PDA

View Full Version : Bungled Rolls



Moritz
07-17-2007, 08:23 AM
In my Marvel Super Heroes RPG (not actually Marvel, but I use the rules for my own world), I have a 'single do-over rule'. Meaning, that if you blow a roll, you can re-roll it once per session.

A player (the sheriff of this town) was faced with a hostage situation. The villain had the token vulnerable female in his clutches with a rope around her neck. The villain also had some mental power that he was about to use on the hero. So the hero, raising his gun, took the shot.

I wasn't going to make the hero roll, just because of the difficulty of this situation was so far below the hero's skill level. But before I could tell the player not to roll, he threw 2d10 for a roll of 20. Well, that was a failure, and he said, "That was just a warm up.". He quickly grabbed the dice and rolled again, 27. A little better, then he said, "I call do-over.". Then he rolled a 15 and exclaimed, "For the love of god!"

I couldn't help but just laugh, especially when I told him that he didn't have to roll at all.

So of course, this brings the topic up of fun bungled rolls. And yeah, it's in the super heroic section, should have put it in general discussion, but oh well.

Farcaster
07-17-2007, 12:50 PM
And yeah, it's in the super heroic section, should have put it in general discussion, but oh well.

No, problem. I moved it for you.

As to flubbed rolls, I let them stand. I'm curious why you wouldn't have the player roll in this situation though. There are plenty of scenarios that I don't have my players roll for, particularly when there are no consequences for failure and they could simply retry. But, in this case, the hero in question is firing a gun at a target who has a hostage. It would seem to me that the consequences of failure are high. He could easily hit the hostage instead.

If I were in the GM chair for this one, I would definitely make him roll because any number of variables could cause him to fail even if success was virtually guaranteed -- the hostage could flail right at the wrong moment for instance and move into the path of the bullet. And that is probably how I would have ruled in this case if the positioning made that conceivable, because heroes should take pause before they fire a gun at a villain who is using a hostage as a human shield. Taking the shot without thinking about it and failing should have dire consequences.

Ed Zachary
07-17-2007, 01:23 PM
I'd only 'fix' a flubbed roll if it will result in the death of a character.

Players need to deal with the stupidity of their own actions, and some times life will suck for their characters.

But I don't want to see an established character die despite good role playing by the player if it's just bad luck that killed him. It's only a game, but the game should be enjoyable.

fmitchell
07-17-2007, 08:56 PM
I'd only 'fix' a flubbed roll if it will result in the death of a character.

I third that. As a player I've rolled 1 on a d20, or 00 on d100, or seriously negative on Fudge dice, and so forth. But the whole point of a randomizer is that (ideally) you should get as many bad results as good. If you start doing "takebacks" on bad rolls, out of fairness you should also "takeback" extraordinarily good rolls as well. See how well that goes over.

In the real world, not every "Hail Mary" pass succeeds, and Greg Louganis really does crack his head on the diving board.

Moritz
07-18-2007, 07:59 AM
I often run games to convey a story. Many times I don't care about the die roll, especially when I'm trying to wrap up the loose ends and move on to a different thread.

Moritz
07-18-2007, 08:17 AM
or 00 on d100,


Isn't a 00 on a d100 the equivalent to 100, otherwise it'd be a d101?

Rain_Spider_08
07-20-2007, 09:37 PM
I agree with farcaster, I would've definately made him roll for that. "living shield = roll" and may the force be with you. "Do-overs" I feel can ruin the game but I do agree with Ed Zachary also in the fact it would stink for a good character to die via botched roll.

fmitchell
07-20-2007, 10:46 PM
Isn't a 00 on a d100 the equivalent to 100, otherwise it'd be a d101?

A d101 would have 101 possible outcomes.

Technically 00 is "one hundred", but after playing Runequest and a few other percentile-based systems I think of it as "O! O!". (Or using tens and one dice, "Oh! Uh-Oh!".)

The Wandering Bard
07-21-2007, 04:04 PM
The first and only time I DMed for a game, it was 3.5 D&D. The players started out traveling in a caravan, From a burned out city, to the lords castle. The players were residence of the destroyed village, and were now in charge of escorting the rest of the residence to the castle for protection.

Each one of the players had previously served a year on the citys guard force, and so they started at lvl 4. the partys rogue character focused every point that would be allowed into open lock and disable device, (The classic rogue nessisary skills.)

