This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.

Author Topic: The concept of "failing forward" as a part of action resolution.  (Read 20932 times)

Archangel Fascist
BANNED

  • BANNED
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 359
I actually like the concept of "failing forward" in an RPG.  There are some times when a failure is just a failure, and there are times when a failure can be something more interesting than a binary yes/no situation.  It also renders gameplay more interesting, particularly when you are trying to do a grim-and-gritty Warhammer-style game.  You succeed, but you also fail at the same time.

LibraryLass

  • Falsehood to the downtrod
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • L
  • Posts: 917
The concept of "failing forward" as a part of action resolution.
« Reply #1 on: August 07, 2013, 10:31:50 PM »
Quote from: Archangel Fascist;678667
I actually like the concept of "failing forward" in an RPG.  There are some times when a failure is just a failure, and there are times when a failure can be something more interesting than a binary yes/no situation.  It also renders gameplay more interesting, particularly when you are trying to do a grim-and-gritty Warhammer-style game.  You succeed, but you also fail at the same time.


I agree. There are some definite pluses to the idea, but not every failure should mean failing forward.
http://rachelghoulgamestuff.blogspot.com/
Rachel Bonuses: Now with pretty

Quote from: noisms
I get depressed, suicidal and aggressive when nerds start comparing penis sizes via the medium of how much they know about swords.

Quote from: Larsdangly;786974
An encounter with a weird and potentially life threatening monster is not game wrecking. It is the game.

Currently panhandling for my transition/medical bills.

Spinachcat

  • Toxic SocioCat
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 14805
The concept of "failing forward" as a part of action resolution.
« Reply #2 on: August 08, 2013, 01:10:00 AM »
Back in the early 90s, there was a company called Better Games who bought Space Gamer magazine and it was their novel, but sadly failed idea, to publish a complete RPG in each issue using their house system.

In their house system, one element was how the task resolution was rated. You could have a Critical Success - which was great, but maybe too excessive and could have nasty side effects, Success, Mixed Result, Failure and Fumble.  The most interesting was Mixed Result. You sorta succeeded, but at a price and it was great fun for the GM to weave those mixed results into the gameplay.

Terrible shame the company did not succeed. Here's their old website.
http://www.spacegamer.com/

Bloody Stupid Johnson

  • Senior Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3366
The concept of "failing forward" as a part of action resolution.
« Reply #3 on: August 08, 2013, 01:20:42 AM »
It depends. Some of the Dungeon World play examples I've seen are like "you fail to climb the cliff so you get up - BUT GRIFFONS ATTACK!" and it comes off as a bit cheesy.

If you can work in partial successes, interesting failures or setbacks logically then its pretty cool (the bow the PC tried crafting and just failed looks OK but breaks under stress, the red berries the PC found on a failed survival roll might be edible but they're not completely sure, failing to pick the lock means you have to beat it down and make a lot of noise, or whatever)...but I don't think it should, necessarily be a part of 'action resolution'.

Not every roll will have a reasonable 'fail forward' option, and its probably better left for GM discretion as to when it should come up.

crkrueger

  • Hulk in the Vineyard
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12559
The concept of "failing forward" as a part of action resolution.
« Reply #4 on: August 08, 2013, 11:12:14 AM »
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;678737
It depends. Some of the Dungeon World play examples I've seen are like "you fail to climb the cliff so you get up - BUT GRIFFONS ATTACK!" and it comes off as a bit cheesy.


Right.  DW is a storytelling game (in the WW sense).  If the GM is a good storyteller, he's gonna make all those Succeed But results seem, as DW players want, "meaningful".  Just like FATE aspects/compels, the WFRP3 special die results, etc, any mechanic that's meant to specifically insert narration into the game is going to fall flat on it's ass if your GM isn't good at it and pop if he is.

More on Fail Forward later, this damn work thing...
Even the the "cutting edge" storygamers for all their talk of narrative, plot, and drama are fucking obsessed with the god damned rules they use. - Estar

Yes, Sean Connery's thumb does indeed do megadamage. - Spinachcat

Isuldur is a badass because he stopped Sauron with a broken sword, but Iluvatar is the badass because he stopped Sauron with a hobbit. -Malleus Arianorum

"Tangency Edition" D&D would have no classes or races, but 17 genders to choose from. -TristramEvans

One Horse Town

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • O
  • Posts: 10203
The concept of "failing forward" as a part of action resolution.
« Reply #5 on: August 08, 2013, 11:23:12 AM »
It always seems pretty lame to me. If a situation leads to complications, it does - you don't need some half-arsed mechanics to tell you so.

