NokiMo
mcdm
mcdm

patreon


End of the First Day

It is the end of the first day of design on the MCDM RPG and I’m thinking about two things. Flow, and the Null Result.

Flow

There was a point in our prototype combat between James’ Goblins and Hannah’s Tactician where James asked Hannah what one of her stats was. I think at this point we were imagining each stat was also a defense you could attack.

Earlier we imagined maybe Defenses are separate from stats? None of these ideas are new. We’re not trying to have new ideas just for the sake of having new ideas. I hate that. We need ideas we believe in, while accepting that there is no “right answer.” And if it turns out that “the idea we believe in” is a popular solution from other games? Well, maybe there’s a reason it’s a popular solution.

But by the time we had ideas for how the dice should work, or how they COULD work, and we were actually fighting a prototype combat, each stat was also a defense. You could use your Might to attack my Agility. It’s obvious how this would work. You can imagine it. If my Agility is low, it’s hard for me to avoid your attack. If your Might is low, it’s unlikely your sword will connect.

Makes sense! That’s nice. It’s easy to fall in love with complex ideas that have to be explained. But even someone who’d never played an RPG before would probably understand why having a high agility means it's harder for the tactician to hit you with their sword.

But it means the active player (in this case the GM, but the same problem happens when you’re a player) has to stop what they’re doing, turn to another player, and ask for some information.  “What’s your agility?”

This creates this annoying “stop-and-go traffic” experience. I’m trying to take my turn. My goblin is trying to do something cool. Can I just do it please? Can I just see whether or not it works, so I can narrate the result and move on to the next goblin?

No, you need to stop and consult other players who might be in the middle of a conversation, or out getting a slice of pizza or whatever.

Or you’re in the middle of doing your thing and a player wants to react to your action, hoping to stop it before it resolves. Counterspell!

Is this fun? In a game mostly about Fighting Monsters, the GM often has a lot to do. The player is only running one character, but you’re running ALL the monsters. With many different special abilities, you’re trying to remember them all, remember how they all work together. So you’re a bit pushed! And you just want to know…did this goblin’s thing work or NOT!?

The GM stopping what they’re in the middle of to ask the player “What’s your Agility?” does not seem fun. Why?

Because it interrupts flow.

Flow is a state of immersion in a process. You know what you want to do, you have the tools to achieve it, so you just follow the process and you get your result. Flow does not mean “every result is positive,” no. It just means “I have a process I can follow, I understand it, and it becomes fluid. It feels effortless.” It just…works. Figuring out “did I hit or not” becomes easy.

So how might this work at the table? In a fighting monsters game? How do we preserve flow?

Very close to the end of the day we thought…what if, instead of characters attacking each other’s defenses, your options in combat just all have different difficulties? Casting spells becomes about “how hard is it to cast this spell?” and “how good am I at casting?” Weapon attacks are about “how hard is this maneuver I’m attempting?” And “how good am I at fighting?” I know I’ve played games that work this way.

The target, aka your victim, can still resist or diminish the effects of your Cool Thing, but not the likelihood of success. Your target may have LOTS of ways to react to your success, but they can’t actually interrupt you while you’re in the middle of doing your thing.

This suddenly seemed very interesting. Now my turn is about how much risk am I willing to take on? Use the easy maneuver? Or the really hard one? My choice. But I do not need to consult anyone else. I don’t need to stick post-its to my screen with everyone’s defenses written down and then remember to update them whenever they change (which, given how often they change in some games, is a fool’s errand).

I can just…take my turn. Succeed or fail. I don’t know if this model is going to work. It has to feel good when you play it. But it seemed like a fertile area to explore.

But it immediately led to the next question. One we’d been batting about all day, but now the “I don’t need to consult you, to take my turn” model put it into the foreground.

What happens if I miss?

The Null Result

Missing, aka “I miss. I do nothing. My turn is over. Next.” Is profoundly unfun. It just sucks. Why?

