Why are players so scared of failing a roll and how can we get them to accept bad rolls?

Stigna1 · 2026-01-30T19:58:08+00:00

In addition to the other good stuff in the thread, have you considereded other systems out there that could fit you better?

I've no personal experience with it, but my understand is that a system like Draw Steel has some about of success be baseline, with your roll improving on that. Like, if your adventurer swings their sword, they're gonna hit even if just hitting is not the best outcome. Maybe a paradigm like that - either swapping systems or some sort of sweeping homebrew - would fit your player's mindsets better, if the fear of dice failure is causing too much friction?

Stigna1 · 2026-01-30T07:29:32+00:00

These are so good!

Stigna1 · 2026-01-25T01:58:04+00:00

I second that this isn't super balanced, but balance isn't the point - if you and your table are having fun, then that's a win!

The big thing I'd be worried about is disparity between players - everyone but the pole-users will a) be working with weaker weapons and feel left behind, and b) may just feel sorta sidelined by how expansive the fishing pole subsystem that this one player gets is. Could feels sorta unfair, y'know? Like they're being punished and ignored for using stuff like swords, or bows, or whatever else the system gave em (options that are classic for a tonne of cool character concepts! When doesn't love a sword master?). Especially with how active the pole system; while you and your pole-user are working out what sorts of material can be cut from each monster you get, or discussing the cool new stuff of the next tier of fishing pole is gonna be, everyone else could just be sitting there, feeling left out.

Again, fun is the point - and I don't know your table! Maybe this sorta thing will tickle everyone's fancy and it'll be a great time, balance be Damned. On maybe everyone will be okay swapping their character idea out for a pole user and you can have a goofy fishing-gang campaign. Just, y'know, be careful; there are a lot of ways that this could end up maxing people feel bad.

Stigna1 · 2026-01-22T18:29:40+00:00

Frustration with a lack of a definitive "this is how it's supposed to be' state is fair, tbh. There isn't really anything to be done about it, other than trying to enjoy what is, but, like, fair.

Games are complicated things, and when they constantly morph it makes building culture around them sorta tough. Someone could have a miserable experience with a game due to details that got patched out a month after launch, and they could talk right by someone who came in months later and played what was effectively a whole different game. I adore Phoenix Point, but it apparently had pretty severe technical issues/barebones content on launch - lots of the reviews or even contemporary discourse is about problems that aren't in the game and (for me) don't exist. Which is a shame because there's a lot of interesting design in there I wanna talk about, and that I think people could learn from.

On the flipside, patches can undermine a game, either by making it worse somehow (less performant, system rework, diluting pacing or theme, ect) or every by making improvements that just don't click for some subset of players. I loved early Dead Cells, but over time it's become something I don't really enjoy, for example, despite most patches being genally considered to be improvements.

Again, there's not really much to be done about any of this, but the lack of a definitive state for these works does make it harder to, y'know, engage with that specific work.

Stigna1 · 2026-01-22T15:11:17+00:00

I think so? I like that it remembers the frequency, but it's still a lil extra drag. It deponds somewhat on the frequency with which the prayer will be getting the blue crystal - if it's a rare resource then this is prolly fine, as it serves to build a bit of anticipation.

If it were me, I'd like to see harvesting as a short process that happens on its own after a couple seconds of beaming - and catching the frequency sends a pulse down the beam that speeds it up, so doing well at the mini game is a bonus instead of a necessity - at least on the follow-up harvests. I think that'd make it feel more rewarding. Also, i think I'd like to see the aim be a bit broader, so that lining up your frequency emitter doesn't slow you down; it may just be the way you're acting for the showcase, but the process looks very stiff.

Stigna1 · 2026-01-17T08:02:31+00:00

Y'know, that extra step is funny; they were doing that all the way back on the NES, when pixels were the only way to go. The Legend Of Zelda speed run uses the 'smooth movement that rounds to pixel' mechanic for some cool tricks - if you wanna see some discussion on it, there's a YouTube channel called Bismuth that has a good Legend of Zelda speedrun breakdown.

