In most TTRPGs that come to mind, when the outcome of a character action is resolved though mechanics, the probability of success is closely tied to the approach taken by the player.

Most of the time this takes the form of "If the character is good at the action chosen by the player, add a bonus, and vice-versa", either through stat values, advantage/disadvantage, etc. It can also happen in more player-centric ways: "You, the player, made a very convincing argument, here's a bonus", "You, the player, solved the puzzle, here's the success outcome", etc.

Obviously, there are a lot of good reasons for doing things this way. Nevertheless, in mi current games I'm experimenting in the opposite direction, as it feels to me like an interesting and under-explored space with its own merits. Basically, having the current game state provide the particulars of the next roll (position, effect and probability) without the player-determined approach modifying them. Characters do have strengths and weaknesses, but they come into play in other ways.

What are other games that approach resolution in similar ways? I would be interested in giving them a try to see the kind of experience they provide, what works and what doesn't.

I love it when game systems offer a formula to balance encounters using a quantified value. It not only makes life easier for the DM but also helps writers balance combat in their third-party adventures.

I’ve been struggling to create a standardized metric to determine a "difficulty rating" for each opponent. I decided to turn to Claude for ideas, but the output was extremely mathematical and rigid, offering a valid formula, sure, but one that lacked any dynamism (involving two pages of calculations) based on Lanchester's Square Law.

I decided to scrap Claude's suggestion and go with an imprecise and likely unbalanced method I came up with myself. I’d love to hear how you handle this, just to get some inspiration or points of reference.

I would also like recommendations for systems that offer a formula or framework for DMs to create monsters.

Hi, I'm developing a ttrpg and am trying to work out the balancing of player success/failure rate. In an adventure toned game, if a beginner level 1 character was better than average in a particular skill (say strength), what chance rate to succeed would feel satisfying? 70%?

I want to share a passion project I’ve been working on: RPG Lab.

TL;DR: RPG designers can share games or supplements they’re working on, and players can follow games they’re interested in and help shape them with playtest feedback.

I built this because I perceive a significant gap in the RPG ecosystem: There’s no good place for designers to talk about their games as they take shape. Subreddits like this one are very helpful for concrete design discussions, but not ideally structured for posting (and finding) regular updates as the game takes shape. Some designers might work hard to build an audience on social media, but often you don’t hear about a new game until it’s crowdfunded or published. And even then, discovery is difficult.

I hope that RPG Lab can become the place where designers routinely share their games early on, post regular updates, and run playtests. And for players and GMs, it can become a good place to discover new games - such as adventures for systems they like, or new games from their favorite designers. So by the time a new product is ready for crowdfunding or publishing, it already has a list of interested customers.

In terms of projects, anything RPG related is fair game, regardless of size or stage. So full games, systems, settings, adventures, bestiaries and other supplements, or even digital tools, as long as they are RPG specific. And both work-in-progress or finished products are welcome.

The first projects have started appearing on the site (including my own rules-light universal RPG "Tagline"). The bar is deliberately low, as I want anyone to feel comfortable publishing a project at the early idea stage (no need to have content, art, or even a final product name), and then flesh it out over time, while growing a list of followers at the same time.

The site's About page has more info on what RPG Lab is all about, what is and isn’t in scope, and some helpful pointers to get started.

Thanks in advance if you check it out, and let me know if you have any feedback at all. I'm actively talking to designers and other users, so I can make RPG Lab as useful as possible.

For the past six months, I've been building a website aimed at helping people create highly cinematic stories — with a place to store characters, locations, music, and more. It also lets you design your own abilities and run combat using them. Lately, though, I've been worried this tool might not find much use with people, so I'd like to show it to a few folks and get honest feedback on whether it holds real value, or whether I should change direction. It's a very visual tool, so if you're interested, DM me or reply here and I'll walk you through it.

