From the "Best RPG Rule" thread:

QuoteI'm inclined to think highly of Burning Wheel's "Let it Roll" rule ... it's much like the law against double jeopardy, that you can't be forced to roll on the same thing over and over again. If you succeeded at the roll then you succeeded at that roll, and you can just keep on truckin' until something happens to make the task harder.

Make a spectacular role to sneak into a barbarian camp? Then you've snuck in. You don't have to check every time you cross an open space. You bamboozled 'em! Skulk to your heart's content. Until, of course, you try to steal the gem from the chieftain's head-piece ... that pops up past the difficulty of what you'd succeeded at before, so then you gotta roll.

It's a nice, simple rule that's easily portable into many different systems. It lets people get their money's worth from risky rolls, but at the same time it lets them know when they're about to take the big chance. You can choose to walk away without looting the chieftain's head-piece, and be pretty damn sure that you'll get clear ... that lends weight to your gamble, if you take it.

I'm moving this here because some folks want to debate it and I don't want that to drown out the other rules that people think rock. I won't fully quote the other peoples' arguments but basically:

Pundit - That rule is stupid because a GM should be able to tell you to roll as many times as he wants.

blakkie - Yeah, and you should also throw out every other rule too.

Wil - (quoted because it contains a lot of words and I'll screw it up if I paraphrase)

QuoteYou're right - all it does is put down on paper in a no-nonsense way the way that most people play, which is to make rolls when it makes sense to, no more and no less. Some people are stupid enough to need that sort of thing spelled out for them, as evidenced by threads I've seen where people say they've played X game for years and never once thought they could change Y, when Y is common sense for everyone (these are usually the same people that claim they have been psychologically damaged by rules systems).

Otherwise, why not have the PC make a DEX check for every footstep they make? That's a change in situation - marbles can roll from nowhere and get under their feet! Why not have the PC make the roll to grab the horse's reins, then a roll to put one foot in the stirrup, then another roll to hoist themselves up, then another roll to plant their ass in the saddle. Hell, they should all be seperate skills!

"Let it Ride" (which I think is what the rule is actually called) I think is more about setting the baseline with the roll. Unless the new lock is more difficult than the last, or the new guard is much more alert than the last - why waste time rolling again? It's saying, "You snuck past the two hyper-alert, hopped up on goofballs guards in the entire camp getting in...why roll to sneak past the one that's asleep?" or "You picked this super complicated lock to get into this safe, why roll to pick the flimsy hasp lock on the box that's inside?".

There was also some stuff about licking grandma pussy as a task resolution mechanic. I'm just as dumbfounded as you.

Personally I like the rule for the most part. There was an example given about picking multiple locks in a row, which I'd never do. Each lock is the start and end of it's own seperate task. But for sneaking around I do it.

I've had GMs in the past who, instead of setting a higher difficulty to make a task harder they'll just make you roll over and over again. For instance, if they don't want you to sneak into a camp they'll have you roll for every single gaurd you have to pass. If they do want you to sneak in a single roll (or even no roll at all) is made. That sorta crap bugs me. If you want the task to be harder, just make it harder.

Brought over to save keep Tony's thread on track.....

Quote from: RPGPunditWouldn't "having to pick another lock" be a change in situation?

Not nessasarily. If the number of dice you are rolling hasn't changed, then likely not. Difficulty of the task, the Obstacle (the number of successful dice you need to roll to accomplish the task), does NOT by itself trigger it. Which makes Tony's description a bit suspect.

Quote from: RPGPunditI mean if not, shit, why not just have every player roll each possible skill/attribute just ONCE and then dispose with dice forever?  

The scope is laid out in advance, is generally are the conciquences of failure. The scope is also needed to determine the penalties/bonuses to your dice.

QuoteAnd if so, basically the "let it roll" rule is fucking meaningless, because it doesn't actually change anything from how (normal, well-adjusted) people normally play.

Well I'll say that it definately is a change from how most RPG rules tell me to play. *shrug* Of course people do rewrite RPGs all the time. It's just nice when you don't have to rewrite rules to have them make sense. You know, good rules, which is what this thread is about.

P.S. Keep in mind that the rule impinges as much on the player, if not more. It basically nixes just rerolling to try have something happen. Also keep in mind that in BW at times it is the player that is likely to be driving for a chance to roll because that is how the skill is improved.

QuoteDifficulty of the task, the Obstacle (the number of successful dice you need to roll to accomplish the task), does NOT by itself trigger it. Which makes Tony's description a bit suspect.

What does change it then?

Quote from: blakkieWhich makes Tony's description a bit suspect.

Yeah, that's fair.  I just rattled it off the top of my head ... I thought the details were going to be buried under a mountain of other rules that people love, y'see

My group generally Lets it Ride for the duration of a scene, which I realize is pretty nebulous.