Well, I think the real reason is NOT “because you failed to succeed.” No, I think it’s worse than that. You did nothing. You spend 20 minutes waiting for your turn, looking forward to it, imagining Dope Shit, and then it’s your turn and…nothing happens. It is unfun and undramatic.

I can’t imagine anyone enjoys this. So what, if anything, is the alternative?

I think for a while we assumed that having no Null Result just meant you couldn’t miss. Right? If missing is the worst thing that can happen, and everyone agrees it's unfun, and you just…delete that result, then all the results you have left are all different versions of “I hit.” Right? You could probably math that design to make it functionally equivalent to “missing x% of the time.”

But what if the worst result possible was “your enemy gets to do something?”

Ahhh! Hey! Hey that’s interesting. Sorta exciting actually. Actually…actually you know what it is?

It’s dramatic!

Now we have this NEW potential result. “The goblin gets to do something.” Oh no! We hates that!

With this new, dramatic, and BAD (but not necessarily ‘unfun’) result…we can delete the Null Result (“I miss, nothing happens, next”) and still have success and failure!

That felt like something. That felt like we might be on to something. Mind you, we haven’t tested this, or even really modeled it yet. We need to refactor our combat rules based on this, but I think we can do that in like 30 minutes tomorrow, and then test again!

Rapid Prototyping!

It Was A Long Day

But I think we got a lot done. We focused on rapid prototyping. No paper design, let’s focus on an actual battle. A 1st level Tactician vs a bunch of goblins. And that meant we learned a lot about our new game. You gotta start somewhere!

I liked one particular breakthrough where we wrote “1d12 = it is late in the battle” and “6d6 = I am high level” on the whiteboard. It’s easy to explain what that means and why we got excited but I’m just too tired to cover everything we talked about today AND write it all down AND get enough sleep tonight to do it again tomorrow.

Will there be a post every day? No idea. We’ll all find out together!

Comments

One idea would be tiered outcomes depending on the risk you are taking. A high risk ability would be 'Big damage on success' but 'enemy gets opportunity attack on a fail' Whereas your generic attack would be 'Good damage' or 'Damage and effect' on high success. Damage on moderate success. Low Damage on failure. Or something like that. Having a bread-and-butter attack that will always do 'something' good should always been an option, while high risk high reward should be a choice.

Adam Hodel

Re: the Null result discussion: what result would there be in the event of a Draw? Are they possible here? And what happens when/if they do? Feels like there’s an opportunity there.

Kerfliggle

I think that idea of the worst outcome being "the enemy gets to do something" also works great for enemies, players can often just sit back and be told what HP number this round taxed them by, but with this they have to pay attention because THEY might get to do something badass if the enemy misses. So they pay attention throughout, not just when they hear "Bob, you took 14 damage".

Angel

Magical Kitties Save the Day is designed so every action an enemy can take is a reaction to the heroes' failure. It sometimes makes it really hard for the villain to succeed, but the bones of that design is super fun. They also use "natural language magic," which is extremely well done!

Dayten Rose

This reminds me of Frostgrave, a fantasy skirmish game. Attacking a monster means a contested FIGHT roll, whoever wins, deals damage to the other. And then it happens again on the monsters turn. It attacks you, but if you roll higher, you damage it. It makes combat much more dynamic and risky! Also all of the spells have set difficulties you need to roll for a successful cast. If you fail, you then take damage that scales with how badly you failed. Having a set number for accomplishing a task is a great idea it's what drew me to OSE and the save/skill system there (I converted all percentile rolls to D20 rolls). The player rolls, they know the target number and whether they succeed. I can grant a bonus or penalty for the given situation but generally the character "knows" their own capacity got failure/success and can attempt the skill challenge

Andrew Varao

This is interesting, especially if carrying/switching weapons has consequence. Do you sneak in with your trusty iron sword or with the high-damage, glass dagger that could break and leave you temporarily weaponless?

Jenny Magana

This reminds me of my favourite mechanic from Powered by the Apocalypse, the 6-or-lower "miss" mechanic that triggers a GM move. The flow in that system is much snappier than 5e, so I'm excited to see where this goes in a Colvillian crunchier system.

