In this episode of Outside the Dice, I offer my thoughts on the use of dice and why I think minimizing how often dice rolls are called for can be beneficial in enhancing player immersion.
Episode transcript:
Hail traveler and welcome to the very first episode of Outside the Dice: a D&D podcast where I share all my thoughts and opinions to help your table become better immersed in the world of your game. Too often do I see DM’s become so wrapped up in the rules and mechanics of the game, that the narrative and the story-telling suffers, and it’s those elements that make D&D so much fun! I’m not saying the rules aren’t important. In fact, I’m going to be discussing those rules a lot. I’m here to discuss how to use the story and roleplaying to justify the mechanics rather than the other way around.
If you’ve run into some writers block in your homebrew game, if you need a fresh perspective on a certain rule, if you’re a veteran who’s looking for possible rule variations or a brand new player who wants some direction, I’ve made this podcast just for you. I’m your host, Allen Niles.
Like I said before, this is a D&D podcast, so I’m going to be focusing on topics that apply to a medieval fantasy genre. It doesn’t necessarily mean you can’t apply these thoughts to other tabletop role playing games that are not dungeons and dragons, it just means not everything will be 100% relevant. Hopefully the ideas I have can be used for any game, but D&D is just what I know and what I like.
One last thing that I want to mention really quick before we begin is that, if you have never played D&D before and you’re listening to this podcast, it will be really helpful for you to pick up a players guide and become at least a little familiar with the rules. I’ll be talking about different aspects of the game, but not a step by step process on how to play the game, and I don’t want you to be confused! If you’ve read over the rules and you’re at least a little bit familiar with the game, then you’re all set!
I have so many thoughts that I want to share, that I almost couldn’t decide on what to actually talk about in the first episode, but I figured, let’s start with a broad category. Let’s discuss one of the most foundational components of the game. It is simultaneously the most exciting and most frustrating part of D&D. Let’s talk about rolling dice.
______________________________________________________________________________
In D&D, the dice determine a lot of things. They determine how well you can perform a certain feat, effectiveness in completing a task, your ability to withstand or react to an outside force, your effectiveness in combat… Speaking generally, nearly anything that happens can be boiled down to a dice roll. Hopping over a puddle? Roll athletics. Remembering an NPC’s name from last month’s session, even though it’s been about 35 seconds in-game? Roll history. Talking to anyone about anything, roll persuasion. My issue with the dice roll carrying so much weight, is that a lot of dungeon masters tend to rely solely on a dice roll as the irrefutable decision maker, which can make the entire world of your game feel really random. No matter how much skill a character possesses or lacks, ol’ lady Luck has the final say in an outcome.
So, how do we fix this- this imbalance and randomness? How do we make the player feel like it’s their character’s abilities that are driving the story and not the number rolled on a die?
My suggestion? Don’t call for so many dice rolls!
In chapter 8 of the dungeon masters guide, there’s a section titled The Role of Dice, and I thought I was really clever for thinking up an episode title that had to do with “role” and “dice”, but seeing as Wizards published it first, I decided to change the name of this episode. But that’s neither here nor there because I’m going to share my thoughts anyways.
In that section, the book discusses different methods on when to use dice rolls. The first method is to use dice rolls for just about everything, and the second method is to use dice for hardly anything at all. Now there are pros and cons for each method, and the book goes on to describe ways of finding a middle ground. My preference falls somewhere near that middle but definitely leans toward not utilizing dice often. Using dice as little as possible empowers your players to role play and immerse themselves in the story and the world of your game. Players should be looking at their character sheet to know what abilities and skills they thrive in, but not necessarily the number next to those skills. Focusing on the number reminds the player that they’re sitting at a table playing a game, rather than acting out the part and thinking the way their character would think. For me, that’s all the fun! When I’m a player at the table, I know that I would rather play the character than let my dice play the character for me.
