Rules Only: Should Players Know Their Chance?

[Supplement Four]

A question for Refs and Players alike: Should players know the percentage chance that their character has when attempting a task?

Should they know exactly?

Should they have an indication of success?

Should they not know their chance at all?





I didn't make this a poll because I was more interested in the discussion.

If you're rolling a d20, it's pretty easy to figure success. Target number x 5%.

If you're rolling d100, then it's a no brainer to figure success chance. Your target number is your success chance.

But, if you're rolling 4D6, looking for 8+, then you probably don't know the exact success, but you know that you've got a damn good chance of making it.



What's your preference? What's your thoughts? What do you think?

 

[Supplement Four]

Oh...and given that there are reasons in an RPG to do just about anything, in general, should a player know his target number at all?

 

[whulorigan]

A question for Refs and Players alike: Should players know the percentage chance that their character has when attempting a task?

Should they know exactly?

Should they have an indication of success?

Should they not know their chance at all?
.
.
.
But, if you're rolling 4D6, looking for 8+, then you probably don't know the exact success, but you know that you've got a damn good chance of making it.

What's your preference? What's your thoughts? What do you think?

Oh...and given that there are reasons in an RPG to do just about anything, in general, should a player know his target number at all?

Barring certian circumstance mods that a player may or may not know about depending on the situation, I generally think a ballpark figure is the best way to go. They should have some idea of their chances based on their skill and experience, but nobody should know exactly (that always adds a bit of role-playing tension as well).

Here's an additional thought: maybe the higher the person's level in a skill, the better their ability to assess their chances at a task based on prior experience and training.

 

[Hemdian]

I used to like knowing an exact chance. My favorite systems were percentage based. Now that seems naive... now I'm drawn to abstract and vague systems as a more realistic simulation.

Here's an additional thought: maybe the higher the person's level in a skill, the better their ability to assess their chances at a task based on prior experience and training.

I'm a software developer in my day job and I'd like to think fairly highly skilled in my niche. I frequently have to provide time estimates for pieces of work ... not chance-of-success estimates, but estimates all the same. Accuracy of those estimates is based less on skill level and more on familiarity with the very specific thing you are trying to estimate. On top of that, in my current job certain areas intrinsically have a higher chance of unknown unknows (as opposed to known unknowns) and are un-estimateable. (Of course we have processes and metrics to hide that fact.)

Bottom line, most of the time you only have a vague intuitive feel for the chance of success. Certainty is illusion... or delusion.

 

[Timerover51]

If you are using LBB or Starter or The Traveller Book, you do not really have a detailed task resolution system, so the players do not really have a way of totally knowing their chances, although the referee in explaining what is going on can give some reasonable hints.

As for combat, I do not use the Traveller system, which makes it a bit more unknown to the players, and I lean to using the Space: 1889 resolution system if I want to make them sweat a bit. Not all tasks are resolved by roles, if the players can give a good idea of how to deal with the issue.

 

[salochin999]

I think they need to know roughly what the odds and the consequences are to avoid making lethal mistakes.

There's a big difference between a failure repairing something meaning another two hours and try again or the thing blowing up.

When the consequences are potentially severe then I like the idea of them making an easier skill roll to check the riskiness of a real attempt i.e. a 6+ skill roll to get info on the real attempt.

(For example a streetwise-1 character investigating a missing person goes to talk to a couple of crew members of a ship who've been murdering low berth passengers and selling the bodies to a crazy doctor - but the character doesn't know that yet. One of the NPCs is noted down as a very impulsive psycho with a shotgun and given the circumstances might easily go postal so I get the player to make a 6+ streetwise skill roll first and if they succeed they notice the guy is very twitchy looking and armed so they know to be cautious when they start trying to pump them for information. Without that roll a failure might lead to a shotgun in the face. With the roll failure just means not learning anything and backing away quietly.)

 

[Supplement Four]

When the consequences are potentially severe then I like the idea of them making an easier skill roll to check the riskiness of a real attempt i.e. a 6+ skill roll to get info on the real attempt.

Maybe an interesting use of JOT?

 

[salochin999]

Maybe an interesting use of JOT?

Yes could be. IMTU I mostly just use JOT for ship skills for scouts so they can single crew ships but otherwise yes. (They get JOT-1 instead of Pilot-1 on enlistment.)

 

[Blue Ghost]

When I used to ref CT, I used to say "Roll lower than your DEX," or one of the basic attributes depending on the task, using skill as a modifier.