I should mention that each charcter got a years pay to buy what ever was needed, the thief bought a ring of lockpicking (Song and silence or adventurers handbook) the party managed to get the villagers to the castle with minimal problems. while there they hear about a crypt that was rumored to hold an artifact of great power, but those who went to the crypt never returned.

Of course the party ran off to the crypt at their first chance. around the door is littered with the corpses of the attempted loots. the rogue steps up and instantly finds the trap (rolled a 20 on his search roll) after much cheering he attempted to disable the trap, (I think I should note at this point that the rogue had only but roll anything but a 1 to disarm the trap.)

Naturally the rollis a 1. the trap fires of a posion gas that kills the Wizard in the groups familiar, and the wizard. the rest of the group passed there fort saves.

I let the rogue roll again, I mean thats a fluke roll a 20 than a 1. but the poor guy rolled a 1 again this time the wizard died and the cleric took some damage before drinking an antidote. Woops. to be nice i let them keep teh first result, and let the temple in the castle ressurect the mage for free, in return for aiding the church in an other quest later.

Inquisitor Tremayne
07-23-2007, 08:07 AM
Geeeze! I feel like I am a harsh GM compared to the rest of you guys! The only bungled rolls I allow are if the die rolls off the table or if it lands on something that makes it cockeyed.

We all know that this is a RPG and rolling dice is part of it, especially when it comes to stabilizing or dying. Which is just what happened to a player in my game last week. He needed to make a Con check DC 10. If you miss the DC by 5 or more you die, he rolled a 4. Dead. Sorry. I felt bad, I mean the look on his face but that is what the situation warranted. They had gotten in over their head and thought that they could simply get away. They were out manned and out gunned (intentionally so that they would hopefully realize that they were over powered and be forced to surrender) but noooooo, they decided to fight.

Moritz
07-23-2007, 08:18 AM
Nah, you're not harsh. In my earlier example, I was just trying to get the story over with to move onto the next one.

In a standard situation, I'm actually very harsh. Especially if the players go out of their way to do something particularly stupid. Like your example of standing and fighting impossible odds. And I will give them significant OOC and IC clues as to what they may want to do.

Inquisitor Tremayne
07-24-2007, 01:27 PM
And I will give them significant OOC and IC clues as to what they may want to do.


Thats what I DON'T do. Especially in Star Wars because of the lure of the dark side. I want the players to play in character and if them playing in character results in them getting a dark side point then so be it.

I also feel it skirts the edge of railroading (which I feel I do a lot of anyway) but thats a whole other topic.

PhishStyx
07-24-2007, 01:34 PM
As far as bungled rolls go, I had one GM who wouldn't allow me to fail at a task. He had a "3-roll rule," where if you failed the first time (especially in a dramatic spot), you could roll over and over again.

Mostly, we used that in supers games, I think because he insisted that we play ourselves as characters. Man, I got bored fast.

Rain_Spider_08
07-24-2007, 03:58 PM
As far as bungled rolls go, I had one GM who wouldn't allow me to fail at a task. He had a "3-roll rule," where if you failed the first time (especially in a dramatic spot), you could roll over and over again.

Mostly, we used that in supers games, I think because he insisted that we play ourselves as characters. Man, I got bored fast.

I'd get bored too... I understand letting someone reroll if the dice either fall off the table or they hit something while rolling but sometimes letting someone reroll can take away from the game :( I'd probably allow if it was a very dramatic scene a sort of "best of two rolls" thing but it would have to be a very important scenario.

Ed Zachary
07-24-2007, 04:03 PM
Dice should only be rerolled if the death of a character happens because of a random event.

If a character dies because of a bad roll when the player does something stupid despite warnings, let the bad roll stand.

Rain_Spider_08
07-24-2007, 09:10 PM
Dice should only be rerolled if the death of a character happens because of a random event.

If a character dies because of a bad roll when the player does something stupid despite warnings, let the bad roll stand.

That too... I hate to see a good character die but if he/she dies because of a player that can't get a sense of "DANGER" let what will happen happen

Ed Zachary
07-24-2007, 10:50 PM
That too... I hate to see a good character die but if he/she dies because of a player that can't get a sense of "DANGER" let what will happen happen

D&D... Death and Darwinism...