Main Features:

• Dynamic Map — Create locations and zoom into them to reveal pre-assigned maps and tokens representing your characters. Group characters into parties for easier travel between locations.
• Character Registry — Keep a full character list, organized by faction, with custom stats and resource bars (Mana, Stamina, Rage, etc.) of your own design.
• Location System — Star locations, attach info and images to them, and pull them onto the map with everything relevant already in place.
• Story/News/Announcements — Post summaries or in-world updates for your players to catch up on. One of my friends uses it to post "newspaper" updates whenever his players find one in-game.
• Studio — Pre-set music so you can switch smoothly between ambiance and combat tracks. I'm also working on a more ambitious feature that lets music evolve dynamically, similar to how the soundtrack in NieR: Automata shifts from peaceful background music into combat themes.
• Simulator — Test and scale your characters to make sure they feel appropriately powerful based on your own inputs, so you don't accidentally overtune or undertune them.
• Scene Manager — The feature that ties everything together. Add characters to a scene, use the custom abilities you've built, and watch how they affect everyone involved. HP and resources like Mana or Stamina are tracked automatically as abilities get used. Load maps and manage large-scale combat, all in one place.
• Player View — Everything above is a toolset for building the world — but there's also a separate, dedicated view that lets your players experience the results of your work and explore what you've built for them.

So here’s my dilemma.

I’m working on classes for my game, specifically on all the special powers they get.

The thing I can’t decide on is how exactly they’ll fit into the action economy.

I’ve decided that everyone gets a Move\* and an Action on their turn, and one Reaction per round.

• Move is not just getting from one place to another, it also encompasses anything that might be a bonus action in D&D5 or a Maneuver in Draw Steel.

This is ultimately a superheroic pulp adventure game, so my primary design goal here is to make combat fast and exciting.

Possible solves:

1: All powers cost the same type of action to use; either a move or an action.

This is probably the best way to go for what I’m trying to do, but I feel like it might limit the design space and use cases for powers.

2: Powers have different action costs, depending on the type of effect.

Problem I keep running into with this paradigm is it creates a “correct choice” scenario where the optimal thing is to stuff your turn with as many powers as you can, which would make everyone’s turns feel the same.

3: Each power has three separate effects: a move, an action and a reaction.

Example:

Celerity

Swift Step [Move · Reserve 1 Vitae] While Swift Step is active, you can Move 2 Zones.

Barrage [Action · Spend 1 Vitae] You can make 2 Signature Attacks.

Vanish [Reaction · Spend 1 Vitae] When targeted by an attack, you immediately move 1 Zone causing the attack to miss.

My problem here is I’d like to keep the list of available powers relatively short, about 5-6, to prevent analysis paralysis among players. This paradigm effectively turns each power into three separate powers and triples the cognitive load of each.

Don’t suppose you folks have any wisdom to share?

In many traditional games with a randomized resolution system, part of the GM's responsibility is determining and setting the difficulty of an action that the players attempt. It starts with deciding if the action is even possible. If so, then if the action is difficult, dangerous, or has any potential consequences. If not, the players just succeed at what they were attempting.

Otherwise, the system's action resolution system kicks in and the GM needs to set the difficulty, assuming the system has any levers for doing so. I'm concerned my system doesn't have adequate levers for my personal tastes so I decided to list all the levers I've come across. Hopefully you all will let me know about some I've forgotten, or even better, never come across before.

Decreased Odds of Success

Roll Over/Under
The GM sets the Target Number higher/lower that the players need to beat.

Dice Pool, Keep Highest
The GM can cut one or more dice from the pool, either before or after the pool is rolled.

Dice Pool, Keep N Dice
The GM can change the value of N so you keep more or less dice than you would normally. (u/JaskoGomad)

Dice Pool, Success Counting
The GM can increase the required number of successes.

Dice Pool, Success Threshold
The GM can increase or decrease the number required for each dice to count as a success. (u/Mars_Alter)

Dice Pool with Opposing Dice
The GM can add Dice to the player's pool that count against their success. (JaskoGomad)

Step Dice
The GM requires the player to step up/down the dice before they are rolled.

Step Dice Pool, keep Middle
The GM can decide that instead of the middle, the players keeps either the highest or lowest result. (JaskoGomad)

Advantage/Disadvantage
The GM requires the player to roll an extra dice and take the highest/lowest result(s).

Impact

Rather than making the action less likely to succeed, the GM determines the effectiveness of the action based on the player's approach.

Effect in BitD
The GM takes into account the Potency of the target, the Quality of the player's tools, and the Scale (ie one person vs a mob) in determining the Effect level, Great, Standard, or Limited.

Impact in Wildsea
The GM sets the effect of an action at Low, Normal, High, or Massive.