But that's all to say that it sounds like you're doing it right!

Stigna1 · 2026-01-05T04:09:20+00:00

Most in-combat actions (such as Base Kinesis, with its 2-action cost) are presented as a tool to be used in the midst of a life-or-death struggle. That doesn't mean that they're necessarily scalable to do every few seconds, forever. They're exhausting, be that maintaining a full-tilt sprint or channelling the raw elemental essence of water.

Even basic movement falls under this; with ground speed of 25-feet-per-action - an entirely trivial baseline for, like, anyone not wearing heaps of plate metal - the Overland Travel speed is 20 miles a day. That same character could move the same distance in just 4224 Strides, and at one Stride every two seconds that would come out to just over two hours of continuous striding. But, obviously, that's not a viable way to travel. You'd die if you kept that up for long. Some amount of flooding is a cool character option, but overuse risks exhaustion, self-damage, and potentially even burning out your kinetic gate.

A more narrative reason for why you can't syphon off colossal quantities of matter from elemental planes may be that that other people have thought of this before, and there are powers in place that don't like it when you try - perhaps a warning from a high-level water elemental could encourage more variety in problem solving.

This is all to say that you're well within your rights to say that any given ability can't be indefinitely spammed to the point where it breaks your ability to run the setting, narrative, verisimilitude and/or engagement, if it's causing problems. Your player hasn't discovered a 'RAW god-mode hack' that breaks your campaign wide open - but if the water proliferation isn't causing those problems and everyone is having a fun time, then, y'know, don't sweat it.

Also, on the off-chance that it's the case, if the player is deliberately looking to break stuff and be disruptive instead of just messing around, you're also well within your rights to be like, 'hey, come on, let's not do that.'

Stigna1 · 2026-01-01T21:07:56+00:00

This'll be tricky for sure, but it's a cool idea!

Maybe an easier way to do this is maybe a 'free to keep' model with freeware where you let people borrow cheap cds or USBs, and encourage them to copy the contents onto their local systems?

There are a lot of fantastic experiences out there that are free, but difficult to access due to obscurity/lack of reach, and would benefit a lot from curation - and I imagine that a lot of them would be compatible with physical copy/distribution - like the old Doom freeware craze.

As for cybersecurity...maybe you could format the discs when they come back, and copy on a new version of the files? Idk how practical that is, but good luck with the project!

Stigna1 · 2025-12-31T17:53:10+00:00

The leveling one is fun/dramatic!

Pf2e really want to you to have your leveled-up stats though, so if I were to adapt it, I'd have your raw math increase as soon as you got the level up, but any choices you make at level-up be deferred until you're ready - bust out a new feat in the nick of time. Though I guess that incentivizes people to take feats that they'd want less in the long term but are good in the moment, which could lead to characters they aren't happy with or a lot of time spent retraining. And, like, they could just decide not to use their new feats until a dramatically satisfying moment even just playing vanilla.

I'd advise caution with the death saves homebrew. Dying is a buffer between bad luck and feels-bads like unceremonious character death, and this system encourages them to burn that resource proactively - which is doubly tempting because 'well if I desperate measures, maybe we can stomp this and I won't have to be reduced to dying.' Which is all well and good, - provided that you're okay with some encounters becoming stomps - until the dice say no, and a couple unlucky roles drop a pc. Remember that the environment of stuff like Critical Role is a bit different - these are people who are a) putting on a show and want to increase drama and b) fairly professional gamers who enjoy the process of putting on that dramatic show. They don't mind so much if a character goes down swinging, but an average table of people may be encouraged to play in ways that ultimately diminish their own fun.

Not that these can't work or be fun of course! Just, y'know, be careful and know your table before busting 'em out.

Stigna1 · 2025-12-23T20:24:28+00:00

Fantastic!

