Every TRPG player knows about critical successes and failures. Game systems include them to ensure that chance is still chance, and even a talented character can fail while even a skill-less character can succeed. And they take on mythic qualities at the table. Rolling a critical success or failure at the table is cause for animated reactions, and they make any moment noteworthy. But how do you handle them as a GM?
The classic style is to take those moments and describe them in a way that befits that moment. A natural 1 on a stealth check? The character trips into a bookcase, which falls and knocks over other bookcases. A natural 20 on a charisma check? The character is otherworldly cool and collected, convincing anyone of anything. Some GMs even take things a step further and make that moment part of the plot. That natural 1 stealth roll not only alerts the people in the area, but also stymies any efforts to use the books on the fallen bookcases in an organized way. That natural 20 charisma check actually convinces a group of NPCs to follow the character via inspiration. This is a good way to extend these important rolls into something that has a lasting impact on the game.
But there's another way to play out critical successes and failures. You can increase player involvement by asking the player to describe the extreme result of their roll. Now, the player has the option to determine the extent to which their roll impacts the game. Some GMs will be thinking, but what if the player chooses to spin a story so that their failure isn't really a failure or that their success exceeds the bonus of a critical success? This is a potential issue, one which you can solve by moderating rather than directing their action. But most players, most of the time, will abide by the spirit of a critical roll. There are clear guidelines for how a critical roll is handled, and players tend to stick to within those bounds. Let's look at how it works when the players do what you need them to do, and then how you can redirect a result where the player stretches things.
First, how players are likely to react. A player rolls a natural 1 on an attack roll. You put it to them: "How does your character fail?" The player might improvise that they miss so badly on the attack that their weapon gets broken or lodged somewhere. They might fall down from the momentum of their missed swing. They might even decide that they actually hit themselves and take a damage roll. These are all solid options. Players understand that critical rolls affect the story in bigger ways than just a missed attack or a powerful strike, and they'll play to it.
Similarly, successes are a way to add something spicy to the mix. "How does your character succeed?" may be answered in a variety of ways. The player might decide they remove a limb or an eye with their attack, which affects how the enemy will fight for the rest of combat. They might decide that they knock the enemy prone or even temporarily unconscious. They might even decide that the powerful strike demoralizes the opponent, pairing it with an intimidation check to scare off the enemy. Each of these has the potential to be a good option, depending on what your goal as GM is for the combat.
The key with good player suggestions for critical rolls is that the decision isn't being handed down from the GM--they're getting to decide for themselves what is in-character and meaningful to the party at that moment. It really is the case that the whole party will be more invested in player-created consequences than something you give them as GM. It's a small change, but it makes these moments much more exciting, including for you--the players will come up with things you wouldn't, and now your own surprise is a part of the process.
But improvisation is rarely perfect. Players may push the limits of what constitutes a critical success or failure. Here's where your discretion as a GM will help you. Ask yourself the question, "Does this change the story by the right amount?" There will be times that a critical roll arises when you really need a story beat to go just right, and there will be times that your players roll in a way that runs counter to what you want them to accomplish in a scene. Think of your role as being either approving a player suggestion (most of the time) or tweaking something slightly to fit the momentum (some of the time). You want to honor player suggestions enough to have it be a general rule that you abide by them--otherwise, the magic will be gone--but with occasional exceptions only when necessary. Be ready to reroute your story to fit these moments unless you truly can't move forward without a change to what a player wants.
So how do you adjust a suggestion? Keep the spirit of it, but take it in a slightly more appropriate direction. Let's say a party is just cleaning up some stray enemies before fighting the BBEG, and they roll a natural 1 on an attack. A player suggests that their weapon breaks. But you as GM know that they have no extra weapons and the fight that will follow will need the party at their best. So you keep the spirit of it, but tweak it: their sword splinters down the middle but holds together, unsure of whether another blow will tear it apart. The player still got the result they suggested, but in a way that doesn't destroy the party's chances of success overall.
Let's consider another critical failure possibility. A character is making an impassioned speech before townsfolk, asking for help with an approaching foe. They roll a natural 1. The player says that the whole town turns on the party, so upset are they with the terrible speech attempt. But this is a pretty dire consequence. The player is in the spirit of a critical failure, but going from possibly being helped to outright attacked is two heavy a swing in the direction of failure. So you keep the spirit of it and tweak it. Two unruly members of the town start agitating to throw the party out of town or even attack them. But the whole town doesn't do so. It's a matter of balance. Alternatively, you can use a suggestion like this to guide your players back to the story; they are engaged in a seriously self-involved side quest, and having the town turn on them gets the party back on track. But mostly, you want to respect the players and their additions.
Critical successes should follow the same format. Let's say your player is rolling a knowledge check to see what they know about a particular magic spell (an arcana check in 5e). They succeed with a natural 20. Your player decides that they know everything about the spell, including how it affects enemies of the type they're fighting. But for story reasons, you want these enemies to put up a fight, perhaps because they are emissaries of the BBEG. So you can curtail the effect of the critical success. "Your character knows all about the spell, including which types of enemies it affects especially well. You also know that using this spell on this type of enemy is extraordinarily painful, like amplified torture." Now you have complicated the situation, opening it to the players to decide whether they use this vicious attack. Perhaps the players still use the spell, but now with the tempering effect that observers will spread word of the party's ruthlessness. It doesn't make it so that the player's success is abbreviated, but it does add some spice to the mix.
Perhaps a player overreaches on their described success. A natural 20 roll to hit deals extra damage, but you also open it up to your player: how does this attack transcend a normal attack? The player decides that the attack cuts the enemy directly in half. Glancing at the stats you're tracking, you see that the enemy still has plenty of health, and you want them to continue fighting. So the player doesn't cut the enemy in half in a lethal way; instead, the player cuts off an arm and a leg, forcing the enemy to fight off-balance and hemorrhaging damage as the rounds continue. We could designate an additional d8 of damage for each round of blood loss. But the enemy is still up and fighting. Your player's suggestion is honored, but you still get to keep the fight going.
These compromises keep the game going in the direction you want while still putting as much power in the hands of the players as possible. It's a very small tweak to gameplay that your players will have fun with. And it costs you essentially nothing. As long as you're willing to shift a wayward player suggestion when it goes out of bounds, you're able to let the players guide the story (which should always be the goal in my opinion) without risking losing control of the moment. So let your players be your guide, and critical rolls will become even more spontaneous and memorable than before.
Back to the homepage (where you can find everything!)
No comments:
Post a Comment