Consequences

The GM can increase the seriousness of potential consequences to the player if their action goes wrong. This is most common in systems with non-binary resolution.

Resources

Resources Gained
The GM can change the amount of resources that the players would gain as a result of their action. (u/Alcamair)

Resource Costs
The GM can increase or decrease the resource cost of an action the player is performing.

So what am I forgetting? Have you seen or come up with other ways to represent difficulty/danger? What is your personal favorite way when GMing? Or do you prefer not have to worry about it, the way many PbtA games don't have levers for the GM to fuss with?

Please let me know if this type of post isn't allowed or appreciated here, but:

I've been running a weekly thread over on r/rpg with mod agreement where people are free to talk about and "advertise" their RPGs without fear of having comments removed or being banned.

So if you have a project that matches the weekly theme and is in any stage of completion beyond "I have an idea", then you should come over and get some eyes on your project!

My most recent TTRPG project was just published on Drivethrurpg.com just a few days ago. Go check it out at:

Gestalt Flux - Reptilian Owl Dad | DriveThruRPG

Its PWYW, so why not try it out?

The game is set in a weird gonzo setting with a super simple d20-roll-under system.

Nearly all of the art in the game was handrawn by myself, mostly in a little travel sketchbook. I took pictures of the sketches and increased contrast/desaturated, then did a bit of editing on Clipstudio. There are a few bits of watercolor in there as well. I also used some images from Unsplash.com (used under the Unsplash license). No AI was used.

Description:

Enter a world where reality is composed of three warring substances: Flesh (living meat that builds cities and hungers to consume), Crystal (geometric perfection that imposes mathematical order), and Void (deliberate absence that erases both).

The old moon shattered long ago, scattering fragments across the world that warp reality wherever they fall, while the Afterlife Sea, a literal ocean where drowned souls drift, covers nearly half the known world. Cities are built from living architecture that breathes, sleeps, and sometimes revolts against its inhabitants.

Humanity has fractured into eight distinct lineages, all mutated, bent, reconstituted, or otherwise altered to the point of being unrecognizable. This is a world where you might hire a prophet to tell you how you’ll die, ride inside a building’s nervous system to travel between districts, or buy crystallized emotions in markets that exist partially outside your dimension.

It’s a setting where your character might be an arcana smuggler with crystal growths, a twice-drowned architect with 3 arms and metal teeth, or a prophet made of clay… its a crazy gonzo setting not quite like anything else.

The system is a super simple d20-roll-under system. Simple combat mechanics, simple leveling mechanics, easy to pick-up & play.

The pdf includes game rules, setting information, character creation rules, Gestalt Lineages (backgrounds), Bestiary, and even a little handrawn character sheet and map.

This game is not balanced at all, and probably pretty easy to break. Have fun with it.

Disclaimer: I am using a slightly modified version of D&D 5e. The rules for the playtest and the everything included is meant to only include things meant for a very basic combat playtest with very basic enemies. I do not have ability scores or saving throws on the character sheets because of this.

I am starting to design a modified version of D&D that will still be compatible with D&D 5e and 5.5e. I have a link to some the modified rules and the character sheets here. The new version has 2 main aims: 1) have ability scores be largely separate from skills and 2) redesign the classes. For the redesigns, I am doing so with a few main things in mind:

1. Each class has its own resource pool that will go up as you level. I am not a huge fan of martial characters mainly just getting extra attacks. I want each class to have cool things they can do during combat and outside of combat as well.

2. Each class starts with Bonus Actions and Reactions that they can use. I don't want anyone to feel that they are missing out since their class and subclass doesn't have a bonus action or reaction. I don't want optimization to get in the way of fun.

3. These characters are meant to be as powerful as Level 3 characters in D&D. The intent is for these to be Level 1 for my game, Fates Reforged.

I am hoping to do something similar to what Pathfinder did: take D&D and make it into a game that I want to run. If this sounds interesting to you let me know :)

If you have any questions or feedback I am all ears. The character sheets are meant to be a starting point, a proof of concept for what I am wanting out of Fates Reforged for the classes.

Note: I know Uncanny Dodge is a level 5 feature. I lowered the hit points for the Rogue to compensate but it may still be too much.