If a player at your table has an idea that their character should be able to do and there’s little to no outside force, I say let them! It helps break away from the monotony that other games are often chained to. Here’s an example: the party is tracking a shady looking character in a city. Now if this were a video game, you would be tethered to the capabilities of the programming and, you’d probably be forced to follow in the street or whatever other course the programmers have decided you take, but this is D&D! You’re sitting at a table with open possibility! If there is a more dexterous character in the party, like a monk or a rogue, they might want to follow by rooftop or doing something else that you hadn’t necessarily considered.
In a scenario like this, you as DM would be the ultimate judge; not only to allow if the character can do what is being asked, but to decide if a dice roll is necessary. Explore approaching these situations openly and allowing the player to perform the action without calling for a roll. I think when players ask if they can do something that the DM did not necessarily plan for, it can cause a sort of fight or flight reaction in the DM, and the response is to call for a roll. But opening up to possibilities your players present can be freeing and will open the door to your players to think of more creative options for future scenarios. It may help to think of the players as additional story tellers contributing to a greater story, rather than players at a game you need to compete and win against.
The biggest culprits of this that I’ve noticed are animal handling checks and vehicle handling checks. A lot of times, I’ve seen DM’s call for an animal handling check as soon as a player mounts their horse or wants to do anything else on horseback. Checks should be made when outside factors are present that affect the situation. “You mount the horse and start to ride? Okay great. Your horse gets spooked by a sudden burst of flames and you attempt to calm the horse down? Roll an animal handling check to succeed!” The same thing goes for vehicle handling checks- “You get into the driver’s seat of the wagon and want to follow the road?” That shouldn’t call for a vehicle handling check! A check should be called when you’re going off road, when you’re swerving through trees in a forest, and being pursued by bandits. I think the reason these checks are commonly called for is because we don’t see them in every session, but just because your players aren’t driving a wagon or riding a horse every session doesn’t necessarily mean that a dice roll is necessary.
Be open to that second method of allowing your players to contribute to the table’s story without a roll and see where those creative sparks can lead. This goes for interactions that are more common as well.
Did the player roleplaying as a bard really just sweet talk your NPC shopkeep into lowering the price? Give them the lower price! Does the barbarian want to break a wooden chair by slamming it into a wall? If there’s no mechanical gain, why not let them do it? Rolling the dice should be used as a supplement to your players’ immersion, not act as a substitute for it.
Now, not every player feels inclined to role play and act as their character, and if those players are uncomfortable role playing then they can’t be expected to perform in that way. After all, D&D is about becoming a character, immersing yourself in a story where you get to control the mighty fighter, be the beguiling rogue, or act the wise wizard. It’s about getting to be something you’re not. If a person wants to play a charismatic character, that doesn’t mean they actually have to be a charismatic person. I love playing charismatic characters, but I’m not going to come up with impromptu badass one liners and witty retorts for every interaction. If a player says, “I try to persuade the guard into letting us go,” you could ask them to role play or you can make them roll a dice, but if they have a creative solution, you may not need either of those to push the story forward. The important thing is the player’s investment in the narrative, whether that investment comes in the form of role play or not. Regardless of if the player acts out the scene or simply describes what they want to accomplish, consider allowing a successful outcome without a skill check because each time a check for the player is called, a check is also being called on the narrative.
On the other hand, calling for checks often can be entertaining in their own way…
_________________________________________________________________________________
I’m not going to lie.. it can be fun to ask your players for a roll on a mundane task and watch them fail. The table is creating a story together, but what’s a good story without a wrench tossed in every now and again?
“You try to pick up the mug of ale? Roll slight of hand. Oh, you rolled a 1? It slips from your hand and shatters on top of the head of a gnomish noble” (a gnomble if you will).
Failed rolls can have their own entertaining results and unravel circumstances that were completely unexpected. The players weren’t PLANNING on upsetting a gnomble, but now the table is forced to get out of the mess, and everyone has the fun of seeing where it goes. Or take my earlier example; “the party is tracking a shady looking person through a city and the monk wants to follow by rooftop.” Asking for a roll that results in failure could mean the monk missteps and breaks through the roof of someone’s home. Probably another gnomble! Personally I don’t like this method, and here’s why:
Calling for rolls on mundane tasks that result in your players failing often are going to make your player feel foolish.
