As most of you know this is, primarily, a D&D blog, focusing on 4th Edition. This is because D&D is my favorite RPG, and it’s the RPG that I get to play most often. It is not, however, the only RPG I like or have read. That’s what this column is going to be about: when I read (and like) other RPGs, and I think they have some application to D&D, I’m going to give advice to that effect.

Recently, I’ve been reading The Mouse Guard Role-Playing Game, which I’m absolutely in love with. I may review it later (preferably after I’ve played it), but for right now, I’d like to discuss how the game handles failure, and how this can be applied to D&D.

In Mouse Guard, as in many indie RPGs, failure does not stop things dead, and never causes a null result. Let me explain that a bit. If you make a skill roll or engage in a conflict, failing to succeed never causes nothing to happen (e.g., “I try to climb the wall.” (rolls dice and fails) “Uh, yeah, you fail. Next?”), and rarely causes the action to stop dead (such as with a total-party kill). This can be applied to D&D, as well. Today I’ll talk about how to apply this to skill checks.

Skill Check Failure: Make it Interesting!
D&D already has a mechanic similar to the one in Mouse Guard, but it’s built into skill challenges. In a skill challenge, failure often achieves a similar result to success, but at a cost. For example, if you’re engaging in a skill challenge to escape from a goblin prison, failure might mean that you still escape, but you’re injured or pursued, too. This mechanic works well in skill challenges, because it means that failure does not stop the adventure dead, and it potentially makes the PCs’ lives more difficult and, as a result, more interesting.

Now, how do we apply that mentality to individual skill checks? One way is to do the same thing that Mouse Guard does: introduce a twist. In Mouse Guard, when a roll is failed, the GM can introduce a twist: an additional obstacle that results from the original failed roll. For example, let’s say that the PCs are trying to bully their way past a guard using the Intimidate skill. If they fail the roll, rather than just saying “He doesn’t seem intimidated”, escalate it a little. “He seems offended rather than frightened, and starts looking toward the other guards nearby. You have the feeling that, if you don’t calm him down soon, he’s going to bring them into the argument and possibly try to arrest you.” This method of escalation will keep the PCs lives interesting, and it may have the side effect of discouraging skill checks for the sake of skill checks.

What I mean by that is, if everyone in your group always makes an Arcana check when you call for a check from one person, escalate the result of the failure for each failure, even if some of them succeeded. Maybe the successes grant some good information, but each failure grants some bad information, or makes existing bad information worse. make it clear to the PCs that not all of their information is good, and that everyone’s arguing and disagreeing about what’s true and what’s not. This might help to reign in players who make untrained checks all the time simply because there’s no reason not to, and it might also lead to some very interesting situations that make the game more fun.

Another thing that Mouse Guard does is it allows a PC to succeed despite a failed roll, but at a cost. To continue the example of the guard from above, if the PCs fail to intimidate the guard, you can choose to have the guard be intimidated anyway, but things don’t necessarily go as planned. Maybe the guard lets them pass, but he tells his buddies afterward and there’s a much heavier guard presence looking for the PCs a little later on. Again, make it clear that they’ve succeeded despite a failed roll, and that even though they got what they wanted, they’ll pay for it somehow, either immediately or in the future. This method has the advantage of allowing you to bank on a specific skill roll being made, and to not have to plan for failure; you just have to plan for the added complication that comes with a conditional success.

One final method you can use is to introduce stakes to skill rolls. This isn’t specifically mentioned in Mouse Guard in relation to individual skill rolls, but it is mentioned in the conflict rules, and can be applied to skill rolls. The idea is that, when a skill roll is called for, you ask the player making the roll what he or she stands to gain from the roll. What is the goal, the roll’s end result if there is a success? Then, you tell the players what the result will be if they fail. Let them know what the stakes are. You don’t have to be completely clear; goals can be vague and open to interpretation. This is really just another way to introduce twists, except that you’re introducing them before the roll is made. Try to shy away from setting mechanical effects as goals; go with the story instead. This method is best reserved for really important rolls; you shouldn’t set stakes for a roll to search a room for treasure, but feel free to set stakes for a roll made to convince the duke that you’re not a traitor.

Next up: Failure conditions in combat encounters!

Related posts:

1. Skill Challenges as Pacing Mechanics
2. SotC plus D&D