I have a rogue and warlock breaking into a small, japanese esque assasination compound. I have the thing pretty well laid out, but any advice for these kind of quests?
If it is a close community of assassins then simply pretending to be one of them (without the proper face disguises, if possible) isn't going to fool them, regardless of roll. If you have a group of five friends and suddenly someone walks up pretending to be one of those friends, then he clearly fails (outside of spells). If it is a large group or they recently got some knew recruits, that's a different story.
I'd even say its always fun to give the PCs the thought that getting caught inside is going to be suicidal. And hopefully leave them to planning ahead what happens then.
Best advice I can think of right now is 1) don't let the PCs off easy. Just because they roll high doesn't mean the NPCs are going to believe them when the NPC has the absolute knowledge to know it is false. *See above. Another example is if you pretend to be the King, while talking to the King's brother, short of magic, even if you roll a 20, it is still going to fail. But at the same time, if it isn't something that the NPC would absolutely know (Such as the possibility that the NPC has never met the leader, or head guard, etc.) then always roll for it. Or fake roll and let the PC win if its great for the story, but still make the PC roll. If it is outside the absolute knowledge of the NPC, always roll and don't assume the NPC knows. You might want to give the NPC advantage if its something they would question.
2)If you don't want to kill the PCs, then come up with what happens when/if everything goes wrong. Do the assassins kill the PCs? or make a deal with them? or frame them for a crime that the assassins were accused of.
3)Don't feel like you have to stick to your original plans if things are looking really good or really bad for them.
Thats great advice. The rogue waa one of them for along time, until he discovered that they killed his family when hew was young and conditioned him with falae memories. This isnt the main location, just a remote base. So im curious how he will use that background. If hes clevwr, ill give it to him.
Is he a member in good standing or bad standing? As well as how interconnected are the locations? If he is in good standing, then think about the reasonable ways he could bring in his friend and the not so reasonable ways and have a basic idea before the game session. That way you can already have planned whether he is going to fail or not, without having to decide once the game session begins. Well...except for the fact he will probably come up with the one idea you would never think of in a million years.
They won't necessarily think the PC in question is doing them harm. They could believe the other PC has influenced his mind or is forcing him to do this and so might take out his friend while leaving him alive (and in a position to rescue his friend).
He fled a month ago. This is his first time back. This place is fairly far away, and deep in a forest. So how much they know of him defecting is a bit mixed. They wont recognize him as a membee, but they wont recognize him as someone that escaped. Meanwhioe, he has knowledge of their unique form of signaling. Also familiarity with the typea of traps they set up. But getting his companion through will be tricky, though necessary.
On top of that, its an extraction mission of a valuable target located in the heart of the place. It should be exciting
He fled a month ago. This is his first time back. This place is fairly far away, and deep in a forest. So how much they know of him defecting is a bit mixed. They wont recognize him as a membee, but they wont recognize him as someone that escaped. Meanwhioe, he has knowledge of their unique form of signaling. Also familiarity with the typea of traps they set up. But getting his companion through will be tricky, though necessary.
On top of that, its an extraction mission of a valuable target located in the heart of the place. It should be exciting
Does your player visit the boards? If so I won't mention how I would approach it from a PC perspective. Otherwise I'll go ahead and throw out my ideas.
Beware of using repeated rolls where a fail on the roll means a failure of the mission.
ie - don't keep asking for a stealth rolls each time they are near a foe, and have a failure trigger the characters being detected. Don't ask for a bluff check each time one of the PCs lies. Don't ask for disguise checks each time they are seen.
Why? Let's say you have a 90% chance to succeed at one of the above rolls. That's pretty good, right? That's a +7 modifier vs a DC of 10. After 3 rolls you're down to a mere 75% chance of success. At 6 rolls, you're down to a 50% chance of success.
Odds are, you're going to set most of your DCs above 10, and your PCs don't have +7 in every skill they need. So making them repeatedly roll is basically dooming them to fail.
