Quote from: Voros;967183Pundit's issue with it doesn't seem to be balance but removing DM control, but I don't see how it is that different from a saving throw.

Yes, it is exactly like a Saving Throw. Monsters always hit but you get a save to avoid the damage.

QuoteAnd I have to say I don't see the issue of balance unless I'm misunderstanding you. Treating monsters differently than PCs at the table raises no issues of balance per se. Seems to be obsessing on a mechanic for tradition not any practical game reason.

"Balance" is not the best term but I couldn't think of another. I do agree that treating monsters and PCs differently by the game rule is not the same as some games which actually forbid the GM from rolling dice. Even though the outward effect (players rolling to hit and to avoid hits) is the same.

I do think that games that treat the GM as just another player, albeit one that controls more characters, are worse than games where GMs can't roll. Edge of the Empire drives me crazy with this sort of thing.

Quote from: Voros;966620What was the first game to have players roll all the dice?

The Whispering Vault 1992, NPCs were TNs IIRC

The micro-aggressions that GMs have to put up with these days are unacceptable.

Quote from: hedgehobbit;967198"Balance" is not the best term but I couldn't think of another. I do agree that treating monsters and PCs differently by the game rule is not the same as some games which actually forbid the GM from rolling dice. Even though the outward effect (players rolling to hit and to avoid hits) is the same.

I do think that games that treat the GM as just another player, albeit one that controls more characters, are worse than games where GMs can't roll. Edge of the Empire drives me crazy with this sort of thing.[/QUOTE]

I think the adequate term is asymmetrical, implying that different players work under different rules; the term has been a part of the game design lingo for ages but it came to prominence with FFG's card games, like netrunner and Star Wars.

As for player-facing games disempowering the GM... I can't say that my experience matches the Pundit's. I like PBtA derived games, Cypher, Black Hack, shit I even hacked Fate to be player-facing because it's faster and the underlying probabilites are more interesting. None of those games made feel as disempowered as D&D 3e/4e... If I wanted to pull a monster out of my ass that could freeze time or do some awesome shit, by default I had to design it using the system in the DMG, it had to use a "spell-like ability" which had specific limitations and such.

Now, in comparison on an Apocalypse World game I can just say "the creature freezes you in a time bubble and bites you, take 2 harm", it's bad form to do so, but I can do it, by the rules.

In the end, a dice roll is just data input, and data is not ideological per se, it's what we do with it that makes it ideological.

Cheers

Quote from: tanaka84;967225The Whispering Vault 1992, NPCs were TNs IIRC

Cool thanks, I googled it but couldn't find the answer.

Quote from: Voros;966620What was the first game to have players roll all the dice?

Quote from: RPGPundit;967075Forge crap.

Quote from: tanaka84;967225The Whispering Vault 1992, NPCs were TNs IIRC

Legendary Lives, 1990, was the first game where I saw this.

The authors describe it as an "early GM diceless game" (not "the first") so I guess that player facing rolls were used even before that.

They used the mechanism in two other RPGs as well, Khaotic, 1992, and Lost Souls, 1994.

Quote from: tanaka84;967231I think the adequate term is asymmetrical, implying that different players work under different rules; the term has been a part of the game design lingo for ages but it came to prominence with FFG's card games, like netrunner and Star Wars.

As for player-facing games disempowering the GM... I can't say that my experience matches the Pundit's. I like PBtA derived games, Cypher, Black Hack, shit I even hacked Fate to be player-facing because it's faster and the underlying probabilites are more interesting. None of those games made feel as disempowered as D&D 3e/4e... If I wanted to pull a monster out of my ass that could freeze time or do some awesome shit, by default I had to design it using the system in the DMG, it had to use a "spell-like ability" which had specific limitations and such.

Now, in comparison on an Apocalypse World game I can just say "the creature freezes you in a time bubble and bites you, take 2 harm", it's bad form to do so, but I can do it, by the rules.