When I play D&D, the stories I like to create follow that epic genre of fantasy, which means, the players are playing as heroes. Professionals in their respective classes (even at level one)! I’ve played in a campaign where the DM called for rolls on nearly everything, and the result was that the characters looked like bumbling idiots. There were times when the game was really funny, but it got old when I noticed how this was affecting the overall narrative of the campaign. I imagined my character as a warrior who had spent years training in the craft of battle, but when I rolled high enough to hit my target, the DM would say things like, “somehow you miraculously land a blow.” Or when I missed, it was described as the obvious outcome. Combat was treated like some kind of Abbott and Costello bit, where the characters were made the fools.
Now this issue has to do with narrative style and not so much on how many dice rolls you call for, because in a combat encounter, the players are required to roll when they want to attack. I bring this up though, because it’s difficult to view the character’s as heroes when dice rolls are called for often in those moments outside of combat. For those moments when the player can’t pick up their mug of ale or fall through a thatched roof, those are all critical moments in shaping the narrative of your world, and that narrative will carry over into combat and determine if the character dodges an attack because of battle prowess, or because they slipped on a banana peel at exactly the right moment.
Now this is all personal preference. The story I look to create when playing won’t necessarily be the story that your table wants to create. If your table wants a more relaxed feel to the game, calling for a bunch of rolls to shake things up maybe the best option. What’s really important is communicating with your players what kind of campaign everyone is hoping for. Are we playing as Finn and Jake in the land of Ooo, or are we Aragorn and Legolas in Middle Earth. (Or Frodo and Sam for that matter, but that dips into a survival story more than an epic one, so we’ll talk about that another time). And even after being clear what story everyone is looking for, sometimes you try to create Game of Thrones and end up with Monty Python. I will be the first to admit that, as a DM, I’ll throw in an NPC who is basically just a fleshy pile of puns when most of the narrative is very tense. I’ve also been that player in a serious campaign who makes one dumb joke, and it causes the table to riff for half an hour. Or more than one joke, honestly they come out by the dozen.
It’s okay to dip back and forth a bit, because a good story is comprised of both goofy and epic. I mean, even Adventure Time has encounters with a Lich, but having a clear idea of that intention is always a great place to start. Communicate with your players on what everyone should expect narrative-wise, no matter your method for dice rolls.
Whether you’re leaning toward one style of gameplay or the other, there is one area where I must insist you limit the amount of dice rolls called. I’ve played enough tables to witness DM’s do this time and time again, usually without even realizing it. I’m talking about DM’s punishing creative decisions.
________________________________________________________________________________
We’ve all been there- the scene is set. Initiative has been rolled. The player sits up to take their turn and... it happens. Instead of taking their attack action, they ask if they can grab the top of their opponents shield, and slam it into their targets face, or, they ask if they can strike the support beam next to them, and loose a heap of boulders onto the enemy. Or they ask to throw a slice of ham on top of the Alpha Wolf’s head, so the rest of its pack eats it instead of the party! And the result is always the same: the DM calls for a hundred dice rolls for the player to accomplish a perfectly reasonable request. Well, except for that last one. That would be ridiculous. But my point still stands!
Now I can hear you yelling at me through your phone or computer or whatever, even though that’s not really how this works. “My players ask if they can do stuff all the time, and I let them do it. How is that punishing creativity??” But just bear with me because that’s not my point. Also sorry about the accent, I’m not sure why I made you sound like that, but here we are.
You grab the bad guy’s shield? Alright make me a alright of hand strength check to grab it, then make me an attack roll at disadvantage to hit his face once you’re holding it, then roll damage.. you try to attack the support beam? Okay that’s going to be an attack roll to hit it, but then make me a strength check instead of damage, then please make me a dexterity saving throw to make sure the boulders don’t fall on you.