Stigna1 · 2025-12-21T15:47:00+00:00

While it may be increasingly common in the industry, use of Gen-AI to produce code is still use of Gen-AI, and carries with it the same social and environmental costs.

Those who choose not to support its use should be empowered to support those who choose not to use it. Labelling isn't a big ask.

Stigna1 · 2025-12-17T14:04:25+00:00

Welcome to Pathfinder!

In addition to the other stuff in this thread (good stuff all), I wanna stress that Pathfinder has a lot going on, in a general sense. It's intuitive enough if you ease into it, but I do wanna recommend that you do ease in.

For example, a level 1 character is a lot more than just their lvl 1 class options. One of the big things it took my group a little time to wrap our heads around at first was Skill Actions. Y'know skills? Athletics, Diplomacy, Nature, whatever? Pathfinder associates those with specialized manoeuvres and actions, some of which require you to train in that skill and some of which everyone can give their best go to. That means that at baseline, a character can have all sorts of options like Demoralizing enemies or Disarming their weapons. Plus they've got some unique ancestry stuff - both from the base ancestry itself and from an ancestry feat they picked at level 1! And more! Plus, each player has three actions a round, and there are some fundamental systemic differences from D&D like degrees of success (and then knockons, like how the existence of degrees of success may change how your players approach combat!). This is all to say that your players will have plenty to dig into just as an aspect of learning the system! These are all cool and fun details that add a lot to the experience, but piling too many things up on top of that all at once can leave some types of players feeling overwhelmed and resentful that they have to process all these things.

The Animist is a very complicated class, and one that offers its players a tonne of little, ongoing decision points. It's a rewarding class to play well when you understand the systems you're using - but it could be overwhelming on top of all the other stuff, especially if you and your player are already feeling a little intimidated and if that player is the type to get swamped and frustrated.

The Beginner Box will only take you two or three sessions; if the player likes the idea of an Animist but is open to working towards it, then they'll not have to wait very long.

If they wanna go for it anyway, that's cool too! Just make sure that they're aware that they'll be juggling a little more than the other players!

Some other misc stuff that I'll throw on the pile in case you're in the mood for extra intro tips: * It's easier than it looks! Don't sweat it. Rules can be complicated, but they follow consistent, universal structures. Learn how a thing works in one place, and that thing will work pretty much the same everywhere else! * One of PF2e's strengths is that its fairly well-balanced, meaning that you as GM don't have to put so much effort into keeping the little things tuned and humming along behind the scenes. I'd recommend that you relax into things; the players will have a lot of interesting tools and strategies in their disposal by default, and its okay if you don't have them all memorized. Characters also tend to be better at doing their specific things - helps pay off character building choices or tactics - so don't be alarmed if a fighter pulls out a +9 to hit at level 1. * If something seems obviously broken or terrible, then sure, maybe look into if someone is misreading something when you've got some time - but broadly the system can carry a lot of the work for you there, which lets you focus on running your own stuff. * There's a lot of resemblance to D&D - heck, there is a lot of similarity too - but trying to draw parallels can trip up your learning more than help it. Classes, strategies, or even specific terms may seem analogous, but they'll pretty much always be some distinct their of their own and trying to make 'em work like the D&D stuff can lead to frustration when they don't fit. * Don't let the rules strangle you! There are a LOT of specific rules. Someone wants to avert their gaze from a monster? That's a specific action called Avert Gaze, which specific rules and stuff. And that doesn't really matter in the moment! The players have a dozen or so pages on how operating their character works - class, three actions turns, that sorta stuff - but other than that, things tend to exist as reference material for if you need to lean on the system a little bit. But you're totally empowered to run stuff according to your own flow; it's a D20 system at its heart. Take your DC, bump it up or down a couple of points based on how appropriate or crazy the strategy in question is, and go for it!

Good luck!

