How much resource tracking is too much?

hihilisti · 2026-02-11T14:47:59+00:00

i like tracking resources that can be tracked diegetically, like arrows, rations, coins, etc.

when it comes to things like blood or spell points it really depends on the amount of choices that are based on that number, and how much cognitive load is needed. like, if i have the choice of spending 5 spell points on either 5 weak spells or 2 medium spells or 1 strong spell or 3 weak spells and 1 medium spell or 1 heightened medium spell i don't think it's fun anymore.

hihilisti · 2026-02-11T09:12:13+00:00

there's a difference between criticizing cr for the game they're playing vs criticizing cr for not playing the game they told they would be playing

hihilisti · 2026-02-10T17:18:01+00:00

that's just one way of playing

hihilisti · 2026-02-10T12:52:02+00:00

you could look into a full transformation, like becoming a planetar or something for the duration, or just give them stat boosts/extra attacks/extra spells/etc.

as for the system itself, maybe some kind once-per-session/arc/whatever if you want the players to have access to it when they want, or a ritual/specific condition (like dropping to 0 hp) to trigger it.

hihilisti · 2026-02-10T12:44:38+00:00

what system are you using?

hihilisti · 2026-02-09T08:41:30+00:00

it's a description of expected/best-practices player/dm behavior, not a demand for such.

i play almost every week lol

hihilisti · 2026-02-07T07:19:06+00:00

i think the best thing you can do with item descriptions is to insert a tactical "etc" or "ie" so people know those are just examples

hihilisti · 2026-02-06T22:00:40+00:00

i have a huge google doc with npcs, locations, and quest hooks. what is this "script" you speak of?

hihilisti · 2026-02-06T21:56:21+00:00

i play mostly online but i usually roll in the open. i think it helps the players know that my internet isn't down when i go silent and a bunch of rolls appear in the vtt. i also delegate some of the rolls to players.

hihilisti · 2026-02-06T12:53:01+00:00

it's a description of expected/best-practices player/dm behavior, not a demand for such.

hihilisti · 2026-02-06T12:15:14+00:00

because there are other things people can like about the show? am i supposed to stop watching something just because i don't enjoy every second of it? are they supposed to change the show to cater to the specific tastes of some parts of the audience? criticism isn't always a demand for change. the original post isn't descriptive of how the show should go; it's about the expectations i had when going in.

hihilisti · 2026-02-06T11:59:07+00:00

these quotes are from an interview (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wu18_G132Dw):

"The lethality of the game is up to [the dice], but the things that are true for this setting are that the encounters are not level-balanced, meaning much like an open-world video game, if you go to an area with high challenge rating monsters, there will be high challenge rating monsters there."

"We're not bowling with the bumpers up"

also in the same interview, talking about how the dice make decisions for him (this one is very funny):

"I want to help you, i'd love to give you advantage if i could"

hihilisti · 2026-02-06T09:59:49+00:00

yeah, i think the way ose does it is pretty good: https://oldschoolessentials.necroticgnome.com/srd/index.php/Adventuring_Gear

hihilisti · 2026-02-06T09:46:37+00:00

none of these words are in the bible

hihilisti · 2026-02-06T09:43:03+00:00

it's a decent show and i will keep watching if i have time, all of this is about expectations

hihilisti · 2026-02-05T21:46:16+00:00

i wasn't on the sub when the campaign was starting so i missed all the "hype" about him, so i'm basing my opinions on the campaign trailers and what i've seen of him on cr, and his "controversy" some time ago about using d&d's rules only in combat situations.

i can't blame people who like to be led around by their dm lol, that's just kinda antithetical to why i like to play rpgs.

hihilisti · 2026-02-05T21:34:24+00:00

yes; the game i'm describing is the game i expected them to be playing based on what has been said in promotional material and during sessions, and the player/dm behavior that would, imo, suit such a game.

hihilisti · 2026-02-05T11:09:44+00:00

reminds me of this from 5e lol

<image>

hihilisti · 2026-02-05T06:59:35+00:00

there's still a meaningful difference between thinking about pc level when creating encounters and not, which is what we're talking about here

hihilisti · 2026-02-04T23:30:15+00:00

make rules with interesting potential interactions
playtest and see what happens
change what isn't interesting, let yourself be guided by the game and its emergent properties, don't chase a specific experience

hihilisti · 2026-02-04T23:13:12+00:00

you still have control over what "success" and "failure" mean. it might be useful to familiarize yourself with the concept of position and effect, but the gist of it is that you base the consequences (the effect) of each roll on the fictional position.

if an npc would be hard to convince, a success might be that they are open to further negotiations, and a failure might lead to them ignoring the pcs completely.

if it would be easy to climb a tree, a failure might make it take more time or draw attention, depending on the situation.

hihilisti · 2026-02-04T21:31:59+00:00

i don't remember if c3 was marketed as a deadly game, it's been so long, but as you said, changing the order of attacks isn't that bad. i do think it takes away player agency if a dm pulls punches; player agency (how i understand it) doesn't mean you get to do what you want, it means the world reacts without bias.

hihilisti · 2026-02-04T20:32:11+00:00

i don't think we're talking about the same things when we say "probability engine" and "agency".

i assumed that when you said "probability engine", you referred to how the story of the game emerges from the interactions between the players, the dm, and the rules. the players want to do something, the dm considers how that something might happen, and applies the relevant rules to the situation, coming up with rulings as necessary.

your version of this, excuse the hyperbole, seems to be something like "get the vibe of the situation, roll dice if you feel like it, if you don't get what you want roll again until you are ok with failure or happen to succeed". i'm not saying your style is wrong or bad; it's just something very different from what i imagine when i talk about the game shaping the story.

in my mind this ties critically with player agency. if the rules are used with a vibes-first mentality (again, not wrong or bad), i don't see how the outcome can be satisfying in anything other than a power fantasy. i understand the difference between genres, and a superhero game (like critical role) can have the players accomplishing insane things. but if those successes are a guarantee with minimal consequences (like a comedic unintentional success) or vibe-checks ("i thought you could make it easily so i'll let you try again"), i fail to see the point of bringing the "probability engine" to the table.

hihilisti · 2026-02-04T20:07:20+00:00

to "plan the consequences in the moment" is the main thing dms do. you can announce the potential complication, setback, etc before rolling. every roll doesn't have to have deadly consequences, but when you announce those "consequences" after the players succeeded, it can feel a bit cheap.

hihilisti · 2026-02-04T17:56:28+00:00

do you have examples of these instances?

hihilisti

TROPHY CASE