Now this where things get dicey for me, not just because of all the dice or because I love any excuse for a horrible pun, but because it actually makes sense. If you’re going to do something out of the ordinary, like using the environment or the bad guy’s own wardrobe against them, it would be more difficult than taking a standard attack action. A fighter trains to use the weapon they know, not training to toss deli meats on feral canines. At least I hope not, otherwise that village is screwed. The part where I have an issue with this, is that the DM will clearly see this action is more complex than a standard one and they increase the difficulty appropriately, often via added dice rolls. But what they fail to follow up with is a scaled outcome that makes the added difficulty justify taking the complex action to begin with.
If a player has to attack a support beam, and make sure their strength roll is high enough, and dodge out of the way to avoid taking damage, they’d never attack a support beam ever again, because you’d never have to jump through all those hoops with a normal attack. Especially if after all those dice rolls, the damage output is roughly the same as just swinging your hammer instead.
It may seem obvious, but I’ve seen countless DM’s do this. Making an action more difficult without any added benefit, just because the action was creative, is punishment!
And punishing creative decisions like this is stifling, and will only result in players making “safe moves.” That is, ones that are highlighted in the players handbook. When your table gets into a combat encounter, they’re not going to care that one guy has a shield and one guy has a helmet, or that the wooden planks you’re standing on are rickety because it’s been decided that interacting with those things just isn’t worth it. And if they don’t care what the enemy or environment looks like, it may as well be a featureless field, and that gets real old real quick.
Now I’m not saying creative actions should never be more difficult than a standard one. I’m also not saying you should allow your players to do every crazy idea that they have, like punching goblins to the moon, --even though that would be … hella dope-- but if you’re going to make a player roll multiple times, give them some incentive. You’re swinging for the support beam? Okay, make that AC similar to the bad guy and throw in the dex save after. The player has to dodge the tumbling rocks to avoid damage, but the upside is they can deal damage to a cone of enemies in the boulders path. Now the player knows they might take damage from doing something like this in the future, but it can be justified in situations when they need to attack multiple bad guys at once! Or shake up the action by creating a contested roll instead of one against the enemy’s AC. Maybe that shielded target is just too tough to hit, so grabbing their shield can be a grapple contest instead! It’ll be easier to hit them, but damage will be lower since the shield is an improvised weapon. Now they know they’ll deal less damage, but they have the added benefit of knowing they have a lower roll to hit.
I realize this is tough to do on the fly unless you’re incredibly well versed on the core rules to begin with. After all, you can’t expect to know when to break the rules if you don’t know ‘em to begin with. Just keep in mind, if you’re adding a lot of extra dice rolls, especially rolls that they wouldn’t have to make with a standard alternative, make sure you’re adding in some benefits to make those rolls worth it.
Or alternatively, if you’re having trouble coming up with a creative benefit, don’t make the roll harder and just let the description be for the sake of flavor. “Hell yeah! With your free hand, you wrap your fingers around the bandits tower shield, and before he has a chance to snatch it away, you slam the slab of iron against his face and leave him with a broken, bloody nose. Roll to attack and roll for damage!”
Now your player has the benefit of coming up with something cool, and you have the benefit of not having to make up rules for it on the fly!
________________________________________________________________________________
As a DM, I never want to have players at my table who are afraid to try something cool, because they know it would be better to take the same action they do at every combat. I’m a big believer that actions should be character or plot driven and love when players make a decision that is in character even if doing a different action would be mechanically more efficient. Something like say, protecting your friend by pushing yourself between them and the monster, even though “mechanically” it would be better to just let them hit zero hit points and heal them with a healing word spell before they hit their third death save. It’s how you know your players are immersed, and actually care about what’s happening in the story!
