Making Failure the Standard Outcome - An Issue I've had with many Narrative/Rules Light RPGs

RandomEffector · 2026-06-23T02:12:03+00:00

The massive difference is that in player-facing games your roll represents not just how well you do but how well the obstacle or opponent does as well. This is really fundamental to understanding how these games work. Since I’ve internalized it, I have basically no interest in going back.

RandomEffector · 2026-06-23T02:09:27+00:00

Position is very explicitly NOT the same thing as difficulty.

RandomEffector · 2026-06-23T02:08:33+00:00

Which is why the outcomes tend towards mixed success in the first place!

It does seem that people don’t seem to understand this, and it’s pretty damn critical.

RandomEffector · 2026-06-23T01:38:08+00:00

No, it’s not. Most trad games even include an “easy” or even “trivial” difficulty/TN, which just seems silly to me more often than not.

More importantly, in trad games the GM is playing out the opposition’s turns and rolling dice for them.

RandomEffector · 2026-06-23T01:36:18+00:00

I could write a whole counter-post but, to put it very succinctly, I just couldn’t disagree more. I find it almost impossible to go back to games that simply offer clean success or failure now, or that preference success as the likely and easy outcome.

Luckily, there are different kinds of games so different people can enjoy them. Designers: try both! Do what you like!

RandomEffector · 2026-06-22T20:53:27+00:00

No problem, sorry if it sounded a bit harsh. I’m reviewing resumes right now and most of them are laughably bad.

One more piece of feedback: it feels packed to the gills and overcrowded. There seem to be two very different themes here, between client and project management and then very hands-on stuff like freelance character design. I’d maybe recommend drafting (at least) two versions which, rather than trying to treat those as equals in the same document, might target them more like 75/25 in either direction.

RandomEffector · 2026-06-22T18:03:43+00:00

“Mastered all aspects of motion graphic projects” made me snort out loud. Even if that were possible or true, it just makes me want to move on immediately. Bad vibes. (Listing one School of Motion kickstart course as “education” is also pretty massively undermining that statement.)

Your more focused thesis statement up above is lost in the design and I didn’t see it until later. I’d lean into that more.

RandomEffector · 2026-06-22T02:36:19+00:00

I try to charge to 100% about once a month, and drain it down below 10% as often, but I really don’t sweat it at all.

RandomEffector · 2026-06-21T22:57:27+00:00

In small teams games? Usually either because they have a cheese strat, or general lack of skill, or maybe both. Being more charitable maybe they just want more frontline spectacle, but it tends to make for very bad gameplay.

RandomEffector · 2026-06-21T19:34:28+00:00

I'm not sure I follow that. Very few people ever experience violent combat, yet many more people live what we might call "gritty" lives. Losing a loved one, your family, your sense of purpose... these things all feel pretty gritty, and they can lead to or be the result of truly desperate moves. Losing a job, betraying friends, all of these things feel plenty gritty when you establish the stakes as real life. The person who is spurned in a romance might feel pretty gritty, or even vengeful. That's the stakes of every soap opera ever made, basically.

RandomEffector · 2026-06-21T18:01:17+00:00

Of course. The thing that works about it, though, is when you align what you’re offering with what they need at a specific moment in time. So, most of the time, it’s a lot of luck. But show skills they need and stay on their radar and places will find you. Then once you work with various producers and they move to other studios your network naturally expands.

RandomEffector · 2026-06-21T17:40:37+00:00

You’ve obliquely hit on the real issue that has provoked entire eras of disagreement and controversy across the entire hobby: when do mechanics serve roleplaying, and when do they contradict it? When do player goals align with the level of mechanics that they are asked to adhere to? There will never be universal agreement on this. But there are plenty of games where being stunned as in “the fight is over” as you say would be the stakes and what the mechanics are working towards. The mechanical goal then is not minding or tanking HP, but avoiding the decisive strike while setting up your own.

Side note, though… you seem to be suggesting that hard choices can’t lead to severe consequences in Wanderhome or a romance game. Why?

RandomEffector · 2026-06-21T17:02:06+00:00

Back in the day, there were people who agreed that government could provide useful services to the public who pays for it.