In the end, a dice roll is just data input, and data is not ideological per se, it's what we do with it that makes it ideological.

Cheers

Nicely put. This is my position on the matter too. After I tried this, I couldn't go back to traditional GM rolling dice games. It makes games much faster.

And about the freezing bubble creature, it's not bad form if it's a hard move.

Quote from: cranebump;967145None of this changes. The only thing at issue is who gets to roll the dice. The GM is still controlling when that happens. Black Hack doesn't have a narrative control system. No Fate Point. No Luck. It's just a different mechanic.

If it was "just a different mechanic" and changed absolutely nothing, why do it?

You're actually trying to argue your best-case-scenario, and the very best argument you've got is that it's a pointless fad/gimmick.

Quote from: RPGPundit;968393If it was "just a different mechanic" and changed absolutely nothing, why do it?

You're actually trying to argue your best-case-scenario, and the very best argument you've got is that it's a pointless fad/gimmick.

The rolling for Defense is pretty much a Save. Not even a new mechanic. Only big difference is the saves are now templated upon the standard six attributes.

I see a potential to speed up combat processing, especially if I have a large table. I no longer become a processing chokepoint to mundane tasks. I'd just point to a player, "Orc hits you with his ax, roll under your STR for Defense," and then process their open roll. Then I can take these quick breathers in combat to jot notes, imagine improv, roll ad hoc content, etc.

Same as before, just delegated away some busywork. And moving it to the open shuts down any dice fudging paranoia. (Also, I have outrageous bad luck, so the less I roll the better for actual play challenge. And knowing those with outrageous good luck, I can see how this makes their GM play better. Dice Gods are a thing. )

Quote from: RPGPundit;968393If it was "just a different mechanic" and changed absolutely nothing, why do it?

Because there is a change, in cognitive economy and attention focusing.

For example, in a multi-opponent combat every player rolls for their own character, but the GM has to roll for each opponent, if the game has basic arithmetic and the NPCs have different values, you have the GM running several arithmetic operations per round.

Granted, 99% of it is simple addition, but on top that you have spells slots, hit points, conditions, positioning, bonuses/penalties and rulings, there is a lot of juggling involved. Player-facing rolls off-load some of that cognitive demand back to the player; if you are number-savvy this might not be important for you, but at least in my case, every bit of work I can pass over helps (which is I why I usually ask a player to keep track of initiative on heavy-crunch games).

On the other hand, the more dice people roll the more engaged they seem to be with the game. I can't recall the source right now, but there is a study about the correlation between system interaction and player engagement. In essence, rolling out of turn keeps players focused on the action and the game, which can be an issue in crunchy game where rounds take a long time.

And after all that, player-facing is just aesthetically pleasing for some folk

Cheers!

Quote from: RPGPundit;968393If it was "just a different mechanic" and changed absolutely nothing, why do it?

You're actually trying to argue your best-case-scenario, and the very best argument you've got is that it's a pointless fad/gimmick.

No my argument is that dice are being rolled by different hands. There is no "reduction of GM power/authority (which is your contention). Among the reasons to do it this way, based on the rules, the reviews I've read, and my own experience with player-facing through Dungeon World, are (1) frees GM to do other things (not my argument, and I don't find no dice rolling take undue time), and (2) keeps players more involved (a strong argument--there's not much of an "off turn" if you're making all the resolution rolls). Now if any of this makes you feel less king of the castle, I would offer that that's a personal problem, not the inevitable result of having your dice taken away. (Speaking of--I imagine the GM could still make the monster damage rolls, if they wanted to).

Of course, tanaka and opa already made much better arguments than I did.

Quote from: RPGPundit;968393If it was "just a different mechanic" and changed absolutely nothing, why do it?

You're actually trying to argue your best-case-scenario, and the very best argument you've got is that it's a pointless fad/gimmick.

