What do you guys think of taking decisions based on a percentile roll?
I've been doing it sporadically and would definitely recommend this as an option to remain unbiased/impartial to whatever that could happen during a chase, social encounter, etc.
Of course having a clear idea of the NPC'S character should work as a compass to take decisions as you control it but, sometimes players will ask or attempt crazy things that you would've never guessed but that can still be reasonable. This is were I would roll and openly disclose, there might be a chance that "that" could've happened, sometimes even disclosing the % assigned to "that" actually happening.
What I like about this is that, even if they have an idea of what could've happened, they still need to roll their applicable skill checks as normal. I would say that this is just a way to still have fun determining what could've happen and release some pressure of players thinking that the DM might be controlling things in his "favor"
Side note: I only play in roll20 so I don't really know my players. Even though they come to know me later and understand that I wouldn't just do things that would "benefit" my narrative I like to make this clear even from the first session if possible. That's why I think this is a very effective tool to solve that problem.
I've run across this idea recently in an AngryDM post, and I really liked it there.
The balancing factor here - according to Angry, and I agree - is a commensurate risk.
The Player wants to do something crazy, and outside the rules? Figure out what their benefit is for winning. Figure out the penalty for failing. Figure out the probability of them succeeding. Do they balance? If so, allow them to make the roll. If not, then either scale up the penalty, or scale down the reward.
Your Player wants to leap off the cliff and plunge the Greatsword of Ur into the Dragon's skull as the Dragon is flying up the cliff? OK - that's got about a 1/5 chance of working. What do they gain? Well - they could one-shot kill a Dragon. What could they lose? Well - they can plummet 1000 feet down the cliff and go splat. Is the reward less than or equal to 1/5 of the reward? You judge, but if so, then allow a roll. If not - maybe you need to scale down the possible gain, or scale up the possible penalty for failure.
I haven't tried this "in the field" yet, but I really like it as a) It opens up the possibility for Players to try things outside the rules, and b) it still keeps game balance by making the risks of failure commensurate with the possible gains.
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
Completely agree with that, but what I meant with players coming up with "crazy ideas" was that for example, if they were chasing someone that can turn invisible they could reach a corner and try to determine whether the NPC went straight or turned....or just stayed there silently. At that point you as the DM are controlling the character and could refuse and say "no, that's absurd" but you know it could actually be a possibility then you as the DM could roll to decide if that was what the NPC actually did.
I know that as a DM you don't really need to do that, but the thing is that by doing it you open up to different outcomes that even you couldn't expect.
Basically trying to avoid the "oh! How convenient" reaction from the party.
OK - but isn't that what the skill system is for? In the case of the "can I figure out where the invisible person go?" scenario, why is that not a Perception check ( or better yet, a Stealth check on the NPCs behalf, trying to beat the Character's passive perception - probably rolling at advantage )?
You seem to be making skill rolls, you're just trying to collapse the DC and the Player's roll modifier together, and making it a "gut feel" estimate by the DM.
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
I'm not making myself clear haha, what I'm trying to say is that sometimes is easier for you a the DM to say he escapes and that's it...of course the party can make skill checks and catch up or at least determine the direction said person went.
But sometimes deciding what an NPC would do is quite arbitrary, what I'm suggesting is opening up to a chance that might not be the most optimal but another option nonetheless.
Consider that what I mean is completely related to the DM, we are not talking of players making a check yet. In this scenario usually you just go with what you (as the DM) want.
I do this all the time and even encourage my players to do it of they can't quite make up their minds about a character decision.
The results can be surprising and lots of fun!
It's also a mainstay in my games that low on my percentile roll means it's about to get real. The character in question is about to do something they wouldn't have planned on--especially when it comes to villains. The party insults him and does good on an intimidate check, I'll roll percentile and set a threshold for whether he gets butthurt and acts rashly. The lower it is the more furious he gets!
Another circumstance where I do it a lot is when deciding which party members the baddies try to attack. If there's any uncertainty in my mind about their choice of targets, I just roll to decide.
I do this all the time and even encourage my players to do it of they can't quite make up their minds about a character decision.
The results can be surprising and lots of fun!
It's also a mainstay in my games that low on my percentile roll means it's about to get real. The character in question is about to do something they wouldn't have planned on--especially when it comes to villains. The party insults him and does good on an intimidate check, I'll roll percentile and set a threshold for whether he gets butthurt and acts rashly. The lower it is the more furious he gets!