I would recommend that you look to combat for inspiration on how to handle things: in combat, a single failure does not immediately fail the encounter. It merely causes you to progress towards failure.
Keep that in mind: have an 'alertness' track for your camp, emulating hit points. Failures by the PCs should increase alertness by varying degrees, and they should be able to take actions to reduce it again.
Technically if they have a 90% chance of success, every time they roll they have a 90% chance of success. The chance of success doesn't go down. The first roll it is 9 out of 10 times, the second time it is 9 out of 10 times. Because you can always roll the same result you did last time, if you make ten rolls you aren't certain to fail, because the odds of succeeding have always stayed 9 out 10. So at 6 rolls you wouldn't really be down to a 50% chance, it would be significantly higher and technically on the sixth try you would still have a 9 out of 10 chance of success. (As the previous success/ failures are irrelevant).
With that said it does mean every time you ask them to roll they do have a 1 in 10 chance of failing. There is a statistical formula to figure out what the odds of failure would be if you ask them ten times. But I think you can short change it and assume that out of every ten times you ask them to roll they will fail once. (I wouldn't recommend the short version when dealing with combat unless it is leaning toward helping the players. as your estimates will be off.)
Note: Almost no one at first level is going to have a 90% chance of success on a DC 10. And most of the DC's being opposed tests are going to lower that percentage even more. So it is probably safe to say that if they have to continuously make a check to be believable they are eventually going to fail.
Technically if they have a 90% chance of success, every time they roll they have a 90% chance of success. The chance of success doesn't go down. The first roll it is 9 out of 10 times, the second time it is 9 out of 10 times. Because you can always roll the same result you did last time, if you make ten rolls you aren't certain to fail, because the odds of succeeding have always stayed 9 out 10. So at 6 rolls you wouldn't really be down to a 50% chance, it would be significantly higher and technically on the sixth try you would still have a 9 out of 10 chance of success. (As the previous success/ failures are irrelevant).
With that said it does mean every time you ask them to roll they do have a 1 in 10 chance of failing. There is a statistical formula to figure out what the odds of failure would be if you ask them ten times. But I think you can short change it and assume that out of every ten times you ask them to roll they will fail once. (I wouldn't recommend the short version when dealing with combat unless it is leaning toward helping the players. as your estimates will be off.)
I think you are missing the forest for the trees. In the example of stealth, you can end up being in a situation of either you succeed at going unnoticed or you get noticed and things get more difficult or are no longer an issue of being unnoticed or not but of some other question such as surviving or not.
If you only need one test of stealth per relevant stealthy activity, whatever your odds of success on the single roll are will be your odds of overall success - if you have a 60% chance at succeeding on a stealth roll, you will have a 60% chance of achieving your goal of going unnoticed.
However, if you need 3 (an example number that doesn't sound inherently silly, but illustrates the negatives of requiring multiple rolls very clearly) tests of stealth per relevant stealthy activity, whatever your odds of success on the single roll are will not actually be your odds of overall success - if you have a 60% chance at succeeding on each individual stealth roll, but you fail your overall goal of going unnoticed if you fail any one stealth roll, you have a 21.6% chance of achieving your goal of going unnoticed (0.6 x 0.6 x 0.6 = 0.216).
The previous success/failures are not irrelevant. Their success is a prerequisite to you making the current attempt IF the DM follows a "one failure and you lose" scheme.
The exact formula for determining success over a number of rolls is success chance raised to the power of the number of rolls. If someone has a 1 in 10 chance at failing a single roll, then they actually have a 34% chance to succeed at 10 rolls. So no, it's not really something you can shortcut without messing up the numbers.
As I pointed out, PCs aren't going to have a 90% chance of success at a DC 10 most of the time. Which makes it much more imperative that you don't use the "succeed repeatedly or fail the whole scenario" method.