Pikaoku

On the Null result discussion. There are games out there that use a success mechanic. The mechanic has things like failure and something BAD happens that causes a complication and maybe even a choice of problems for the player. Or there is a low end failure where the bad is not so bad. Something more in the neutral realm and then mixed successes a little good or bad depending on the roll. And of course a straight success and critical type success. Basically a gradient of how things go but something always happen never just nothing. It definitely makes for a more interesting story and can be very dramatic. Good path to go down.

Ben S.

I kinda hate the you "miss, nothing happens" bit. I always tried to flavor it as "you take a might swing, but they dodge out of the way" or "after a glancing blow, the target howls and turns its attention on you"

Kelley H

This is sounding like some of my favorite parts from Jim Murphy's playtest: Enlightened. Especially the stuff about my own stats determine whether I succeed, which was something I liked about Murphy's stuff, but I really love how you guys built upon that by incorporating the whole thing where the defensive monster/player's stats/abilities affect the outcome, not determine the result. Awesome! Its definitely something I felt was missing from Murphy's game and its super cool that you guys are thinking about it! Also, really nice that you're thinking about "null", I've had some bad experiences in a game where one of my players kept on getting terrible die rolls, and it was super un fun, and I think made the whole session unfun for him, just because it was the one combat of it, and he was looking forward to it. Looking forward to the RPG!

Nolan

This is amazing amazing content. If it's easier to do on audio, or video, or whatever I'd still think it's amazing. Don't hesitate to keep it raw (as opposed to laboring more to get it out) so we can see all of this, because it's so cool.

Corey C

Incredibly interesting stuff. It's rare to see notes from designers in the early stages of TTRPG design (for understandable reason). Cool that yall are working together and figuring stuff out

Sixfingeredmage

This is great. Reading about your work and thinking process. I hope you will post more and keeps us updated on the progress of the new MCDM RPG.

Mike Butts

MCDM saved my high level 5e game with action monster rules (i might have messed the name up sorry), but in the wake of the OGL madness I watched the twitch stream, and I felt this was all coming from the right place. So here I am. Excited more than ever to try something that came from the right place. Whatever metrics this RPG hits (or misses), my enthusiasm and huge respect will remain, because more than anything, it came from that good place or pure intent. Thanks.

Lo-fi Jedi

The thing I love the most about this is that I can imagine that workday. Nothing is sacred, we just need to headbutt each-other untill we come to something that feels fun. I care about MCDM's products but I love the company, how trasparent everything is and how ispiring you all can be <3

Skull Azure

Both ideas sounds like a great way to spice things up regarding combat. ❤️ mcdm!

Luca Mita

Huge fan of this kind of communication. Nothing is cooler than seeing how these things come together and getting to share in the excitement in real time as a new game develops.

Zymri

On the null result issue. One idea to help GMs out is that weapons have a trait that could trigger them. E.g. you attack a spear wielding Goblin and miss. The spear has a null trait of push back. This means the spear weilding goblin gets to push you back 1 square. It also adds more variety to weapon choice above and beyond how much damage they do.

phil williams

This glimpse into the design work at MCDM is fantastic. Getting to see the team of professional game designers at work is like watching a band play. It's not all about the lead singer, it's the talents of the whole team coming together in common purpose to make something great. I'm just going to sit back and watch, waiting patiently for my chance to applaud (with my wallet). I'm loving what I see in just the first day. Good on yer!

Bob Hopp

Day 1 a success, keep being creative. Love hearing about the process.

christopher northcutt

A bad roll by a character resulting in goblins taking an action feels like a restructuring of villain/legendary actions

Graham Schofield

I definitely read this in his voice lol

Roosevelt Cooper

Reading this, I kept thinking about Magic: The Gathering combat... While you're attacking, you always "hit" - but your opponent can choose to Block (or maybe Counterspell, or some other removal) ... idk that's all I've got, just thought there might be something interesting there to dig into.

