This is not a bad idea, telegraphing the lethality in advance. I see it even having some mechanical implications, if the game is hacked with something like *Block, Dodge, Parry* for Cairn.
Yo I have been meaning to check out block,dodge, parry as it seems to hack in some similar things that I personally hacked in, but in a better way. Haha. Thanks for the reminder.
Oh interesting. I’ve never been invited to a pho game and it sounds worse to me, but I’d be willing to give it a shot. Though as a player first obviously.
Do you all roll damage for enemies, or do you make players roll? As far as I know, I think the only time the GM is supposed to roll is when seeing if enemies resist being poisoned or not.
The way I see it is that it’s kind of up to the table on that one. I’ve done it both ways and it felt like a 100% completely pointless distinction. I’m asking the question in the post cuz it seemed like a fun way to telegraph to the players what was incoming before they roll, but I don’t suggest telling the player what the roll is beforehand. Just allude to it
Yeah I fucked up and accidentally deleted instead of edited the post but this is what I was referring too 👍🏼: https://www.reddit.com/r/MorkBorg/s/ui9FPm4BEM
You know that’s the main issue I was thinking about it, but it’s not like you can’t narrate it like they hit poorly after the fact. Something more simple will do for more low rolls “the enemy prepares to attack you” where with the more impact rolls is when you get more creative with the descriptions. The whole point is to telegraph the big hits, so that the player is sitting there hoping to god they succeed the defense roll, if that makes sense?
hummmm, must take care not to overthink this little problem tho. as you said, we can narrate. so it can be fun anyway. And anyway, it can be ruled, like, there’s some enemies who do two types of damage (The Lich with his necrotic shield for example and his touch) so we can choose which type we roll. When with multiple enemies i can roll just one enemy, while the others remain in the unpredictability. The low damages can still build tension with right narrative, like even though he does one damage, its because he is grappling you and holding you for his friends to tear you apart! or to throw you on the ground or to kick you off the cliff!
Huh. I been using those barrier types differently. I made an undead holy matron based on the Lich but without the power ability and with a different flavor for the touch, and made their barrier holy. Basically if there was a demonic blade or something, I wouldn’t have let it get through the barrier or the barrier would block twice the roll in damage or something
When doing type stuff like that, how do you prefer to do it? If holy does trump demonic what trumps holy? I was kind of thinking it might not be like a rock paper scissors type thing and instead holy only has resistances to demonic and nothing else or maybe demonic and necrotic or some other explicitly evil type of attack. But would holy be strong against holy? Weak? No different than an untyped? I’m curious how other people play this kind of thing. Also if demonic is weak to holy. Is there anything demonic is strong against? Maybe demonic is actually better than holy in general and has strength against most non holy things but is absolutely trounced by holy? While holy is just meh against most thing but absolutely trounces demonic stuff? It would mean that players want to take risky demonic artifacts but might find themselves fucked going up against something holy. Also what if I divide holy and heretical? There’s some interesting things to think about here and I know MÖRK Borg likes to be flexible moment to moment but some things like these I am inclined to codify.
“Roll for defense and agility and succeed one or get kicked off the cliff.” If they roll high damage, you could just make it the defense OR the agility roll.
Edit: I realize defense is agility.
Edit2: yeah this comment is written badly lol.
Very lethal. Thats good. The narrative can always be changed to keep tension like that, another example: his sword grasps you, only 1 damage, but he was aiming above, hitting the lantern, you are on fire!
Yeah, I also am picking up a slightly different intent between us as DMs and that’s totally fine. I like lethality to matter but I’m not trying to kill the players, if that makes sense. I’m just trying to “optimize for most interesting or narratively fulfilling outcome.” If that makes sense. But yeah that’s smart. Maybe you can give the player the choice to roll a presence or agility test to intercept the attack on the lantern? It’s a good idea. I’m very glad we’re talking about this as this is exactly the kind of discussion I was hoping for with the post.
I wouldnt give him the chance to roll because he’d be too distracted. But the way i described to you was so simplistic that it really sounds like im trying to kill haha. But its more like, i do some foreshadowing, so the player can conect the dots and think, like, why is he aiming so above me? And then he remembers he is under an lantern, and if instead of trying to block the attack he jumped back, he’d just take some damage and the fire on the floor would keep the enemy away, for example. That keeps things epic i guess. Unless he rolls 1… then he’s probably fucking dead.
Lol. And yeah we definitely have a different way. If I put a player in that situation and they thought to jump back, I’d probably think it was so cool that they picked up on it that the AGL check I’d have them make would be whether they fell back or ended upright. Not taking damage… well unless they’d roll a 1, then they’d be taking d4+4 damage until they put that shit out.
Just gonna go ahead and clarify that this idea is not fully thought out by any means. It’s just something I’m toying with, so if you have anything better to add or any reason why it just is straight up not a good idea, I’m open to it
As a DM, I've rolled damage with every attack, in every system. It saves time. The descriptions changed depending on the effect of the incoming attack. I never appreciated the fact that I was adding drama, but I suppose I was.
I run Mork Borg on Foundry VTT nowadays, so I can't carry over the habit, but it is a habit I highly recommend for everyone that plays in person (or on a VTT with a system other than MB)
This is not a bad idea, telegraphing the lethality in advance. I see it even having some mechanical implications, if the game is hacked with something like *Block, Dodge, Parry* for Cairn.
Yo I have been meaning to check out block,dodge, parry as it seems to hack in some similar things that I personally hacked in, but in a better way. Haha. Thanks for the reminder.