Technically if they have a 90% chance of success, every time they roll they have a 90% chance of success. The chance of success doesn't go down. The first roll it is 9 out of 10 times, the second time it is 9 out of 10 times. Because you can always roll the same result you did last time, if you make ten rolls you aren't certain to fail, because the odds of succeeding have always stayed 9 out 10. So at 6 rolls you wouldn't really be down to a 50% chance, it would be significantly higher and technically on the sixth try you would still have a 9 out of 10 chance of success. (As the previous success/ failures are irrelevant).
With that said it does mean every time you ask them to roll they do have a 1 in 10 chance of failing. There is a statistical formula to figure out what the odds of failure would be if you ask them ten times. But I think you can short change it and assume that out of every ten times you ask them to roll they will fail once. (I wouldn't recommend the short version when dealing with combat unless it is leaning toward helping the players. as your estimates will be off.)
I think you are missing the forest for the trees. In the example of stealth, you can end up being in a situation of either you succeed at going unnoticed or you get noticed and things get more difficult or are no longer an issue of being unnoticed or not but of some other question such as surviving or not.
If you only need one test of stealth per relevant stealthy activity, whatever your odds of success on the single roll are will be your odds of overall success - if you have a 60% chance at succeeding on a stealth roll, you will have a 60% chance of achieving your goal of going unnoticed.
However, if you need 3 (an example number that doesn't sound inherently silly, but illustrates the negatives of requiring multiple rolls very clearly) tests of stealth per relevant stealthy activity, whatever your odds of success on the single roll are will not actually be your odds of overall success - if you have a 60% chance at succeeding on each individual stealth roll, but you fail your overall goal of going unnoticed if you fail any one stealth roll, you have a 21.6% chance of achieving your goal of going unnoticed (0.6 x 0.6 x 0.6 = 0.216).
I can go with that if we are assuming 1 failure at any point results in total failure.
The previous success/failures are not irrelevant. Their success is a prerequisite to you making the current attempt IF the DM follows a "one failure and you lose" scheme.
The exact formula for determining success over a number of rolls is success chance raised to the power of the number of rolls. If someone has a 1 in 10 chance at failing a single roll, then they actually have a 34% chance to succeed at 10 rolls. So no, it's not really something you can shortcut without messing up the numbers.
As I pointed out, PCs aren't going to have a 90% chance of success at a DC 10 most of the time. Which makes it much more imperative that you don't use the "succeed repeatedly or fail the whole scenario" method.
Yeah, my apologies. I believe you originally rounded the 50% and I was thinking it was significantly higher, but it isn't. The previous success/failures are irrelevant to the next die roll, which is why the probability of success doesn't change. Your chances of success is certainly lower if you have to succeed every single time, which is the point. I still think it is safe to simply and assume that if you make someone roll ten times they will fail once. This was unfair to you, as I was claiming you were simplifying (looks like just rounding) it and then stating it was okay to simplify it. Which was really stupid on my part. Anyways sorry about that Saeviomage.
This was unfair to you, as I was claiming you were simplifying (looks like just rounding) it and then stating it was okay to simplify it. Which was really stupid on my part. Anyways sorry about that Saeviomage.
No need to apologize! We are all friends here!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I have a rogue and warlock breaking into a small, japanese esque assasination compound. I have the thing pretty well laid out, but any advice for these kind of quests?
If it is a close community of assassins then simply pretending to be one of them (without the proper face disguises, if possible) isn't going to fool them, regardless of roll. If you have a group of five friends and suddenly someone walks up pretending to be one of those friends, then he clearly fails (outside of spells). If it is a large group or they recently got some knew recruits, that's a different story.
I'd even say its always fun to give the PCs the thought that getting caught inside is going to be suicidal. And hopefully leave them to planning ahead what happens then.
Best advice I can think of right now is 1) don't let the PCs off easy. Just because they roll high doesn't mean the NPCs are going to believe them when the NPC has the absolute knowledge to know it is false. *See above. Another example is if you pretend to be the King, while talking to the King's brother, short of magic, even if you roll a 20, it is still going to fail. But at the same time, if it isn't something that the NPC would absolutely know (Such as the possibility that the NPC has never met the leader, or head guard, etc.) then always roll for it. Or fake roll and let the PC win if its great for the story, but still make the PC roll. If it is outside the absolute knowledge of the NPC, always roll and don't assume the NPC knows. You might want to give the NPC advantage if its something they would question.