So, basically, yes. I think an exception to that rule might be the classic D&D trap type of situation, where a character stumbles upon something and has a chance to avoid danger or gain a reward through sheer happenstance.

My take.

 

[Hemdian]

When the consequences are potentially severe then I like the idea of them making an easier skill roll to check the riskiness of a real attempt i.e. a 6+ skill roll to get info on the real attempt.

Sometimes the risk/reward calculation is not (and should not) be based purely on the odds. Sometimes it should be an emotional decision. When the consequences of a failed roll are fatal I emphasis the sense of risk by asking the player to hand over their character sheet before throwing the dice. The odds don't change, just their assessment of them. (Video explanation.)

 

[Reynard]

I've played and refereed many, many games and personally concluded letting players know what chances of success is not so bad. The biggest x factor can be mods to a roll known only to the moderator who makes the final decision to the success or failure of that roll. Often, the target is naturally known only to the moderator and that can work but I prefer the moderator not be burdened with doing a lot of the work players should do merely to add a little tension with every task. If players are mature enough, they handle tasks responsibly and accept results for a good game.

Realize that most task rolls don't guarantee success, there's always the chance of failure or reduced success. A player knowing how much a chance to succeed is possible can be considered skill, intuition or insight of the character and how they judge their action. Remember that characters are always considered above the norm and fate favors them. Works in novels and movies all the time.

 

[CosmicGamer]

Should players know the percentage chance that their character has when attempting a task?

The accuracy of a characters ability to predict an outcome, I think it is very situational. But in general, I think a GM should provide feedback based on the situation and what the GM thinks the character would be able to determine. I don't believe a specific target number or percentage is necessary. A simple description like "difficult" or "easy" may be all a GM need provide.

Sometimes ones skill can help but then sometimes ones lack of skill is a good indicator. No piloting or flying skill at all? Real life chance of success flying a helicopter: I'd say near zero.

 

[robject]

The players I play with like to roll the dice for their players' tasks. Beyond whatever intuition they might have in probabilities, they don't really care about knowing their chances, even though they could put it together if they wanted to.

Except one guy, who strongly prefers percentile dice, for their clarity.

I suppose that makes us casual gamers.

 

[GypsyComet]

I suppose that makes us casual gamers.

If RPGs are *a* hobby, they are casual by definition.
If games are *the* hobby...

 

[aramis]

I think the should know the base target number before committing.

 

[rancke]

There's no answer other than 'it depends'. A roleplaying game is a mixture of roleplaying and gaming. Gaming is all about manipulating the odds, so how much the players know of the odds and their chances of manipulating them depends on what sort of gamiing experience they (and their referee) wants.


Hans

 

[Ulsyus]

I don't mind them knowing the difficulty when we're playing - it makes it easier for me to have them calculating their target no. as well. I do however use uncertainty dice all the time, which seems to do something quite similar to what this discussion's all about, just at the other end of the process.

There are times when I've rolled for the players behind a screen, but that's not a common occurrence.

 

[Shonner]

Should players know the percentage chance that their character has when attempting a task?

No. Unless there's an AI nearby that a player character can ask the percentage for.

"What are my chances?"
"Working... Probability: 10% chance of succeeding."

That kind of thing.

Oh...and given that there are reasons in an RPG to do just about anything, in general, should a player know his target number at all?

The target number is always going to be 8+. Players can do the adding of DMs and difficulties to their rolls and say what their effect was without slowing a game down. The effect is all I care about. This is for Mongoose Traveller.

 

[Owen E Oulton]

Generally player characters should NOT know the task numbers, but should be given a rough estimate of their chances - sort of "You think you've got a fair chance and it should take you x amount of time". As their skill level increases, this extimate should be a little better.

 

[DickNervous]

Should they know the exact change, it depends.

I would (almost) never tell a player "you need to beat a 6" for any task that is important to the story. I may tell them, based upon the character's skill level, a general description of how hard it is. For instance I might tell someone who is skilled at "Mechanic" trying to fix an engine in a vehicle that it looks "easy", "difficult", or "damn near impossible" (and they may be able to figure out what they need to roll), but I won't tell them the number. And there is always a chance of failure (2) or success (12) (or 1 and 20 in d20 system).

For tasks that aren't important, like changing a tire on a car, I would probably tell them what they need to beat.

For things like perception checks, searching, etc, never. I just tell them to roll and let them know what happens.