IME 'fail forward' type mechanics sort of lead to a carnival of the absurd in the end, where in trying to adhere to the spirit of the rules, ever more weak or bizarre 'fail forwards' are made up.

No thanks.

Exploderwizard

  • DESTROYER OF HOBBIES!
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • E
  • Posts: 5025
The concept of "failing forward" as a part of action resolution.
« Reply #6 on: August 08, 2013, 12:03:01 PM »
I have no problem with degrees of success or failure. If every failure were literally the end of the world then either the players have to be incredibly lucky or you have a series of very short games.

The fail forward concept however, just doesn't fit into a traditional rpg.
If you fail to climb the cliff, then you DON'T make it to the top. The end. This doesn't have to mean you fall and/or die. You could reach a point where you fail to find the next handhold and be forced to climb back down. Saying you reached the top BUT.....is purely a narrative driven device.

Its the difference between action resolution and conflict resolution. If the ACTION being resolved is the climb then you either make it or you don't. If needing to get past the cliff is a CONFLICT in the narrative then the check is to see if you won the conflict, lost the conflict, or won the conflict with attached consequences.  A simple rpg/storygame divide.
Quote from: JonWake
Gamers, as a whole, are much like primitive cavemen when confronted with a new game. Rather than 'oh, neat, what's this do?', the reaction is to decide if it's a sex hole, then hit it with a rock.

Quote from: Old Geezer;724252
At some point it seems like D&D is going to disappear up its own ass.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;766997
In the randomness of the dice lies the seed for the great oak of creativity and fun. The great virtue of the dice is that they come without boxed text.

Bill

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4593
The concept of "failing forward" as a part of action resolution.
« Reply #7 on: August 08, 2013, 12:14:08 PM »
I want to 'Succed Backward'

"You just stabbed your arch nemisid through the heart finally, after a year, killing him'  but....it was an illusion so you really killed the kings son.



Oh wait...shouldn't what determines that be, I don't know, a villain capable of casting an ilusion?

silva
BANNED

  • BANNED
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1091
The concept of "failing forward" as a part of action resolution.
« Reply #8 on: August 08, 2013, 12:27:52 PM »
Quote from: Archangel Fascist;678667
I actually like the concept of "failing forward" in an RPG.  There are some times when a failure is just a failure, and there are times when a failure can be something more interesting than a binary yes/no situation.  It also renders gameplay more interesting, particularly when you are trying to do a grim-and-gritty Warhammer-style game.  You succeed, but you also fail at the same time.
Its basically what Apocalypse World resolution does. Assigning a range of sucess called "sucess at a cost/ugly choice" between the normal "sucess" and "fail".

Its great because it make failures have branching consequences on its own, steering the fiction/situation in unexpected directions.

Bedrockbrendan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12695
The concept of "failing forward" as a part of action resolution.
« Reply #9 on: August 08, 2013, 12:43:46 PM »
I am not a big fan of this. I dont mind partial successes or degrees of success, but if you are talking about adding in unrelated elements to the roll (i.e. I failed my parking roll at Shaw's today, still managed to get my spot but had to dodge a tumbling boulder as I stepped from the car). I have seen games that handle something like this well, but usually what i see when people discuss it online, is using it to add in new complications (like indiana jones getting the treasure but then a group if angry warriors appear).

Emperor Norton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1352
The concept of "failing forward" as a part of action resolution.
« Reply #10 on: August 08, 2013, 12:52:49 PM »
Its actually why I like the Edge of the Empire dice mechanic. Since everything works on 2 axes and 2 extra bonus symbols, you almost never have a roll where nothing happens.

You have successes and failures which determine how if you succeed on the action and cancel each other out.

You have advantage and threats which determine if you get some kind of minor boost or penalty based on the actions you took and cancel each other out.

And then you have Triumph and Despair, which DON'T cancel each other out and represent a major boost or penalty.

