Open Lite RPG

This game is free for non-commercial use and was created with the intent to be used for Draconia '95.

RULE ZERO
The rules provide structure for the game, but the fiction we create is based on realism; therefore, the logic of a scene beats the rules.

RULES LITE
A rules lite game allows the Game Master (GM) to interpret the rules to serve their style. DIY and design are expected. GMs can change, add, or subtract rules, but new rules should not add unnecessary complexity that doesn't improve the game.  For example, you don't need a rule for playing a musical instrument when we can believe that a character can do so because the player included it in their character concept or history. This game can be adapted for any setting and any genre.

PLAYER CHARACTERS (PCs)
Discuss character concepts with the Game Master (GM). PCs must suit the tone and setting, and must be able to work with a team. PCs need a goal to pursue in play. Create an ordinary person who becomes an adventurer.

ABILITIES
Roll three six-sided dice (3d6) for each ability to generate an ordinary person. Abilities describe your character, but do not limit player agency (example, a low intelligence character does not mean you have to play your character unwisely).

Strength: hand-to-hand, Load
Agility: Defense, saves
Vitality: Max HP, saves 
Knowledge: tools, crafts, lore
Perception: Missiles, surprise
Willpower: Magic, saves
Luck (optional): critical range, random table rolls

Score Modifier Description
3 to 6 -1 modifier below average
7 to 14 no modifier average
15 to 18 +1 modifier above average

HIT POINTS (HP)
Your maximum HP is 10 + your vitality modifier. HP represents your physical condition, and so HP loss abstractly represents wounds or injuries. Recover 1 lost HP per day representing natural healing. At 0 HP, make one Save; Success means unconscious for one hour, failure means death.

DEFENSE (DEF)
Your Defense is 10 + your agility modifier + bonuses from armor and shields. Defense represents your ability to defend yourself when you are willing and able. Your touch defense is 10 + agility modifier and is applicable for attacks that do not need to penetrate or bypass armor such as wrestling. Defense cannot exceed 19.

CLASS
Class is a game term for the sake of game terminology. It suggests rather than describes your characters' background, skills, and knowledge. PCs are limited to one class. These class options are left vaguely defined for you to flavor as you like. Assume all classes are fit for adventure, can use improvised weapons and peasant weapons, and can do basic things like light fires and climb ropes.

Fighter
Fighter describes an athletic person who can use all weapons, armor, and shields. Fighters get a +2 to saves vs fatigue.
Lv Hit Save
1 +1 14
2 +2 13
3 +2 12
4 +3 11
5 +3 10
6 +3 9
7 +4 8
8 +4 7
9 +4 6
10 +5 5

Mage
Mage describes someone who can cast spells (or use supernatural powers in other genres). Mages add a +2 to saves vs Magic.
Lv Hit Save MP
1 +0 15 2
2 +1 14 4
3 +1 13 6
4 +1 12 7
5 +2 11 8
6 +2 10 9
7 +2 9 10
8 +3 8 11
9 +3 7 12
10 +3 6 13

Rogue
Rogue describes someone who is trained or self-taught in specialized and unconventional skills (suited to the setting, genre, etc. of the game). Rogues can use light armor, one-handed swords, and crossbows or longbows. Rogues add a +2 to saves vs traps.
Lv Hit Save Skill
1 +1 15 1-2 in 1d6
2 +1 14 1-2 in 1d6
3 +1 13 1-2 in 1d6
4 +2 12 1-3 in 1d6
5 +2 11 1-3 in 1d6
6 +2 10 1-3 in 1d6
7 +3 9 1-4 in 1d6
8 +3 8 1-4 in 1d6
9 +3 7 1-4 in 1d6
10 +4 6 1-5 in 1d6

LEVEL
Level describes how experienced you are in your class. Lower levels mean amateur, higher levels means seasoned.

EXPERIENCE POINTS (EXP)

Characters need 20 * their level in exp to increase their level (example a level 3 character needs 60 exp to reach level 4). Encounters are worth 1 to 4 exp, where a 2 exp encounter is an ordinary difficulty encounter. No exp for absenteeism. Players may not level up mid-game session.

TO-HIT BONUS (HIT)
Your hit is how well you can hit with barehanded attacks and weapons you can use or to grapple an opponent. Add to your d20 roll when you attack along with any other appropriate modifiers. An attack hits when the roll is greater than or equal to the opponent's Defense.