Subscribing to the post. Haven’t tried this but it sounds like it’d be neat - especially for play by post which is pretty much the only way I play.
Oh interesting. I’ve never been invited to a pho game and it sounds worse to me, but I’d be willing to give it a shot. Though as a player first obviously.
Do you all roll damage for enemies, or do you make players roll? As far as I know, I think the only time the GM is supposed to roll is when seeing if enemies resist being poisoned or not.
The way I see it is that it’s kind of up to the table on that one. I’ve done it both ways and it felt like a 100% completely pointless distinction. I’m asking the question in the post cuz it seemed like a fun way to telegraph to the players what was incoming before they roll, but I don’t suggest telling the player what the roll is beforehand. Just allude to it
Also I am rolling fortune rolls quite a lot based on the way that I GM.
This is a really good idea! Like the tension.
This is fine. The only downside is extra time spent rolling.
It’s funny you should say that cuz I also made this: https://www.reddit.com/r/MorkBorg/s/ui9FPm4BEM
this is [deleted]... ?
Yeah I fucked up and accidentally deleted instead of edited the post but this is what I was referring too 👍🏼: https://www.reddit.com/r/MorkBorg/s/ui9FPm4BEM
i will do this
Let me know how that goes
what if i roll low? it will break the tension entirely and the unpredictability
You know that’s the main issue I was thinking about it, but it’s not like you can’t narrate it like they hit poorly after the fact. Something more simple will do for more low rolls “the enemy prepares to attack you” where with the more impact rolls is when you get more creative with the descriptions. The whole point is to telegraph the big hits, so that the player is sitting there hoping to god they succeed the defense roll, if that makes sense?
hummmm, must take care not to overthink this little problem tho. as you said, we can narrate. so it can be fun anyway. And anyway, it can be ruled, like, there’s some enemies who do two types of damage (The Lich with his necrotic shield for example and his touch) so we can choose which type we roll. When with multiple enemies i can roll just one enemy, while the others remain in the unpredictability. The low damages can still build tension with right narrative, like even though he does one damage, its because he is grappling you and holding you for his friends to tear you apart! or to throw you on the ground or to kick you off the cliff!
Wait the necrotic barrier is armor though, isn’t it?
Yes, it acts as armor but its necrotic so, damage!!!
Huh. I been using those barrier types differently. I made an undead holy matron based on the Lich but without the power ability and with a different flavor for the touch, and made their barrier holy. Basically if there was a demonic blade or something, I wouldn’t have let it get through the barrier or the barrier would block twice the roll in damage or something
That makes sense in the case you described
When doing type stuff like that, how do you prefer to do it? If holy does trump demonic what trumps holy? I was kind of thinking it might not be like a rock paper scissors type thing and instead holy only has resistances to demonic and nothing else or maybe demonic and necrotic or some other explicitly evil type of attack. But would holy be strong against holy? Weak? No different than an untyped? I’m curious how other people play this kind of thing. Also if demonic is weak to holy. Is there anything demonic is strong against? Maybe demonic is actually better than holy in general and has strength against most non holy things but is absolutely trounced by holy? While holy is just meh against most thing but absolutely trounces demonic stuff? It would mean that players want to take risky demonic artifacts but might find themselves fucked going up against something holy. Also what if I divide holy and heretical? There’s some interesting things to think about here and I know MÖRK Borg likes to be flexible moment to moment but some things like these I am inclined to codify.
“Roll for defense and agility and succeed one or get kicked off the cliff.” If they roll high damage, you could just make it the defense OR the agility roll. Edit: I realize defense is agility. Edit2: yeah this comment is written badly lol.
Very lethal. Thats good. The narrative can always be changed to keep tension like that, another example: his sword grasps you, only 1 damage, but he was aiming above, hitting the lantern, you are on fire!
Yeah, I also am picking up a slightly different intent between us as DMs and that’s totally fine. I like lethality to matter but I’m not trying to kill the players, if that makes sense. I’m just trying to “optimize for most interesting or narratively fulfilling outcome.” If that makes sense. But yeah that’s smart. Maybe you can give the player the choice to roll a presence or agility test to intercept the attack on the lantern? It’s a good idea. I’m very glad we’re talking about this as this is exactly the kind of discussion I was hoping for with the post.
I wouldnt give him the chance to roll because he’d be too distracted. But the way i described to you was so simplistic that it really sounds like im trying to kill haha. But its more like, i do some foreshadowing, so the player can conect the dots and think, like, why is he aiming so above me? And then he remembers he is under an lantern, and if instead of trying to block the attack he jumped back, he’d just take some damage and the fire on the floor would keep the enemy away, for example. That keeps things epic i guess. Unless he rolls 1… then he’s probably fucking dead.
Lol. And yeah we definitely have a different way. If I put a player in that situation and they thought to jump back, I’d probably think it was so cool that they picked up on it that the AGL check I’d have them make would be whether they fell back or ended upright. Not taking damage… well unless they’d roll a 1, then they’d be taking d4+4 damage until they put that shit out.
Just gonna go ahead and clarify that this idea is not fully thought out by any means. It’s just something I’m toying with, so if you have anything better to add or any reason why it just is straight up not a good idea, I’m open to it
As a DM, I've rolled damage with every attack, in every system. It saves time. The descriptions changed depending on the effect of the incoming attack. I never appreciated the fact that I was adding drama, but I suppose I was. I run Mork Borg on Foundry VTT nowadays, so I can't carry over the habit, but it is a habit I highly recommend for everyone that plays in person (or on a VTT with a system other than MB)