Blake

I'm a little skeptical here because it feels like the unmoving target number for a successful foll is heading towards the design of games like PbtA. My beef with these games is that because the DCs never change, you're always encouraged to try and find a way to use your best stat. Arguing a weird, roundabout way to use 'Cool' in a place where 'Charming' is the most obvious stat because mathematically it gives you better odds every time, detracts from the tactical significance of each decision. Opponents aren't better or worse at given things, requiring a party to mix up their approach - a roll of 10 or better just succeeds every time. You spend all the extra time coming up with tedious ways to justify a stat choice instead of just rolling.

Tryston Gilbert

Love it. Upped a tier for this post, and happy I did. Could player and enemy turns be combined in to one, with the winner of the roll being the one to make an attack? Is that anything?

Josh Rodell

Absolutely love this diary style post that goes into some of the game designing process. Fascinating!

Robin Baggett

This sounds very interesting to me. I had a game over the weekend where I was apparently playing with cursed dice [even on roll20] and couldn't roll above a 3 and got 3 nat 1's in a row at one point. So in the big long battle I waited patiently for my turn to come around carefully planning for may character to do something cool and dramatic which just simply failed and thus did basically nothing for most of the fight. I like this design idea of "no matter what SOMETHING interesting is going to happen on your turn, good or bad"

ConvincingIllusion

I played in a game using the PBTA engine and it features the type of "bad roll = enemy acts" combat you are talking about. It felt a little odd at first, coming from D&D, but I think it does achieve the objective you are after! I think another plus is that it auto-balances the action economy to some degree.

Nicholas Klagge

Hey MCDM RPG creators. As a long time DM, would you please entertai n these two ideas when creating your game THAT I CAN'T WAIT TO BUY AND USE: 1. Please don't make a system of a lot of complex rules and unnecessary minutiae like D&D 5e. That gets overwhelming as a DM. 2. Please do not make players overpowered early on like in 5e. That gets overwhelming as a DM. Thank you for your consideration! Can't wait to throw my money at you all!!! :)

Chris Peters

Matt often references old movies and this brought up memories of the many Errol Flynn movies, especially Robin Hood, where every fight was a dance between the combatants, 2,3, more? So this sounds great so far. Thanks for this window into your process!

George I Lemke

Thanks for this Matt, James and Hannah, super cool seeing rapid prototyping in progress. Gives me a lot of ideas for how to make my own design better. Excited to see what today brings

Roman Penna

I was expecting hearing stuff like this next week at the earliest! You spoil us, Matt, James, and Hannah.

Nathan Lee

THIS. This post is incredibly generous. The details of the design process in this post alone are worth a year's subscription. Thanks.

Drak thn Bolak

Another thing to think about is that when you have the possibility of something bad happening on your turn by rolling low the null result no longer becomes necessarily the worst thing and it can in fact be a good thing. I can think about your tables sitting around and saying, "oh yes! that's just enough with all my bonuses to avoid the enemy doing something! Nothing happens, hooray! "

Evan Welsh

This post reinforces why I'm intrigued to see what you folks come up. At the start at least, it's less about what you're striving for and more about what you're trying to avoid. The "wasted turn cuz of a poor die roll" and the "lack of engagement because the pace of combat died" are definitely some of the biggest complaints my table has.

Joe DeSantis

I must say that for all of the new TTRPGs that are going to crop up, I'm most excited for MCDM's take. I've loved Matt's take on running the game, mechanics, and just narrative design in general. Interestingly enough, I've actually become a pretty strong defender of null results having run and participated in games that try to not have them (primarily Dungeon World) and I've found that firmly not having any tends to run the risk of severe attrition on the part of the GM to try to continually come up with cool and dramatic non-null results, especially when the party is just having bad RNG for whatever reason. I'm interested to see if MCDM can come up with a good solution to this that doesn't either put a lot of strain on the GM or make the game oppressively hard for players who are just having a rough night.

Grumble Bumpkin

As someone who has homebrewed 5e to *almost* be a different game, really thrilled to be reading your POV!