Another circumstance where I do it a lot is when deciding which party members the baddies try to attack. If there's any uncertainty in my mind about their choice of targets, I just roll to decide.
I like the idea. I've been trying to get into the heads of all of my party's opponents more recently, to the point that I'm slightly modifying the module narrative to accommodate their personalities. For example, in area 7 of Cragmaw Castle (LMoP), their are 7 goblins who are supposed to all be intimidated by Yegg, a fat goblin who is the cook for the cattle. If Yegg dies, all the surviving goblins are supposed to retreat by 1 of 2 paths (there is a third path that they avoid due to it being trapped). I decided that one of the other goblins was amorous towards Yegg and would focus attack whomever kills him. I also try to have retreat thresholds (general HP and Crit hit thresholds, if there is enough HP to merit it). However, this doesn't mean that the characters wouldn't do something unexpected based on the right criteria that I can't foresee in preparation. The percentile option allows for the out of character decisions to be made in a way that would allow for the seeming randomness that sometimes accompanies people/creatures decisions.
That is definitely a way to solve that issue. I think the more important thing is that what you're talking about is Player Agency and if players feel like they truly CANT do anything outside the DMs plan. Which sometimes is true but others it is the players perception that tells the truth. So what I think would be easier is to simply reaffirm your players that you wrtent expecting that to happen and congratulating them for derailing you and going on there own path!!
Yes, and definitely is a tool that you can rely to determine how many cells are occupied in a prison, tavern's concurrence, etc. It may seem unnecessary but it keeps you on your toes as a DM.
A brief story example of some of the completely off the wall results that this practice can create:
Once during an infiltration operation, one of our female mages accidentally cast chill touch on her romantic interest NPC, a brave and very self-confident fighter/knight. Because of circumstances I can't remember at present, the spell landed in his nether regions and prompted one of the other players to say, "I bet he liked it!"
Then silence and everyone looked at me.
Then they looked at my dice. Expectingly.
"There's no way," I said and reluctantly made the roll.
Let's just say that those two characters eventually married, survived the campaign, and lived a long and enjoyable life together.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
What do you guys think of taking decisions based on a percentile roll?
I've been doing it sporadically and would definitely recommend this as an option to remain unbiased/impartial to whatever that could happen during a chase, social encounter, etc.
Of course having a clear idea of the NPC'S character should work as a compass to take decisions as you control it but, sometimes players will ask or attempt crazy things that you would've never guessed but that can still be reasonable. This is were I would roll and openly disclose, there might be a chance that "that" could've happened, sometimes even disclosing the % assigned to "that" actually happening.
What I like about this is that, even if they have an idea of what could've happened, they still need to roll their applicable skill checks as normal. I would say that this is just a way to still have fun determining what could've happen and release some pressure of players thinking that the DM might be controlling things in his "favor"
Side note: I only play in roll20 so I don't really know my players. Even though they come to know me later and understand that I wouldn't just do things that would "benefit" my narrative I like to make this clear even from the first session if possible. That's why I think this is a very effective tool to solve that problem.
I've run across this idea recently in an AngryDM post, and I really liked it there.
The balancing factor here - according to Angry, and I agree - is a commensurate risk.
The Player wants to do something crazy, and outside the rules? Figure out what their benefit is for winning. Figure out the penalty for failing. Figure out the probability of them succeeding. Do they balance? If so, allow them to make the roll. If not, then either scale up the penalty, or scale down the reward.
Your Player wants to leap off the cliff and plunge the Greatsword of Ur into the Dragon's skull as the Dragon is flying up the cliff? OK - that's got about a 1/5 chance of working. What do they gain? Well - they could one-shot kill a Dragon. What could they lose? Well - they can plummet 1000 feet down the cliff and go splat. Is the reward less than or equal to 1/5 of the reward? You judge, but if so, then allow a roll. If not - maybe you need to scale down the possible gain, or scale up the possible penalty for failure.
I haven't tried this "in the field" yet, but I really like it as a) It opens up the possibility for Players to try things outside the rules, and b) it still keeps game balance by making the risks of failure commensurate with the possible gains.
