It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
yes, and; yes; yes, but; no, but; no; no, and
Yeah, X-ary outcomes are great and I do use them. Just saying that I'm seeing a lot of wonky probability stuff; not in this thread but it can happen pretty easily.
Advantage: 25.0%, 50.0%, 25.0%, 00.0%Regular: 12.5%, 37.5%, 37.5%, 12.5%Disavantage: 00.0%, 25.0%, 50.0%, 25.0%
4dF+2 vs 0: 38.3% 43.2% 12.3% 06.2%4dF+1 vs 0: 18.5% 43.2% 19.8% 18.5%4dF vs 0: 06.2% 32.1% 23.5% 38.3%
Now, the outcome distribution of this system is:
The fact that you’re even aware of your outcome distribution means that you’re pretty far ahead when it comes to designing RPG mechanics. (Uh, I came up in the 90s when things were especially dire and every system needed its own mechanic for some reason.)
This being said, as a mathematician I do think that many designers do a very poor job when they work out how to translate the roll output into a scale of outcomes (which, if I understood you well, was your point)
Sorry for the wall of text… :-)
Hey, I’ve written close to 3K words on S-G today I'd guess. Brevity is the soul of… hey, do they have nachos here?
"No, but" and "No, and" should die, because it's what "Yes, but" actually is. The phrases comes from improv originally, and I guess roleplaying gamers got a hold of them and didn't understood what they did."Yes, and" is accepting while "Yes, but" is blocking.https://improwiki.com/en/wiki/improv/accepthttps://improwiki.com/en/wiki/improv/blockingIt's good to accept (Yes), but blocking (What RPGamers think is "No") can occur as well, but not matter what you choose, it's even better if you offer something new - usually with "And", "But", or "Because".https://improwiki.com/en/wiki/improv/offer"I would like to go out the door.""Yes, but there is a guard in the way because you're in prison". Blocking ... but offering.
@Hopeless_Wanderer:I think you'll learn everything you ever wanted to know about this, as well as downsides, and games it's been used in, here:http://story-games.com/forums/discussion/19114/is-the-d6-yes-and-scale-enough
I understand what you mean but I use the "Yes" and the "No" bits as a declaration of what happened "a posteriori" (random oracle) rather than as ritual to shape the narration (key phrases).In that sense I was thinking in a classical action resolution:- I try to hit him with my axe. What happens?- [rolls a "No, but"] You get to narrate your "partial fail". Remember that you don't really hit him with the axe but you end up somehow better off than how you started.- Ok, I try to hit him with my axe... and he dodges the blow... but that leaves him off-balance and he won't be able to counter-attack immediately!
Skill Roll Chart (Find highest result)6: Amazing! Describe the result and gain 2 Franchise Dice. 5: Good. Describe the result and gain 1 Franchise Die.4: Fair. Describe the mostly positive result of your action but you must include negative or humorous effect.3: Not Great. The GM decides your fate but you may be given a chance to suggest a single positive (albeit minor) effect.2: Bad. The GM decides your fate or you may suggest something suitably negative.1: Terrible! The GM gets to hose you with a truly dire situation resulting from your incompetence.
Anecdotally, most GMs already categorize roll quality based on the roll itself even if the rules don't prescribe it.
Is this still common? It's been so absent from our own play and from groups in our local community. It's something I associate with online discussions maybe five years back or so
Oh, you mean codified. I meant the, like, "folk practice" of reading the boolean outcomes as if they were scalar
"No, but" and "No, and" should die, because it's what "Yes, but" actually is.
"No, but" and "No, and" should die, because it's what "Yes, but" actually is.
I respectfully disagree, or rather, I'd say it depends on the intentions of the system. DayTrippers (for instance) uses all of the options except for a flat "NO", and I absolutely see "No But" and "No And" as being qualitatively different than "Yes But" - especially in a game such as DT when both parties have already stated their intended actions and the die roll is working out how those two things interact. The GM narrates the negative parts while the Player narrates the positive parts.Rough example: "Yes But" means you succeeded but another problem arose, "No But" means you failed but some benefit arose, and "No And" means you failed plus some other problem arose.
Let’s break it down.
“Good blocking” in impro is when a scene is splashing and you want to throw a wrench in the gears – introduce conflict and play with status.
“Accept” is when you don’t block but build strictly on the other’s contribution.
In this binary model,
“Yes, and”, “Yes, but” are both forms of acceptance,and “No, but” is still a form of “good blocking”.
However, the binary model is for accepting “world facts” – even if the facts take the form of IC proposed events, like the “Let’s go to the movies today” IC proposal example from improwiki.
Story games aren’t limited to dealing with world facts, where the “accepting/blocking” dichotomy is relevant. They are also dealing with success & failure of attempts.
C.f. Fiasco where the scene resolution of a character saying “OK, I enter the pizza place and say freeze you dorks! Hand over today’s earnings from the register!” is much more about “is the character successful?” than “is there really a pizza place there?”
Blocking: “A pizza place? This is a pharmacy!”Acceptance: “Oh no, someone is robbing our pizza place!”
Hopefully it’s pretty self-evident to the story gamer that yes, there is a pizza place. There are mechanisms in place for blocking on this level, such as X-card or “Try another way” Archipelago card, but what we’re more concerned about is whether or not the pizza robbery – acceptance of which is a given – is successful or not. The “resolution” focus of roleplaying’s roots.
That’s when the two ternary models “yes, no, maybe” × “good bonus side outcome, no bonus side outcome, bad malus sideoutcome” give rise to the familiar nine out comes, the “maybe” results are pointless & stalling so are discarded, leaving the six mentioned in the title of this thread.
Rickard is talking about a different level of gameplay than what all the “Yes but / No and” stuff is about.
Arguably story games are more evolved than impro theatre in this regard.
“Acceptance” of world facts, as opposed to blocking of them, is a given in a GM-less / GM-full game where we build on each other’s contributions, while in a GM-driven game (including, especially, “adventure games” to use Ben’s parlance) is something wholly on the GM’s side of things (where I’ve been pushing for the GM being under some sort of “rules” for this, such as gloracle or PbtA moves/principles/agenda).
Now, in a impro model, the success and failure are themselves handled as if they were “world facts”.
“OK, I enter the pizza place and say freeze you dorks! Hand over today’s earnings from the register!” “I’m shaking in fear as you approach the counter” “I’m nervous too – this is my first robbery” etc etc.
There are story games that are based on resolving all scenes at this level – Microscope is what I have in mind.
But there is also great fun to be had by having explicitly different mechanics for specifically resolution of success/failure propositions. Especially in some stances. “I try to do X, do I succeed?” is a common enough question in many story games that it has been lifted to be a “first class mechanic” as opposed to being handled by the general “world facts” mechanic. Example: Everway, where success/failure (and other events) is fortune cards, while other, non-event world facts are vision cards.
Another example: D&D B/X, where success/failure on a save-or-die poisonous bee is “dice” while the existance of the bee is “prep”.
Now, what’s my own take on this familiar yes/but/and etc hexad?
First, I seldom see value in including a bunch of side world facts (the bonus / malus effects) when I turn to the oracle with a specific question of a particular attempts resolution. “Yes” and “No” are sufficient for me since I have other ways of introducing world facts and events.
Second, for a lot of attempts the question of success or failure isn’t immediately interesting. “Can we search for traps?” I’d rather say “yes, and it takes 10 minutes” than “IDK we’ll let the dice decide” because I know that the time expenditure itself will lead to interesting side world facts / events being introduced soon enough.
I try to do X, do I succeed?