On pbta games:
I have this view that i could simplify to this:
-- Every problem requires a certain number of 10+ results..
-- A 7-9 results changes the narration, doesn't modify the number of 10+ required.
-- A 6- results ADDS to the required number, changes the narration
That might be crazy. Thoughts?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
What are you trying to achieve with this?
ReplyDeleteAs it is now, I love failing. It makes things deliciously complicated and dramatic. With adding or subtracting successes, it feels like you would want to avoid failure at all cost (but you can't, it's random, and with bad luck you might just pile on more and more failures).
ReplyDeleteI would probably make it less numbers based...10+ move 1 step closer to your goal. 6- set back, lose ground or the goal gets farther away. That keeps it more rooted in the fiction.
ReplyDeleteOne thing that didn't work well with the number based approaches (like 4e skill challenges) was that often the fiction would say "goal accomplished" but you still had more rolls to do.
Eva Schiffer to model something close to how I wind up playing
ReplyDeleteKevin FarnworthMayhaps a better statement is a new problem is revealed, also requiring some number of successes to eliminate?
ReplyDeleteRalph Mazzathat's a good point, so, yeah. Adding a new problem rather than making the current one worse.....
ReplyDeleteYep, I'm with Ralph here; the biggest problem you run into is...what if they find a way in the fiction to get around the problem? This is generally why I like to pull it back to the basic framework of moves, and then let the MC/GM adjucate what those results translate to.
ReplyDeleteI think doing this would ruin the fun of pbta. This is effectively a slower version of gaining successes and punishing failures. In pbta, every roll should add new narrative and the point isn't to arrive at a specific resolution.
ReplyDeleteI think you're all right. Ah well. Simplifications don't always work, and thats AOK
ReplyDelete