Probably the best way is to think about what the larger conflict is: You're trying to steal the Ruby of Radagammasteron? You Let it Ride for all of the sub-tasks involved in breaking in and stealing it. Note that Let it Ride does not apply to the detailed resolution mechanics like Fight and Duel of Wits.

Quote from: James McMurrayWhat does change it then?

Generally leaving the scope for which the initial roll was made. Sometimes the scope is the entire gaming session.

In Tony' example it may be a different roll for the Chieftan, but not just because the Ob is higher.  If the Chieftan is a really important part of the situation for the table, what they want to focus the game on, then it could be a new roll. The focus of the game can be signaled by, say, really high stakes for a failure/success getting by the Chieftan.  But if they knew about the Chieftan, or that this was going to be a really sneaky mission, and the general severity of the conciquences of failure before the initial roll they likely would have just used one roll for it for all the checks.

Basic rule of thumb is all about pacing. If people are interested in something, what they want the game to be about, then it'll be a roll. Otherwise Let It Ride because rolling again is cluttering up the game.

Quote from: TonyLBYeah, that's fair.  I just rattled it off the top of my head ... I thought the details were going to be buried under a mountain of other rules that people love, y'see

Instead it got buried under a mountain of crap? Sorry 'bout that. :eek:

That sounds a lot like how we already do it. I'll only force a new roll if the situation changes enough to warrant it and it will make the game more interesting to see a roll happen. Otherwise you just keep sneaking along (or whatever).

I would never use the Let It Ride rule in a traditional dungeon crawl adventure.  But for something more plot-oriented it looks like a great shortcut.

Quote from: jrientsI would never use the Let It Ride rule in a traditional dungeon crawl adventure.  But for something more plot-oriented it looks like a great shortcut.

This gets more to the point than any other perspective, ironically.

It's a matter of taste, folks - how much granularity do you want in your resolution system?  Watch folks claim "your conflict isn't with the sleeping guard, it's with the chieftan!" Yeah? Sez You.  Can't you see a group who desires to play in such a way that your "conflict" is with the guard you are trying to get by right now?

If not, than you're falling into the "My way is the one true way" discussion.

As I've said before, there is a huge sliding scale of resolution granularity.  Using two common terms - from Task to Conflict. Both can be reduced to absurd extremes.  Which you use may depend on the group, the setting, or may even change moment to moment.  As long as the group is cool with it, and it's known.

EDIT: And the implication of Pundit's view (the way it's being taken, I think), that every guard must be rolled is as much One True Way thinking. Ironically, I think Pundit might be more accurate, as I think his argument is it's the GM's decision. It might be better said as It's the GM's choice as long as the group has determined the guidelines/rules ahead of time.

Quote from: jrientsI would never use the Let It Ride rule in a traditional dungeon crawl adventure.  But for something more plot-oriented it looks like a great shortcut.

We actually just started up an 'Old School' Burning Wheel campaign, and Let it Ride has been working pretty well for us, so far. For instance, our elven ranger used his Stealth skill to scout out a cavern and look for some prisoners we were supposed to rescue. He had to pass several orc sentries, and the like: he rolled well, and was able to find the prisoners and give us a good idea of the obstacles before us, all in about five minutes of real time. Honestly, it didn't feel like we were missing out on any of the traditional flavor, at all, and it certainly streamlined play.

You do have to adjust how you look at the consequences of failure, and how you set up your dungeons, though. Otherwise you end up with doors you can't pass, and will never be able to pass, and other problematic outcomes.

Let me clarify what I meant by 'traditional dungeon crawl'.  I'm referring to the kind of game where entering, surviving, clearing, and looting a big multi-level dungeon is itself the entire point of the outing.  Your rescue scenario is exactly what I mean by 'more plot-oriented'.

Quote from: jrientsLet me clarify what I meant by 'traditional dungeon crawl'.  I'm referring to the kind of game where entering, surviving, clearing, and looting a big multi-level dungeon is itself the entire point of the outing.  Your rescue scenario is exactly what I mean by 'more plot-oriented'.

Okay, I've got you and understand the difference. I would like to point out that the ranger still had to overcome each sentry, individually. Being seperate individuals, they each had a chance to roll their Observation vs. the rangers Stealthy result (which was operating under Let it Ride).

On one level you can use Let it Ride to ratchet things up to a pure conflict resolution level, but you can also use it to simply streamline the amount of rolling at the table, which is how we're using it for this particular game.

Of course, if stopping at each door, listening, checking for traps, and forcing it open is something your group likes, Let it Ride is going to be the shittiest rule, ever. Which I can understand: I likes to roll the dice, too.

Tim

Quote from: TimWhich I can understand: I likes to roll the dice, too.

This is why I don't like Cheetoism.  Some game we don't have snacks.  But every game we roll dice.  Except that one time I ran Nobilis.  What can I say?  Sometimes young men like to experiment a bit before they settle down.