Noah Kunin

Thanks for sharing, great read. I love the idea of what you're trying to solve in the Flow section, I am curious to see if you can make it feel good.

Dor Edras

Maybe these could be tied to class as well, giving different options for different characters.

Andrew Conti

Very Dungeonworld-like! I really like how PbtA handles 'misses'. A failed result doesn't even necessarily mean you don't hit. It just means something interesting - and usually bad for the PC - happens.

Shaun Johnson

"As you miss the goblin slips his sword past your defences, cutting you across the belly." This sounds great, and very dramatic. This makes it feel like each creature is acting at the same moment.

stephen sayers

i love the way you write posts because i always imagine them in the exact same voice from the videos and it always works perfectly, it's like watching an imaginary matt colville video in my head

Kavukamari

You fixed why many DMs love critical failure attacks dropping swords or breaking axes, without making players hate it! (Probably!) If a big failure means you do nothing AND you will have a harder time next turn, that sucks. If a big failure (which you knew was harder to succeed in the first place) means that the enemy does something, you feel less personally screwed. Especially if the things they can do roughly mirror disengage, or a chance to stand back up, or break out of your grapple. So it isnt just “aw man i did 6 damage but then they did 4, that turn sucked”

Clay - Kenku Court

I have created a similar system with one of my old friends. We balanced it with an pool of "action points" that could be spent during each round. Difficult actions like high level spells cost more actions. So if you spend all your actions on your turn, you have none left to counter attack or defend with out of turn. The system allowed for great flow and interaction for all players during a round of combat, almost no wait time since we allowed all players to act out of turn if they had the right tools for it.

Grantopp

The null result idea sounds really cool! I like the idea of not just waiting for your turn, but also being excited for the monster's turn to attack you because you get to do something if they miss. No matter what the final mechanic is, it would be really cool if you guys could find a solution or way to address the un-fun-ness of missing and your turn being over!

Victor Frunza

I'm guessing 1d12 means the Tact is tired and losing technique (and so dmg is very swingy and inconsistent) and then 6d6 is ALL THE TECHNIQUE since you're more consistently getting the average dmg. Also (and I don't think this is a better idea, I'm just musing) I wonder if the flow issue would also be addressed by only having 1 or 2 numbers that you need to worry about in a combat encounter. I'm thinking of the times I suddenly need to figure out spell save DCs or a stat that only seems important once every handful of encounters. But, on the other hand, you probably can't get very deep with the system if you only have a couple numbers that are important in combat. I dunno, just musin'.

Sampson

ok ok when I got to the part of "what if the goblin gets to do something" on a miss I just wanted to jump out of my chair in excitment. Loving the look on the process so far. As for flow, i totally get it. It really sucks when you have to stop your thing and go "player what's your AC?" It can be minor, but it interrupts the flow, it feels unsatisfying. Can't wait for more out of the MCDM team, keep up the good work

Beltux

Thank you for everything, being a member of the MCDM community is such a pleasure

Inge

I really appreciate the two-sided nature of this post / summary: 1. As a patron, I get an early access to the game, and get to be "in the know" about what's coming, which makes me more excited for it when it gets here, and allows me to *understand* its design better when it does. 2. I get a step-by-step recount of game design and testing, from a team of professional designers, AS they're designing their flagship game. Not hypothetical. Not tied to an existing system. Bare-bones, ground-up, straight to the meat game design, which I can learn from and develop my own skills as a game master / designer. It even reads like a Running the Game video. This post may be more helpful to me in the long run than even Arcadia. Thanks MCDM.

Caleb Plehn

Just wow. A friend of mine really hated the null result in dnd so in our Homebrew we added a little bonus you gained when missing, e.g. a crusader gains rigtheous fury etc. But the enemy getting to DO something somehow never crossed our mind. Cant wait to see the how the MCDMRPG ends up looking with all these cool ideas (maybe not this one if it somehow doenst work) packed together!