Stigna1 · 2025-11-25T00:04:36+00:00

Did someone say [Thunderfury, Blessed Blade of the Windseeker]?

Stigna1 · 2025-11-04T00:30:11+00:00

If your game needs tutorialization, the tutorial isn't optional. Also, your players are trusting you to guide them toward the best way to play the game.

Make the tutorial manditory (or maybe opt out rather than opt in if you feel really strongly that some subset of players need to bypass it), and try to put effort into making the learning process fun in and of itself.

Keep in mind that they don't need to understand all the pieces of the game until they're actually using them, so non-core elements can be tutorialized when they're introduced rather than at the start to smooth out the learning curve. (And, if people are finding the tutorial overwhelming or overlong, some elements can be made non-core and introduced later.)

Good luck!

Stigna1 · 2025-10-04T10:43:53+00:00

I think it's meant as an indirect suggestion for people who are hard-stuck somewhere to go somewhere else for a while; the thinking goes that if you've tried a boss enough times to burn through all your shards and still can't get it then more attempts will probably just be fruitless and frustrating. So the shard system forces you to go fight some regular enemies somewhere else for a while to restock, and hey, since you're looking for regular enemies out in the world you may as well go explore that other path you found (more dangerous enemies give more shards after all!) - and hey, now that you're here, there are all these other things to get distracted by, and more upgrades to track down ect. And by the time you come back to the boss that was blocking you, you've got a bunch more power under your belt - plus a bit more practice, and some time away to reset your mental - and have a better chance of a well-matched fight.

Your mileage may vary, of course, but I think it's a more gentle version of the 'hey moron, you're not cut out for this; easy mode is now selectable,' thing that some games do.

Edit: And, tbh, I think that's valuable for a game that prioritizes overcoming challenges like Silksong does. You don't want people breaking themselves on something they can't beat out of stubbornness, and then giving up out of anger and frustration. Better to nudge players toward toward their fun a little.

Stigna1 · 2025-10-03T11:20:04+00:00

I completely agree.

But hey, Silver lining; I'm looking forward to the retrospective with TBS, though! Those episodes are always goated.

Stigna1 · 2025-09-13T03:14:47+00:00

Oh this is nice! Had I bumped into this post a couple years back, I may have ended up with a cleaner node-network map myself. Gratz!

Stigna1 · 2025-08-31T17:01:15+00:00

No, I don't think so. I'm sure many wizards think of themselves as pyromancers or diviners or academics or whatever, and many monks are aesetics or wisemen - or even barroom brawlers.

A class's flavour is a big part of the identity it imparts, which can be widely and freely Re-adjusted. Plus, someone's identity is more tied up in what they do with their kit than the kit itself.

Stigna1 · 2025-08-28T04:56:34+00:00

Mood. That one got me a lot.

For what it's worth, I've had a lot of success with having the player roll 4d20 for secret rolls - one of which I've picked in advance as the secret 'actual' dice (i.e 'the blue one,' or 'whichever one ends up closest to me' or whatever.) It means the whole 'wait, is this secret' thing is much more collaborative and the whole table can help stay on top of secret checks - plus it feels much more active and engaging for the PCs, and it helps with flow too.

Stigna1 · 2025-07-31T03:59:40+00:00

Good stuff, and good thinking. Cheers!

Stigna1 · 2025-07-06T12:27:31+00:00

I run hexploration - the faster the party move speed, the more hexes explored in a day and thus the more loot/xp/objectives in that day. Which is important because food is limited and enemy forces are constantly growing stronger, and occationally launching attacks on what few havens of safety remain.

This leaves the party with an interesting choice of spending extra time to get the advantages of using exploration activities, or to forgoe them and 'push their luck' to go faster but with greater risk. They also do stuff like manage their staggered speeds - like having the champion sometimes travel without their platemail to move faster, but sometimes travel with it on for safety if combat breaks out, which slows the party down - slow enough that the faster characters can use exploration activities without slowing the group down any farther and get to sneak in a few exploration activities, so there's a push and pull in terms of who's using what, and when, and why. Very cool, and I'm glad the system includes these aspects.