SAVING THROWS (SAVE)
A save is rolled in response to something that acts on you and does not ordinarily require a turn. Roll a d20, add any modifiers, try to roll equal to or greater than your own Save. Escaping a grapple or hold must be attempted on your turn and requires a successful save.

MAGIC POINTS (MP)
MP is another game term for terminology's sake. It represents magical stamina (or stamina with supernatural powers). All spells cost 1 to 3 MP to cast and require one turn to cast.

SKILL
Skill describes your ability to succeed at very specific actions described below. Roll a 1d6, and roll less than or equal to your skill. A GM may assume that only a Rogue can attempt these, or that other classes may attempt them with only a 1 in 1d6 chance of success.
Move silently without being heard
Hide in shadows without being seen
Pick pocket (or plant) without being observed, although the pick is noticed
Pick locks with lock picks
Disarm traps successfully and safely
Listen for and discern noises at doors

Climb 50 ft increments without fatigue
Additionally, a Rogue can backstab an opponent who is unaware of their presence. The attack roll is made with a +4 situational modifier, and on a hit the maximum damage is done (example, 6 damage if rolling a d6 without modifiers).

(optional) Track foes, wild game, etc. and identify such signs in the wilderness. Additionally, navigate unfamiliar regions, forage, nature lore and natural remedies, Foe expertise (specify Foe).

LOAD
Load is your carrying capacity. You can carry a maximum of 10 + Strength modifier items. When you are at your maximum load, you are encumbered and move at slow speed (15 ft per turn). Some items are heavy or bulky and count as two items, like metal armor or two-handed weapons. Some items are petty and count as 0 items. Some items stack up to a fixed quantity, like a container of ammunition. Record fatigue and similar conditions using item slots representing the effects that these conditions have on your character. There is no catalog of equipment. DIY.

EQUIPMENT
There is no catalog. DIY. Barehanded strikes do 1d3 damage. Assume weapons do 1d6 damage. Small and improvised weapons do 1d6-1 (minimum 1 point of damage). Large weapons do 1d6+1 damage. Metal armor is always considered heavy and may be restrictive and noisy.

LEVEL UP BONUSES
The class options available can be distinguished with bonuses. Players may choose one when they level up, though the availability of these options is subject to the GM.

• +1 Max HP (cap 20 + vitality modifier)
• +1 to an ability score (cap 18)
• +1 to Load (cap 20 + strength modifier)
• +1 to base Defense (limit once)
• -1 to Save (limit once)
• Light Armor use
• Heavy Armor use (requires light armor use)
• Shield use
• Weapon use (choose)
• Weapon specialization (choose one weapon, cap +1)
• Critical hit range +1 (cap 18 to 20; restriction cannot take at consecutive levels)
• Other, including special actions or movement, specialized skill or talent, extraordinary trait, etc. DIY (discuss with GM).

HOW TO PLAY
The game is played through conversation and can be freeform or structured into turns like a board game. In all contexts, players can do one dedicated thing on their turn. First, the Game Master (GM) describes the scene, setting, or situation (almost like a narrator). Second, the players describe what their characters do and/or say. Third, the GM describes the results. Repeat until a scene is resolved, then establish a new scene.

In general, if an action or speech can reasonably succeed, it does. Pass or fail die rolls are necessary only to simulate things we cannot do at the game table, like fighting. Saving throws can be called for by the GM to determine if characters can avoid harm for their actions. If something is sincerely impossible, no statistic or die roll will allow it to succeed.

COMBAT
Combat is structured into a GM turn and a Player turn, though all actions are assumed to happen simultaneously. A combat turn represents seconds. The player turn is structured into two phases. Phase 1, all players declare their intended action. Once declared, you can't change it. Phase 2, all players roll dice, and the GM narrates the results. Turn order may be apparent based on the logic of the scene, otherwise, the GM determines who goes first with a single d6 roll where the player turn is first on a roll of a 4-6. Note that there is no move action or double move; Players can simply move up to their movement (30 ft) as part of their action.

EXPLORATION
Exploration is structured into turns. Each player can do one dedicated thing per turn. There are no die rolls to find hidden things (example perception). Information is revealed by the GM as the characters interact with the room or scene (information for action). An exploration turn represents 10 minutes in a small scale location like a dungeon and assumes characters are taking their time, or 1 day in a large scale location like the wilderness. If actions can be resolved in less than a full turn, count the turn for tracking purposes, but treat the time as negligible and fold it into the next turn.