Luca

Super cool to get a back-seat view of all this. I (and i assume the others here for this) know that whatever you all land on will be amazing, but it’s very special to get to hear about the bits that get you there — even the ones that are cast off into the abyss along the way.

Brian Diehl

Go Team MCDM, Go!

Paul L.

Man, love me a good design discussion. Thinking about that Null result discussion, what jumped out for me was "This is why Twilight Imperium has role selection" and I immediately started to wonder if maybe it'd be cool if the first thing every party decided at the top of the turn was what role they were going to take, and for this to maybe give them a special ability that they can always apply at some point during the turn, but never on their turn. It's a mad initial concept, and I have no idea about the roles, but designed well and teamwork becomes sort of inevitable in that situation as you decide who needs to do what.

RuhroRubbinz

Wow! This is really cool to read! Even if everything changes and none of the ideas in this post are used, it is so so so cool to be able to have an glimpse of what designing a game is like. Thanks for sharing!

Michael Micek

That type of ebb and flow to a fight is something I’ve always felt was missing from the Seattle game. Feels much more fluid.

Shovel_Cat

I thought I spotted attacking different stats on that whiteboard! The action DC idea sounds really interesting. I love the solution to the null result. I was flirting with a similar idea with my own system that I keep telling myself I'm going to make. When you "miss", you still deal damage, but the target also gets to hit you. You don't fail at hitting. you fail at defending yourself. I'm super excited for these design logs. They are really cool to get a peak in the thought process.

Dakota Neilsen

It's amazing to have this insight in your process ! Hope you have a productive and lovely week !!!

Carmelo Sutera

I know it's early but all of the ideas being discussed here, alone and together, feel like they're moving in a direction of a game I want to play.

chris weed

This is so exciting!

Drew Hilliard

Ooh, I love this inssight into the development process!

Adam Hodel

This is such a great concept. It reminds me of all the cool things that made D&D fun for me. Having something autotrigger in retaliation to an enemy failure is really obvious in hindsight but what a great way to solve a problem I didn't quite know how to verbalize until now. Reminds me of disarming a trap, which, to me, is an interesting way of thinking of combat. Looking at combat in the same way we look at building a trap? Each side 'codes' their character's actions and autotriggers. Then the round could start all at once. Maybe structuring turns similar to computer programming? Prepare Phase / Action Phase? As far as fluidity goes it could take out the waiting around for your turn but then would a phase be needed for in the moment adjustments to the characters combat code? I'm rambling. Thank you for helping my brain think today.

Andrew Rivera

Yes, no null results! Looking forward to seeing how this all develops.

Joshua A Long

Just wow... what a refreshing take on what a TTRPG combat could be. I became a patron because of the inevitable MCDM rpg, and gotta say, if this are the things that are ahead of us I cant be happier.

Bral

I love seeing the behind the scenes design on your stuff, I find it very educational for my own design

Lawson Ebbert

First off; This is really exciting. Some of the best minds in the TTRPG space finally getting it done, thinking through "what's fun!" I wish you plenty of creativity, constitution, and caffeine in your efforts! Secondly, I would personally VERY MUCH be interested in a "developer's log" like this. I know it's work, but being able to see how you think through things really excites me and perhaps might invest us more in the process (and perhaps provide and opportunity for feedback or at least a vibe?)

Tatum Vayavananda

Personally, I've always liked the idea of two sides to the combat. The personally attacking rolls to see if their attack is even possibly effecting. The person defend rolls to see if they would succeed in dodging the attack, if applicable. Certainly more dynamic than one side hitting this number and moving on. I also hope spell failure tables come into play and makes magic more of a dynamic and living thing than, conceptually, no different than shooting an arrow.

Steven Simmons

Thanks for the writeup and insights, sounds like you're having a blast and like you're already on a good track! The idea of not being able to miss sounds intriguing for a game where the PCs are explicitly heroes, and "misses" turning into enemy actions instead is downright scary! :D

sklogw

Sounds like some great ideas floating around!

Jacob Montague


Related Creators