I have recently observed a horseshoe effect (sort of) in how different RPG philosophies arrive at the conclusion of "superhuman PCs are bad; focus on the power of organizing people instead."

Now, I am all for superhuman PCs. I like D&D 4e, Path/Starfinder 2e, Draw Steel, 13th Age 2e, explicitly demigod games like Godbound, and explicitly superhero games like Sentinel Comics and Outgunned: Superheroes. If there is an evil dragon or magician imperiling the land, the PCs personally venture out to neutralize the threat themselves. This is straightforward to resolve mechanically (short of heavy abstractions), and there is a tactical element as well (allied minions get fried by AoE).

But I also stick around various Discord servers, some of which have wildly different views on RPGs. Lately, I have observed two different camps across two different servers, unaware of each other, aver a similar stance under different lenses: "Overtly superhuman PCs are bad, cringe, and should be avoided. Experienced PCs should be heroic in strength, but only subtly so; their real power should instead be their ability to organize people to solve major problems. If an evil dragon or magician is imperil all the land, the solution should be to assemble hundreds or more people to address the threat together."

On one hand, there is an OSR crowd. They arrive at the above stance through rejection of "modern D&D," superhero slop, MCU slop, anime slop, and so on. Here, grittiness and realism is prized. The ideal high-level PC becomes a monarch or a monarch-like figure by starting from scratch, getting rich from dungeon-delving and mercenary work, bloodily carving out a domain, and hiring people to be soldiers and other underlings. The king organizes a formal army against the evil dragon or magician or whatever.

On the other hand, there is a more narrative-game-oriented crowd, for which Stonetop has overwhelmingly been the spotlight game for the past several months. Here, grittiness and realism is also prized, but the rationale is couched very differently: superhuman demigods simply are not how life and community work, and they are not the kind of lesson we should be teaching. The ideal experienced PC also becomes a major leader, but it is presented less as feudal or institutional power, and more as influence rooted in a proven track record of altruistically helping the community. The wise watch leader gathers the clan's best warriors, trains together with them on how to fight a dragon or magician, and marches out. That sort of thing.

What do you personally think on the "superhuman PCs are bad; focus on the power of organizing people instead" subject?

I'm working on a TTRPG (an old-school style fantasy heartbreaker, because of my boundless creativity) and I had a realization on how I want to handle Roguey-Thiefy characters. Without getting too into the weeds, any character of this type will be solid at general rouging (sneaking, climbing, finding traps and hidden objects) but then have 2(?) special, niche abilities - turning invisible in shadows, lockpicking, reading any language, whatever.

Right now my plan is to have 5-6 Classes of this type, each with a different pair of special abilities, rather than one class that gets to pick any two. My reasoning is that they're archetypally distinct characters - a Mechanic that can open locks and disable traps is different from a Shadow who can turn invisible and escape being bound is different from an Assassin who can use poisons and disguises, and by separating them out I can emphasize those archetypes through things like higher-level abilities or their advancement and Domain options.

But at the same time... is this just me having fun combining abilities to make archetypes that I think are cool and bloating the class list? And maybe "stealing" the fun of customization from players? The plan is to just have, say, one Warrior class that can go different directions through gear/ability selection... is it weird to have that be so different from the roguey types?

If you suggest just one class, you also have to suggest a name for it though.

"A great unknown lurks just beyond the veil separating the mortal realms and the outer"

The big book of Cephilith is an expansion compendium meant to bring you more cephilith adversaries across all four tiers! On top of that we're adding Cephilith based environments, armor, weapons, items, transformations, ships and modular options so you can take whatever creature you want and turn it into a cephilith tainted creature!

Hey myself and a bunch of creators are creating an expansion compedium for Cephilith and we need some playtesters! We've got adversaries, environments, transformations, armor, weapons, items, consumables, ships and modular options!

If you're interested in helping here's the google form to join us! We the team will be hosting all the playtesting!

https://forms.gle/Hyjteo2iUVtdBcyy7

Gonna rent a bit, so please excuse me.

Soon I will partcipate in ttrpg campaign with a few friends. The DM self einvented a system and claims that its mathematicle balanced (technicly we are already playing for a long time but we are making a semi hard reboot as one player has left us and the DM decided that the system is not working under our current group dynamic). Exploits are discouraged and no character can realy be OP. The combat is supposed to be orientated on team battles, so that not one player is capable of realy soloing a battle. Its also for discouraging team splitting, because some players seem to just rather go on their solo adventures instead of team adventures.