It may not come as a big surprise to you that I’m not a big fan of the terms “min/maxing” or “action economy,” but I digress. You can listen to me rant about that some other time. Whether you handle your players’ alternative, often chaotically random, actions with a balanced result or simply use the request to spice up your narrative. Or if you don’t use either and ignore my advice altogether, the important thing is you find a consistency to your deliberation. Not just whether you chose one method or the other (because odds are you’ll switch back and forth), but consistency with.. did those boulders deal a d6 of damage or 5d12. Consistency in a campaign is such an understatedly crucial element that a lot of DM’s bump to the wayside. Things like the color of your guard captain’s hair, or that a gold piece is called a ‘tapper’ in your world- those details sit on the back burner, but I will tell you right now, if you mention a detail about anything, I promise the players will remember it. If you overly describe a random building’s door, you better bet your sweet behind that those players will be investigating the door immediately. But when it comes to consistency, above many other things, if there were one concept I wish DM’s would be consistent with, it would be the difference between an ability check and an ability saving throw.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Again, it looks like wizards beat me to the punch, because in chapter 8 of the DMG, just below the section Role of Dice, is a section about checks and saves. If I release this episode and find out there’s a podcast already out there called “Thinking Outside the Dungeon” I will be SO mad. [regular laugh followed by sad sigh] If you’re having trouble remembering what you should call for, don’t worry! Both The dungeon masters guide and I have cleverly and separately come up with a simple way to help you remember.
A skill check is used for anything that the player decides to do. The player chooses to walk a tightrope? Have them make an Acrobatics check. Player wants to pick the pocket of some poor schmuck? The player would make a Sleight of hand check. The player wants to do anything related to deli meats- you get my point. An ability save however, is when anything happens to the character that the player did not intend on happening or account for. The tightrope you were walking on snaps? Make a dex save to jump to safety. The pocket you tried to pick was actually a deviously shaped block of sentient muck? Roll a strength save to pull yourself free. It helps me to picture if the character is consciously acting or subconsciously reacting. It’s a small detail, but it’s those little details that keep your table immersed in the action rather than rules lawyering your choices.
The last thing I will say about dice rolls is this: feel free to experiment with timing, frequency and who makes the roll. I’ve had players sneak into a dungeon, to which I made the stealth check for the player. The reason I decided to do this was so the player would proceed with their action without bias of the roll. It stops the player from rolling a 1 and suddenly rethinking their plan to sneak in without backup.
This can be effective in keeping your players in suspense, but it does take away that excitement of the player making the roll. It’s just as random, no matter who actually rolls the dice, but the player feels less in control if they’re being told the result rather than being the one to announce it. If your players aren’t too keen on the idea of you making their dice rolls for them, then it might be a better option to let the player make the roll but just change the timing. “Oh, you said you want to sneak into the dungeon? Cool, perfect, I allow it.” No roll needed. “You sneak in,” but then as soon as I state that bandits are walking around the corner, now you have to make a stealth roll, the moment it’s too late for the player to takesies backsies if they don’t like the roll. If neither of those options work for your table, then you could try something else- call for the check to begin with, and let that roll carry over for the next minute in your gameplay, or hour, or even the entirety of the dungeon. A player rolls a 1? Well, unfortunately, that character is just having an off day and they’re just gonna keep sneezing their way through the dusty ruin. Now you might wanna be careful with this method too, because, if you’re not careful, players could end up exploiting their rolls. If they see that one player rolled a 20 and one player rolled a 1, they’re just going to keep sending in that player who rolled the 20 and leave behind the players who rolled a 1. I call them the Crit Crew and the Fumble Fellows! You don’t have to call them that, --you can call them whatever you want-- but it’d be really cool if you did.
If I’m being totally honest, I bring up these things like timing and consistency because I had a cool idea that I really wanted to share with you! It’s nothing super groundbreaking, but it’s just a neat way to implement changing the timing of a roll in your campaign, when your players encounter a situation when they are being charmed.