SOCIAL INTERACTION
There are no die rolls to resolve conversations or to interpret meaning in non-player characters (NPCs) face, voice, or body language. Players should treat NPCs like real people and rely on their curiosity and creativity. They will remember you. NPCs can be a resource. Try to make NPCs happy by finding out what they want and offering it to them.

FAST TURNS
Long turns are boring and slow the game down. Excessively long turns can be skipped or cut short by the GM. To keep your turn concise, turn off your gamer brain and stay in character as much as possible. Rather than ask the GM for a explanation about a room, describe how your character explores and ask what your character sees. Never discuss rules during the game. Do not have out-of-character discussions about what you can do or should do. Pay attention when it's not your turn so you never need a recap. Consider the length of time that your turn represents in-game (example a combat turn is seconds). Avoid using game terminology. Describe what your character does or says fluidly like writing a line in a book and tell us what we see. No do-overs or retcons.

SITUATIONAL MODIFIERS
There are times when situations offer a character an advantage or disadvantage to an action. The GM should use their judgment and apply a conservative modifier not to exceed +/- 4. Some examples of situations that may permit a situational modifier are: obscured line of sight or reduced visibility, partial concealment or cover, a magical effect, a physical condition or restriction.

MONSTERS AND OTHER OPPONENTS
Human opponents should be designed with similar logic to PCs, but monsters should not. Stats like Strength and Agility are excessive for NPCs. Below are recommendations. Please change them to suit your game.

Hit Avg To- Average
Die HP Hit Save Def Damage Size Example
1 3 +1 14 10 1d3 half goblin, hobbit
2 7 +2 13 11 1d6 base human, elf, orc
3 10 +3 12 12 1d6+... double lion, bear, ogre
4 13 +4 11 13 2d6 triple        giant, *dragon
5 17 +5 10 14 *dragon breath can do 3d6
6 20 +6 9 15
7 23 +7 8 16
8 27 +8 7 17
9 30 +9 6 18
10 33 +10 5 19

The Importance of Staying In-Character

Metagaming is a common concept in RPGs, and it means making decisions in-character using knowledge which the PLAYER has but which the CHARACTER does not have. To an extent, this is unavoidable. This game defines out-of-character discussions as metagaming. As much as possible, you should be speaking in-character, and you should avoid speaking out-of-character.

For example, a PLAYER might understand that they have a 90% chance to succeed at tracking, but a CHARACTER doesn't have a concept of a success chance. A CHARACTER would instead understand that they are really good at tracking. Here's what the metagame approach vs roleplaying approach look like at the table:

Metagaming has out-of-character discussions that look like this:

Player 1: "Hey player 2, you have a 90% chance to track, you should track."

Roleplaying has in-character conversations that look like this:

Character 1: "Hey Character 2, you are really good at tracking. Why don't you try tracking this monster for us?"

The roleplaying approach is preferred when immersion is desired. The metagaming approach is preferred when you want to speedily resolve a short, simple scene or obstacle, but it is less immersive, and it can slow the game down if it leads to prolonged out-of-character discussions that distract from the game; And before you know it, the participants at the table have resolved an entire scene out-of-character and they've wasted a really good opportunity to roleplay, then another, then another. If you can, you should have the conversation in character, not out of character. Instead of asking "what is in the room?" say "my character looks around," and ask "what does my character see?" Instead of asking "what sounds are in the cave?" say "my character listens for sounds in the cave," and this will prompt the GM to provide you with a description of the noises that are present if any.

D&D Rangers Suck and it's 3e's Fault!

 If I was a pretty girl and I asked you what was special about you, you understand that I'm asking what is it that you can offer me that other guys can't. Your specialty is therefore what you can do that other people cannot do, or what you can do better. Rangers were special because they were the only ones who could do survival, then in 3e devs added the skill system which took what made the ranger special and made it available to everyone else, trivializing the Ranger. To compensate, devs gave rangers lame powers like animal companions which anyone can get b/c fantasy, and devs made rangers partial casters at early levels and whoopy for that. Who isn't a partial caster these days?

By comparison, the 5e Rogue can sneak attack for consistently more damage than rangers and rogues can also put expertise into survival. 5e Druids can cast good berry with a first level spell, 5e Clerics can create food and water (3rd level spell?), the 5e Outlander background can AUTOMATICALLY forage enough food for a party of 4 (or 5?). Furthermore, wilderness exploration is very non-present in 5e. Rangers suck because they don't have a specialty anymore. Also, who can describe what a ranger is without game mechanics? Can anyone even do that!