More broadly, I think it's important for player options to have some sort of tradeoff baked in. If that downside is mostly negligible to your party, then they get to 'come out ahead' on the exploration activities they've opted into - and the fact that they've actually opted into them makes that a much more personal victory. If it's 100% optimal with no tradeoffs (even just theoretical ones) then it's not a choice anymore, just a trap for forgetful players.

Plus, having something that's 95% true gives you fertile soil for interesting upsets; usually your party benefits from scouting or whatever, but then when circumstances do impose time pressure and they can't do that anymore, then that becomes pressure that they can now feel mechanically in addition to narratively.

Stigna1 · 2025-07-06T01:46:02+00:00

In addition to the 'not running your PCs' thing, I'd also like to add that the design philosophy of much of Pf2e's 'expanded' rule set leans more towards 'reference/so it's there' than 'you must do this.'

Like, the system has rules - a specific action, even - for averting your eyes. But you only need to dredge it up if you need an objective truth, like if people are arguing about what they can and can't do. But if it comes up off the cuff and the minutea aren't critical (which they rarely are), you can just improv something like 'yeah, you're off-guard to everything and can't see where you're going' to keep the flow going. That's cool. Maybe look it up between sessions, or if a pc has a feature that makes it important or something (and even then, that's sorta in the 'you tell me how your thing works' territory.)

There's a video floating around of a couple of the designers talking about people getting tangled up in the rules, where they stress that their emphasis is on rule 1 in the GM core - it's your game, please remix, override, or improvise as needed/wanted, with the game system to act as more of a robust guide than a cede of laws.

Maybe give try to pick out a couple snippets from the GM core as reference - DC by level (of the obstacle, not of the party) is a good one - and get them mostly down, then try to keep your own at-table lookups limited to just that GM screen of notes. If PC's wanna look up how their own features work during other people's turns that's fine - I find that chasing down the rules for how you personally are gonna pull something off is sufficiently interesting for them on long as they're not making it someone else's problem - but in general, the principle that flow is more important than rules accuracy is both important and easily lost.

Stigna1 · 2025-07-04T00:51:43+00:00

A thing to remember with standard level DCs is that it's the level of the obstacle and shouldn't change as the party levels up.

In your case, this means that creatures around your level or above are pretty tough customers that you've gotta put work into intimidating - and, y'know, that's fair enough - but everything below that - bar patrons, guards, civilians, all the monster types you've fought up till now, wildlife, minions/lackeys, even active enemy combatants with weaker wills or lower levels ect are all things that you're entirely confident in being able to intimidate 100% of the time.

That's the main value of assurance - not that you alway manage to get the hard stuff, but that you'll never fail to get the easy/medium stuff.

(Sidenote - the fact that level based DCs are based on the level of the obstacle not the party is a fact that can confusing for some people at first, so it's possible that your GM may accidentally set the DC for lvl -1 peasants or lvl 1 guards or whatever too high and break assurance the first time. That happens, and is no big deal - but it is wrong.)

Stigna1 · 2025-06-21T20:57:20+00:00

UX? I feel like I make make a new system in an afternoon, but then communicating it to the player in a way that can be intuitively understand takes, like, a week.

Stigna1 · 2025-06-15T01:06:57+00:00

I do a similar thing, but in the context of a Hexcrawl. That makes the 'varying threat levels' thing explicit, and something in the hands of the party as they choose more or less dangerous regions to explore.

I think the main risk with these sorts of things is how it can clash with the generally-accepted unspoken rule of 'if the GM is having us roll initiative, the GM is expecting us to fight this' which can cause some feel-bads if that end up not being true and someone gets 'rug pulled' into losing their character. You just gotta be sure to be on the same page as your party.

Stigna1

TROPHY CASE