________________________________________________________________________________
Usually, I’ll see DMs approach Charm in one of two ways: one, they will nonchalantly either tell the table or one player at the table to make a Wisdom Saving Throw with zero context. Then, they will proceed with their narration or dialogue and subtly let those players who failed their roll know they are under the effects of a Charm. Or, two, they will begin with dialogue or narration and call for a Wisdom Save immediately upon reaching a certain point in that dialogue or narration (kind of like a trigger). They might say something like, “You’re not sure why, but you cannot take your eyes off the tapestry and stand frozen in awe of its captivating beauty. Roll a Wisdom Saving Throw.” Or: “The stranger locks eyes with you and beckons you forward. You feel compelled to obey! Make a Wisdom Saving Throw.” Normally, these approaches are fine, because the effect the players are rolling against are made obvious shortly before or after they need to do so. Things like narrating the player stepping on a trap door and calling for a Dex Save immediately doesn’t ruin the surprise that they are possibly about to fall through a trapdoor! But calling for a check like this goes against the entire framework of what a Charm spell does. Completing some dialogue and asking for a save immediately is going to put your table on high alert, because telling the table to make a saving throw tells them that something about the situation isn’t right. Same thing goes for the first approach: even if the table is unaware of the source of the Wisdom Save, they are still going to be put on edge just by you announcing that it was necessary.
A Charm ability makes people comply without logic. It’s sneaky and seductive and requires an air of ease and relaxation. That atmosphere is impossible to create when asking your players to roll a save. This is where timing comes in. Without calling for a save, these types of narration don’t spark the same suspicion, because the DM is always narrating something. It’s their job! (Or at least a big part of their job). “You don’t know why, but you are captivated by the tapestry,” or, “the stranger locks eyes with you and beckons you toward them.” These are pretty normal things to hear from a DM. What’s more, and I think this is key, they’re also situations we run into in real life. There have been times where I’ve caught myself staring at a painting and either didn’t have the thought to look away or could literally not will myself to, because I felt like, if I looked away, I’d miss something. There are people that draw your eye- it can be the way they dress or the way they speak, but sometimes it’s just simply the way a person carries themselves that causes others around them to be drawn in. Those people just possess charisma- the ability to command a room. Now take that idea and multiply it, because the characters are in a world where magic exists, and a person can cast a spell to embody that captivating persona! A person who casts Charm is doing that to their target. They’re charming them!
So the tapestry draws their attention, or this stranger’s waving them forward; now what? Now, like in any situation where the DM describes the scene, we wait. The players can make a choice, and that choice might be to keep staring at the tapestry or to walk toward the stranger OR the choice might [be not to]! The difference between Charm and normal narration though, is that these situations have a specific outcome that the charmer wants. So we say the stranger beckons the character, “What do you do?” If the player says they walk away or stays put or anything other than moving toward them, NOW the DM calls for a Wisdom Saving Throw! Now it puts players on alert, because they can now be aware that this wasn’t just a choice offered by a normal circumstance, but one that is being forced by a magical and malicious circumstance- and if the players fails the saving throw now, it will create this awesomely icky feeling at the table! A dramatic irony that we all know the character is not in charge but is complying because of magic.
[audible discomfort delivered to imply excitement] Isn’t that cool? Idunno,Ithoughtitwascool.
No matter what the player says, just make a note of when you’ve actually decided that an NPC has cast the Charm spell, so you’re aware of its duration. And make sure to tell the player when the duration has ended since most Charm abilities make the target aware once the Charm has worn off. If a character does everything the charmer wants them to do because the player chose to for themselves, imagine their faces when you tell them it was never actually their choice! I can’t be certain, but I think the reveal would be something like you were telling them, “Would you kindly,” for an entire storyline. And I don’t wanna spoil any plots or anything, but that reveal was pretty successful!
Bioshock. It’s from Bioshock! It’s from like ten years ago, but, ya know.
So, that was a lot of rambling about rolling dice, but here’s the final take away: dice don’t have to be the end all, be all decision maker. If there is little to no significance for a failed result, more often than not you can let your player succeed without a roll. If there would be a mechanical gain like increased damage, or a status effect, add dice rolls conservatively to keep the difficulty appropriately balanced. Experiment with timing, and keep saves and skill checks in mind to fit the narrative. But above all else! If you take one piece of advice away from this episode, it’s to keep finding new ways to think outside the dice!
Credits:
Written and recorded by Allen Niles
Logo design by Karolyn Moses
Intro music by Louis Rabago
Photos by Megan Abbott
Music transitions found on Youtube Audio Library:
Sneaky Business by Biz Baz Studios and Tip Toes by Myuu
Comments