My DM Philosophy, as summed up by other people: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rN5w4-azTq3Kbn0Yvk9nfqQhwQ1R5by1/view
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
Completely agree with that, but what I meant with players coming up with "crazy ideas" was that for example, if they were chasing someone that can turn invisible they could reach a corner and try to determine whether the NPC went straight or turned....or just stayed there silently. At that point you as the DM are controlling the character and could refuse and say "no, that's absurd" but you know it could actually be a possibility then you as the DM could roll to decide if that was what the NPC actually did.
I know that as a DM you don't really need to do that, but the thing is that by doing it you open up to different outcomes that even you couldn't expect.
Basically trying to avoid the "oh! How convenient" reaction from the party.
OK - but isn't that what the skill system is for? In the case of the "can I figure out where the invisible person go?" scenario, why is that not a Perception check ( or better yet, a Stealth check on the NPCs behalf, trying to beat the Character's passive perception - probably rolling at advantage )?
You seem to be making skill rolls, you're just trying to collapse the DC and the Player's roll modifier together, and making it a "gut feel" estimate by the DM.
My DM Philosophy, as summed up by other people: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rN5w4-azTq3Kbn0Yvk9nfqQhwQ1R5by1/view
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
I'm not making myself clear haha, what I'm trying to say is that sometimes is easier for you a the DM to say he escapes and that's it...of course the party can make skill checks and catch up or at least determine the direction said person went.
But sometimes deciding what an NPC would do is quite arbitrary, what I'm suggesting is opening up to a chance that might not be the most optimal but another option nonetheless.
Consider that what I mean is completely related to the DM, we are not talking of players making a check yet. In this scenario usually you just go with what you (as the DM) want.
I do this all the time and even encourage my players to do it of they can't quite make up their minds about a character decision.
The results can be surprising and lots of fun!
It's also a mainstay in my games that low on my percentile roll means it's about to get real. The character in question is about to do something they wouldn't have planned on--especially when it comes to villains. The party insults him and does good on an intimidate check, I'll roll percentile and set a threshold for whether he gets butthurt and acts rashly. The lower it is the more furious he gets!
Another circumstance where I do it a lot is when deciding which party members the baddies try to attack. If there's any uncertainty in my mind about their choice of targets, I just roll to decide.
Exactly!
I like the idea. I've been trying to get into the heads of all of my party's opponents more recently, to the point that I'm slightly modifying the module narrative to accommodate their personalities. For example, in area 7 of Cragmaw Castle (LMoP), their are 7 goblins who are supposed to all be intimidated by Yegg, a fat goblin who is the cook for the cattle. If Yegg dies, all the surviving goblins are supposed to retreat by 1 of 2 paths (there is a third path that they avoid due to it being trapped). I decided that one of the other goblins was amorous towards Yegg and would focus attack whomever kills him. I also try to have retreat thresholds (general HP and Crit hit thresholds, if there is enough HP to merit it). However, this doesn't mean that the characters wouldn't do something unexpected based on the right criteria that I can't foresee in preparation. The percentile option allows for the out of character decisions to be made in a way that would allow for the seeming randomness that sometimes accompanies people/creatures decisions.
That is definitely a way to solve that issue. I think the more important thing is that what you're talking about is Player Agency and if players feel like they truly CANT do anything outside the DMs plan. Which sometimes is true but others it is the players perception that tells the truth. So what I think would be easier is to simply reaffirm your players that you wrtent expecting that to happen and congratulating them for derailing you and going on there own path!!
Check out my YouTube channel where I give DMing advice!!! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3I2kTgXD2X9U1GVDCYwoYg?view_as=subscriber
I also am a professional DM contact me through Discord for more information KahlylRoberson#8891
Yes, and definitely is a tool that you can rely to determine how many cells are occupied in a prison, tavern's concurrence, etc. It may seem unnecessary but it keeps you on your toes as a DM.
A brief story example of some of the completely off the wall results that this practice can create:
Once during an infiltration operation, one of our female mages accidentally cast chill touch on her romantic interest NPC, a brave and very self-confident fighter/knight. Because of circumstances I can't remember at present, the spell landed in his nether regions and prompted one of the other players to say, "I bet he liked it!"
Then silence and everyone looked at me.
Then they looked at my dice. Expectingly.
"There's no way," I said and reluctantly made the roll.
Let's just say that those two characters eventually married, survived the campaign, and lived a long and enjoyable life together.