So in one roll you can have results of:

Success
Success with Advantage
Success with Threat
Success with Advantage and Triumph
Success with Threat and Triumph
Success with Advantage and Despair
Success with Threat and Despair
Failure
Failure with Advantage
Failure with Threat
Failure with Advantage and Triumph
Failure with Threat and Triumph
Failure with Advantage and Despair
Failure with Threat and Despair

Personally, I like that EVERY roll tends to have some kind of meaning beyond "did I succeed". The one thing to keep in mind though is that it takes a little bit of adjusting some things in game, but once I got used to it, it made things so much interesting to me.

crkrueger

  • Hulk in the Vineyard
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12559
The concept of "failing forward" as a part of action resolution.
« Reply #11 on: August 08, 2013, 01:02:46 PM »
I actually kind of like the weird die mechanics in WFRP3, but constantly coming up with a fictional explanation every time to explain why makes it seem like Madlibs or the campfire storycircle thing, stilted and artificial.  My group just isn't into doing Who's Line Is It Anyway when playing.  Obviously, it doesn't feel like that for everyone.
Even the the "cutting edge" storygamers for all their talk of narrative, plot, and drama are fucking obsessed with the god damned rules they use. - Estar

Yes, Sean Connery's thumb does indeed do megadamage. - Spinachcat

Isuldur is a badass because he stopped Sauron with a broken sword, but Iluvatar is the badass because he stopped Sauron with a hobbit. -Malleus Arianorum

"Tangency Edition" D&D would have no classes or races, but 17 genders to choose from. -TristramEvans

jhkim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11746
The concept of "failing forward" as a part of action resolution.
« Reply #12 on: August 08, 2013, 01:08:26 PM »
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;678937
I am not a big fan of this. I dont mind partial successes or degrees of success, but if you are talking about adding in unrelated elements to the roll (i.e. I failed my parking roll at Shaw's today, still managed to get my spot but had to dodge a tumbling boulder as I stepped from the car). I have seen games that handle something like this well, but usually what i see when people discuss it online, is using it to add in new complications (like indiana jones getting the treasure but then a group if angry warriors appear).

I think there are many completely related results that don't fall on the usual spectrum of failure, partial success, or success. Examples:

(1) unintended success, like trying to shoot the gun out of someone's hand, but hitting them right between the eyes instead - or you are researching one question and fail to answer it, but make a discovery you didn't expect.  

(2) extraordinary success in some aspects, but failure in others - such as if you complete the repair in half the time, and it works as intended but will give out soon.  

(3) negative consequences of extraordinary success - like you run someone through with your spear, but your spear gets stuck; or you dodge out of the way of the grenade, but fall into a ditch.  

In my experience, the usual rules for partial success don't handle these cases well because there is an expectation that a partial success is uniformly worse than a full success.

Emperor Norton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1352
The concept of "failing forward" as a part of action resolution.
« Reply #13 on: August 08, 2013, 01:11:30 PM »
Quote from: CRKrueger;678953
I actually kind of like the weird die mechanics in WFRP3, but constantly coming up with a fictional explanation every time to explain why makes it seem like Madlibs or the campfire storycircle thing, stilted and artificial.  My group just isn't into doing Who's Line Is It Anyway when playing.  Obviously, it doesn't feel like that for everyone.

Yeah, it can be difficult to think of things in context sometimes. I still enjoy it, to each their own. (EotE uses a simplified version of the WFRP3 symbols, obviously).

Though combat is much easier, as there are options to choose from spelled out in charts for what you can spend advantage and threat on.

Also, minimizing die rolls helps, too. One of the things I saw that I liked was the advice of "let it ride" which is that you don't ask for another die roll until the situation changes. Say for instance, your character is sneaking into a compound. They roll their stealth check, and then instead of rolling a new stealth check every so many feet, or based on time, that stealth check holds until the situation changes (maybe some more guards patrol by, maybe the lighting is different in a specific area, etc.)

Bedrockbrendan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12695
The concept of "failing forward" as a part of action resolution.
« Reply #14 on: August 08, 2013, 01:12:25 PM »
Quote from: jhkim;678955
I think there are many completely related results that don't fall on the usual spectrum of failure, partial success, or success. Examples:

(1) unintended success, like trying to shoot the gun out of someone's hand, but hitting them right between the eyes instead - or you are researching one question and fail to answer it, but make a discovery you didn't expect.  

(2) extraordinary success in some aspects, but failure in others - such as if you complete the repair in half the time, and it works as intended but will give out soon.  

(3) negative consequences of extraordinary success - like you run someone through with your spear, but your spear gets stuck; or you dodge out of the way of the grenade, but fall into a ditch.  

In my experience, the usual rules for partial success don't handle these cases well because there is an expectation that a partial success is uniformly worse than a full success.


Those wouldn't bother me so much (though some of those are very hard to model with a mechanic). It is mainly when the results are unrelated that i find it quirky. Which is why i said i have seen this kind f thing done well (just normally when i see folks tlk about it, they seem to be looking for complications like "you succeed but nazis run into the room"---which is fine, just not my cup of tea).