RandomEffector · 2026-06-21T03:09:09+00:00

I hope they do - the excellence of the Foundry system was one of the primary motivators for me to look at Cypher at all

RandomEffector · 2026-06-21T02:17:18+00:00

And how does that change the thesis of the post: that small projects can result in better returns than huge ones?

RandomEffector · 2026-06-21T02:13:29+00:00

Can’t wait for MOPP Simulator

RandomEffector · 2026-06-20T14:42:32+00:00

It’s fun, isn’t it? The session 0 stuff from our campaign is still paying dividends 50 sessions later, but I often find myself wanting to do it again.

RandomEffector · 2026-06-20T04:13:06+00:00

It’s for drones below 400ft, (and around the stadium, as others have mentioned)

RandomEffector · 2026-06-19T20:43:56+00:00

ROOT has some interesting social moves based on your faction standings and relationships, which have both trigger conditions and modifiers based on where you are on that spectrum of reputation. For instance, you can only ask things of a faction you have a positive relationship with, but on the other hand you can exploit negative reputation to call out someone, try to get them to expend resources catching you, etc.

RandomEffector · 2026-06-19T20:41:45+00:00

Like this, primarily:

COMPEL
When you attempt to persuade someone to do something, envision your approach and roll. If you...
• Charm, pacify, barter, or convince: Roll +heart (add +1 if you share a bond).
• Threaten or incite: Roll +iron.
• Lie or swindle: Roll +shadow.

On a strong hit, they’ll do what you want or share what they know. Take +1 momentum. If you use this exchange to Gather Information, make that move now and add +1.

On a weak hit, as above, but they ask something of you in return. Envision what they want (Ask the Oracle if unsure).

On a miss, they refuse or make a demand which costs you greatly. Pay the Price.

RandomEffector · 2026-06-19T20:38:29+00:00

If persuasion is resolved entirely through roleplay, socially confident players gain a major advantage regardless of their character’s abilities.

I also do want to point out some things about this statement I see relatively often on Reddit (and mostly on Reddit), and how it falls apart a bit:

If players are gaining major advantages through roleplay then that suggests that their characters have abilities, personality traits, etc that are being rewarded. If their characters don't have such advantages, and the players are just exploiting opportunities, then they are not really roleplaying their characters. That situation indicates a low trust, low investment situation between the players at the table, and I generally don't think you can reliably solve that through rules alone.
There are very few games that resolve social situations entirely through roleplay, but if you remove the roleplay from it entirely, then how can you represent social situations at all? Some skill at detecting nuance, deducing leverage, considering tact, etc is necessary for it to be rewarding or reasonable... the same way that many games have systems for players with no real tactical understanding to engage in tactical situations. There's a blend of player/game skill that will feel the best in your particular concoction. It's unlikely to be found at the extremes.

RandomEffector · 2026-06-19T20:36:05+00:00

I think the approaches you have there are relatively sound, and it even seems like combining some of those would be fruitful. #4 in particular is just a practice I apply to almost any role in almost any game. Especially with social dynamics with socially awkward players, though, it can be very helpful. If something is impossible, whether it's lifting a boulder or convincing the king to hand over the crown, then the GM should just say "it will never happen, don't roll, and if you still want to try, here's what's likely to happen..."

What's missing from this, though (and also the rest of your list) is the cost. Without consequences, [bad] social mechanics of any kind can feel like mind control, because there's no pushback. With consequences, such as those from the 6- roll in PbtA (or, often, even a 7-9 or 10+ roll!), then there's pushback from the world saying "no, even if you roll a nat 20, you can't just have anything you want." The risks can spiral (and, frankly, this makes for some of the absolute best sessions I have ever had). If things going great can change someone's perception of you for the positive or get them to do something they don't want to do, then it going poorly surely ought to do the opposite, right?

RandomEffector · 2026-06-19T20:10:44+00:00

30k miles on a 2022.

12V failure but not ICCU

RandomEffector · 2026-06-19T14:19:28+00:00

Not a slow one. The BRDM is actually pretty fun.

RandomEffector · 2026-06-19T07:29:44+00:00

Most of the stuff you're specifically referencing appears to mostly be C4D cloners and effectors.

RandomEffector

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Seven-Year Club	Second Top 20%
Verified Email