2d20 games design problem?

#1

I had an opportunity to play Conan a 2d20 system. My opinion will be about it but I know there are more 2d20 systems and if you played them I wonder if you had similar thoughts.

During session few times a roll was made that I would consider pointless. A roll to avoid trap only to find out a minute later that trap would not activate even on failed roll, a roll to observe situation which gave us super basic information “castle is under siege, gate is broken and fight is inside as well as outside”.

After the game I gave feedback about it to the GM and he told me that system requires such rolls to generate meta-currency for PCs to spend.
As a result I’m confused. On its own it is easy to fix most system and put some stakes on every roll even in DnD, but what is system encourages us to make pointless die rolls to generate meta currency for us the players to spend?
Is it bad design, bad interpretation of rules, is it just me too used to Apocalypse games engine?
Do you have similar experience with 2d20 systems?

3 Likes
#2

Based on my limited understanding, you’re talking about momentum, correct? I was able to find an in depth post about the game on RPG.net, the part that jumped out at me was this

The Momentum system also means that the players are encouraged to be active, no passive. To generate Momentum you have to do something. Do nothing, take no risks, and it ebbs away.

So perhaps the act of providing low to zero risk challenges is to encourage the players to begin investing and propelling themselves forward. If you provide them with clear options to push their luck, they’ll actually engage with the meta-currency to learn how it works and how much reward you get for each risk. Sort of like how PbtA games encourage player interaction by making you focus on complications that arise from skill checks, this seems to also be part of the “yes and” design philosophy but in a more empowering light; you build successes on top of successes as bread crumbs to keep the players moving forward. “Playing it safe” is not a very heroic attitude and thus will not give your character the bonuses they need to swing hard.

Take this all with a grain of salt, I am by no means am expert in either system but that’s what appears to be happening to me.

4 Likes
#3

That parallels my own experience with the game where adventures would call repeatedly for simple things like Stealth rolls to be made by every member of the party. I didn’t care for the # of rolls assumed. But I’m not entirely sure that lowering that number would too negatively impact the momentum mechanic. Or if it did, if that would seriously affect the play experience. This is a problem with any game with a currency gain tied to rolls. If you’re a GM with a lower RPS (rolls per session), the economy may not work as intended. I almost wish games like these would advertise the expected # of rolls per session or per hour.

4 Likes
#4

How does the momentum mechanic work? Because as described, I have this picture in my head of a rule that says “If five minutes go by and no one has rolled dice, reduce the momentum pool by 1” which is obviously nonsense, but I’m having trouble figuring out how a resource that is “sustained” by “do-nothing” die rolls would actually work.

2 Likes
#5

My guess would be that it’s not about sustaining a resource but about characters “powering up” during the game. So if you don’t power up enough you’ll lack resources for later confrontations. (It still doesn’t sound that compelling.)

1 Like
#6

Sounds like some cutesy design or questionable results oriented GMing. Maybe both?

The whole idea of some sort ability currency that PCs gain as they adventure to build powers sufficient for a climactic session event reeks of results oriented, path-based design and that makes me squirrelly.

I can see session limited or event based powers/currency (rerolls, die pools, luck points etc.) as a mechanic, especially in a Swords & Sorcery setting, but I can’t trust adventure or encounter design that requires a specific amount of that currency to succeed in an adventure or encounter - it just feels so CRPG.

2 Likes
#7

@Radmad yes I mean momentum.

@Airk you gain momentum for having more than needed amount of successes on a roll then you spend momentum for re-rolls, activating special talents, rolling more dice etc, quick gain - quick loss currency.

@Gus.L the currency is not needed to “complete” the encounter but spending it allows to succeed more so encounter goes more smoothly if you have some to spend.

@edige23 for me as story gamer the pure mechanic meaning of this currency makes it boring, at least in the game I played we just gained and spend it without any fiction, “how does it look when you spend momentum to re-roll?” for that reason I like Fate points more, you have less of them but each time you spend it you describe how being “super strong” helps (at least I ask players for this extra bit of narration, I know some GMs don’t - what a missed opportunity for awesomeness)

2 Likes
#8

Makes sense. That gulf between simplifying the encounter and required to survive the encounter is where bad GMing may thrive.

A problem of both the standard excessively narrative GMing issue: having THE final encounter that the adventure leads to tends to pare down player choice, coupled with the impulse to make sure that encounter is as climactic as possible by making it as immune to randomness or player schemes as possible by making extremely difficult without a sufficient reserve of feat currency. Making that whole design edifice function will require a great deal of GM control. That’s the parade of horribles I’m guessing at?

Again I suspect this is a GMing and adventure design issue as much as a mechanics issue?

2 Likes
#9

Ah, so it’s less that it’s really “momentum” in any sense, and the idea was just for the game to “make sure” you have enough bonus dice.

That’s a mixed bag for me. Setting aside all the ideas about “the final encounter” if you’re playing a game about Conan, there’s PROBABLY some sort of evil high priest, or serpent cultist, warlord or something waiting for you at the “end” (one way or another) of your adventure, and if you’ve built a game with a metacurrency that has substantive impact on how that encounter will go, it’s definitely desirable to be able to get the PCs into the “expected ballpark” of metacurrency counts, lest the confrontation be a foregone conclusion one way or the other.

1 Like