2)If you don't want to kill the PCs, then come up with what happens when/if everything goes wrong. Do the assassins kill the PCs? or make a deal with them? or frame them for a crime that the assassins were accused of.
3)Don't feel like you have to stick to your original plans if things are looking really good or really bad for them.
Thats great advice. The rogue waa one of them for along time, until he discovered that they killed his family when hew was young and conditioned him with falae memories. This isnt the main location, just a remote base. So im curious how he will use that background. If hes clevwr, ill give it to him.
Is he a member in good standing or bad standing? As well as how interconnected are the locations? If he is in good standing, then think about the reasonable ways he could bring in his friend and the not so reasonable ways and have a basic idea before the game session. That way you can already have planned whether he is going to fail or not, without having to decide once the game session begins. Well...except for the fact he will probably come up with the one idea you would never think of in a million years.
They won't necessarily think the PC in question is doing them harm. They could believe the other PC has influenced his mind or is forcing him to do this and so might take out his friend while leaving him alive (and in a position to rescue his friend).
He fled a month ago. This is his first time back. This place is fairly far away, and deep in a forest. So how much they know of him defecting is a bit mixed. They wont recognize him as a membee, but they wont recognize him as someone that escaped. Meanwhioe, he has knowledge of their unique form of signaling. Also familiarity with the typea of traps they set up. But getting his companion through will be tricky, though necessary.
On top of that, its an extraction mission of a valuable target located in the heart of the place. It should be exciting
He is kind of new, but very thirsty to learn more, so maybe... ill have to casually mention it to find out, haha
Beware of using repeated rolls where a fail on the roll means a failure of the mission.
ie - don't keep asking for a stealth rolls each time they are near a foe, and have a failure trigger the characters being detected. Don't ask for a bluff check each time one of the PCs lies. Don't ask for disguise checks each time they are seen.
Why? Let's say you have a 90% chance to succeed at one of the above rolls. That's pretty good, right? That's a +7 modifier vs a DC of 10. After 3 rolls you're down to a mere 75% chance of success. At 6 rolls, you're down to a 50% chance of success.
Odds are, you're going to set most of your DCs above 10, and your PCs don't have +7 in every skill they need. So making them repeatedly roll is basically dooming them to fail.
I would recommend that you look to combat for inspiration on how to handle things: in combat, a single failure does not immediately fail the encounter. It merely causes you to progress towards failure.
Keep that in mind: have an 'alertness' track for your camp, emulating hit points. Failures by the PCs should increase alertness by varying degrees, and they should be able to take actions to reduce it again.
Technically if they have a 90% chance of success, every time they roll they have a 90% chance of success. The chance of success doesn't go down. The first roll it is 9 out of 10 times, the second time it is 9 out of 10 times. Because you can always roll the same result you did last time, if you make ten rolls you aren't certain to fail, because the odds of succeeding have always stayed 9 out 10. So at 6 rolls you wouldn't really be down to a 50% chance, it would be significantly higher and technically on the sixth try you would still have a 9 out of 10 chance of success. (As the previous success/ failures are irrelevant).
With that said it does mean every time you ask them to roll they do have a 1 in 10 chance of failing. There is a statistical formula to figure out what the odds of failure would be if you ask them ten times. But I think you can short change it and assume that out of every ten times you ask them to roll they will fail once. (I wouldn't recommend the short version when dealing with combat unless it is leaning toward helping the players. as your estimates will be off.)
Note: Almost no one at first level is going to have a 90% chance of success on a DC 10. And most of the DC's being opposed tests are going to lower that percentage even more. So it is probably safe to say that if they have to continuously make a check to be believable they are eventually going to fail.
You both bring up excellent points! Ill be mindful of the number of redundant rolls im using. And i like the thought process behind comba. Thank you!