I think it can serve to reinforce the GM's position in the game entirely. The GM can sit back, surrounded by notes and references, and no longer bother with rolling a die for each goblin attack. It also means the GM could instead focus on tracking scores in combat - a HP tracker for all monsters, the group, and effects going on. I've often found as a GM it's useful to stand and walk the table when important conflicts are going on, and update maps or a whiteboard. Freeing me from rolling dice makes that easier.

There is also a mild psychological component here. If I'm the GM and rolling dice, my dice are affecting players, and their losses are partially attributed to me in terms of luck. But if a player is doing all the rolling, s/he is always relying on his or her own luck - it could change the focus of a bad run of luck.

This would also be a useful mechanic for teaching newer players how to play. By handing off a lot of the moving parts to the player, it teaches the more passive player how to get involved with and see the mechanics in the system.

Now, flip the entire system around, with the GM rolling everything, and announcing the results to the players, who are only tracking their HP and spell slots, and you have transformed the game again. This is effectively how all computer RPGs work, with players having control over resources (healing potions, spells). I think the advantage of having all rolls player facing is the enhanced interaction the players have with the mechanics - it can lead to greater attention, as tanaka mentioned.

Quote from: Coffee Zombie;968736I think it can serve to reinforce the GM's position in the game entirely. The GM can sit back, surrounded by notes and references, and no longer bother with rolling a die for each goblin attack. It also means the GM could instead focus on tracking scores in combat - a HP tracker for all monsters, the group, and effects going on. I've often found as a GM it's useful to stand and walk the table when important conflicts are going on, and update maps or a whiteboard. Freeing me from rolling dice makes that easier.

There is also a mild psychological component here. If I'm the GM and rolling dice, my dice are affecting players, and their losses are partially attributed to me in terms of luck. But if a player is doing all the rolling, s/he is always relying on his or her own luck - it could change the focus of a bad run of luck.

This would also be a useful mechanic for teaching newer players how to play. By handing off a lot of the moving parts to the player, it teaches the more passive player how to get involved with and see the mechanics in the system.

Now, flip the entire system around, with the GM rolling everything, and announcing the results to the players, who are only tracking their HP and spell slots, and you have transformed the game again. This is effectively how all computer RPGs work, with players having control over resources (healing potions, spells). I think the advantage of having all rolls player facing is the enhanced interaction the players have with the mechanics - it can lead to greater attention, as tanaka mentioned.

Going to chime back in here, and agree wholeheartedly with the benefits of the player facing concept.  I was watching a couple of videos online, looking for some actual play of the black pack. I stumbled upon one video, a tradition nakmgame, i think they were running a dungeon called Stone Hell, and there was a table for the players and just sitting there staring at the GM while he dies announced results and wrote things down. While this is a typical mode of play, and fine for most tables, including mine,  I think a strong argument can be made that player facing does keep players occupied and invested.

Quote from: Opaopajr;968422I see a potential to speed up combat processing, especially if I have a large table.)

As I said previously, I ran my game this was for about a year and a half in my 3e campaign and didn't see any improvement in speed. Mostly because my players would somehow automatically lose their dice every minute or so. But, I had setup my notes such that it was possible for anyone to make any roll (monsters had BAB and a Defence DC (11+BAB) that the player would roll against. Both numbers were on the character sheet so either roll was fine).

If speed of play is a concern, I found other methods far more effective; damage roll over and pre-rolling are methods that get the best results.

Quote from: hedgehobbit;968897As I said previously, I ran my game this was for about a year and a half in my 3e campaign and didn't see any improvement in speed. Mostly because my players would somehow automatically lose their dice every minute or so. But, I had setup my notes such that it was possible for anyone to make any roll (monsters had BAB and a Defence DC (11+BAB) that the player would roll against. Both numbers were on the character sheet so either roll was fine).

If speed of play is a concern, I found other methods far more effective; damage roll over and pre-rolling are methods that get the best results.

I think the main benefit is more player engagement. Makes it less about, "now watch me do stuff, everybody--I am dah GM!"