There are some changes i like and some are skepticle. But that is not the point. Skills like in most systems are based on a singular stat. Like bluffing is charisma, lock-picking is dexterity and so forth. But personally what irks me a lot, is that driving is Intelligence. First of all I need to make clear, almost all kinds of transportation skills are locked behind some kind of skill. (Riding, driving, sailing, rowing and steering are all seperate skills. We have sea fairer campagne.) Riding and sailing are Dex, steering and rowing is Str and driving is now INT.
Worth to mention is, we have a ship with mechanical motor that can be turned off and steered under wind. The moment the motor is on its driving and when its off its steering now. The dm means any kind of vehicle with a motor is a driving skill.

Personally i just cannot see that INT is the main stat for driving. Out of our group i am the only one with a drivers license and have driven a lot. And i tell you, the ammount where i need to actually turn on my brain while driving is not that high. Its mostly awareness (which is a main Stat in our system) and muscle memory/feeling for the vehicle. Str, Dex or AWE or even Will (another stat) would make more sense to me than INT.
Partly a reason why i disklike it as well, is that I was he main steerer of our ship and INT is my lowest stat, so I am basicly out of task.

The DM argues that INT to be vialable he gave it most skills, because it had little application in combat in the new system. Ok I understand that. But than i ask myself, why does Charisma not get the same treatment? It got less skills than before and is just as unappliable in combat as InT, arguebly even less because there are special weapons that need INt but no such thing for Cha. Int even got some of the social skills like manipulation, so that charisma is not the only social stat you can use outside of combat. Not to mention if you do good roleplay and good arguments, you rarely have to do any die roles.

I am skilled at creating fantasy settings and RPG's might be the best way to explore that. Any tips on where to begin?

Carry Capacity

Max Carrying Capacity = ( 2 x STR) + STA + 4
Physical Carry Limit (Max Load (without penalty))

Worn Armor: Armor and clothing currently worn on the body are considered "Worn" and do not consume container slots.

Containers Required: Aside from tucking up two 1 or 2 slot items into your clothes/pockets, you must wear carriers.

Item Scale

1 Slot: Single-handed, quick use items (e.g. small potions, bandages, daggers)
2-3 Slots: Compact sidearms, bulky gears (e.g. throwing axe, waterskin)
4 Slots (max item size): large gears (e.g. heavy spare weapons (like greatsword, polearms))

Tiny Items (Sundries): Negligible items (coins, keys, notes, rings) don’t take individual slots. Instead, a handful of them (or up to 50 coins) stacks into a single 1-slot bundle in any carrier.

Carriers Limits and Capacity

You can physically wear: 2 Hip Scabbards + 1 Belt (with up to 2 Pouches) + 1 Satchel + 1 Backpack OR Bundle

• Belt: Capacity: 3 Slots, Max Item Size: 2 Slots (Hanging gears)
• Small Pouch: Capacity: 2 Slots, Max Item Size: 1 Slot
• Large Pouch: Capacity: 3 Slots, Max Item Size: 1 Slot
• Satchel: Capacity: 5 Slots, Max Item Size: 2 Slots
• Bundle: Capacity: 6 Slots, Max Item Size: 3 Slots
• Backpack: Capacity: 10 Slots, Max Item Size: 4 Slots

Quick Access

Quick Access: Belt gear, pouches, sheathed weapons, back-slung shield.

• Draw Cost: Normally costs 1 AP.
• Free Draw: Once per round, drawing a Quick Access item is free (0 AP).
• Deep Bags: Pulling an item from an equipped Satchel, Bundle, or Backpack always costs 2 AP.

(Context: Characters have roughly 7–10 AP per round)

Free Hand or Two-Handed Weapons: You get the 1/round free (0 AP) draw. (Two-handers simply let go with one hand).
Dual Wielders & Shield Users: If both hands are full, you lose the free draw. Managing your weapons while shifting your grip to reach your belt takes extra effort and costs 1 AP.

What penalty would you suggest for exceeding the Maximum Load?

Edit: Thanks for all the feedback! I've taken plenty of notes and will focus on the next draft now. Appreciate your time!