I recommend making the 5e Ranger a flavor or subclass of either Fighter or Rogue rather than it's own mid class. Alternatively, everyone play OSRIC instead. The SRD for OSRIC is free online. Seriously, for perspective, go read what it says a Ranger is compared to its other class options. You will see why ranger used to be special but now it isn't.

Economics in TTRPGs

 BASICS

An economy is a closed system where goods and services are produced and traded. For instance, the local economy of your town, the regional economy of the Mediterranean, the global economy of Earth, or hypothetically the galactic economy the Milky Way. How well or how poorly people are living (called the standard of living) within an economy depends on production. Production means what people can make and how much of it they can make. People have to make stuff to trade stuff, and they have to trade stuff to have other stuff.

COST OF LIVING

If the average person in your setting earns a wage of 5 Silver Pieces per day, then the cost of food, water, and shelter should total less than that. Otherwise, no one buys anything because they can't afford to, and so no one will earn anything because nothing is being bought, and the economy doesn't work.

SUPPLY AND DEMAND

If there is a market demand for a product or service, then the market will find a way to supply it. If there's no market demand for something, there will be no market supply. Do you really think the that the average person needs healing potions? Not if the average person earns 5 silver pieces per day, and the cost of a healing potion is 50 gold pieces. This means alchemists and alchemists with work are extremely rare.

SILVER OR GOLD?

Your setting's currency system ought to have a silver standard rather than a gold standard. At the time of writing this, an ounce of silver is worth $30.00, and an ounce of gold is worth $2,466.00. That means that the value of gold is 82 times that of silver. If a gold piece is a US dollar, then a silver piece is a coin with a value of 1.25 cents, not the neat 1 to 10 conversion rates given in your TTRPG book. Values are based on SCARCITY. Food, water, and shelter are much more common than gold. Would you trade a $10 silver coin for a cheeseburger or an $820 gold coin? Only merchants and nobles use gold coins.

FIXING THE ECONOMY IN YOUR TTRPG

Whatever you do with money in your TTRPG, don't worry about it feeling realistic, just worry about it being simple and feeling fair to the players. If possible, big IF, you want players to be able to develop an intuitive understanding of the value of a silver or gold piece in-setting, similar to how they might have an appreciation for the value of a dollar. Apply some basic principles of economics to your setting. Healing Potions are not a common household item like cough medicine. Common household objects, meals, and stays at the traveler's lodge don't cost 1 whole gp. Emphasize that people make a lot of their own stuff.

Primer for No Speech Mechanics in TTRPGs

INTRODUCTION

A primer is something that prepares you for a new idea. This might be a long one! So far, this document is over 3.2k words. I'm almost as verbose as the Angry GM. In my experience with roleplaying games and conversations about them, people seem to think that speech mechanics are necessary and important, or for some reason, FUN? I want to suggest to you that speech checks were not always a part of roleplaying games. Think about that, and DON'T make any assumptions about the regularity or depth of roleplaying before speech mechanics were added. Don't assume roleplaying was somehow less prevalent or serious in the before times. In D&D at least, speech skills were added to the game with the publication of 3rd edition, 25 years into D&D's existence. Players got along fine before that. Charisma represented one's aptitude for leadership and was primarily used to determine how many followers you could lead. It did not represent your appearance or how charming you were.

If you wanted to have a conversation with an NPC, you had a conversation; either that, or you described what you would say and how you would say it, and the GM would describe how the NPC responded. In a no-stakes or low-stakes conversation, the GM roleplayed his NPC, and if the PC made a fair proposal, there would be no need for the NPC to reject it. In a conversation where there were stakes, (something significant to gain or lose), then it was up to the player's creativity to convince the NPC that it was in their best interest to help the PC. I'll teach you how to do this later on. 

COMPLAINTS

Here's my first complaint about speech mechanics: SPEECH MECHANICS are for video games. Why's that? Because game mechanics are necessary ONLY for simulating actions we cannot do ourselves, and video games as a medium have a few more limitations. In a live roleplaying game with people, we cannot hit each other with swords, so we have a mechanic for that. We can however, persuade, intimidate, and deceived each other at the table. Therefore, speech is an unnecessary thing to mechanize. In general, I believe unnecessary mechanics make a game system needlessly complicated which means it's harder to learn, harder to play, harder to run, and harder to prepare a game for.

For all I know, Charisma checks might have started in video games, which have limitations. If I could prove conclusively that Charisma rolls began with say Fallout 1 for example, I would use that as evidence to make this case and argue that you'd be using tools that were given to computers for the purposes of handling human interactions, but you're not a 90s Mac or PC and you don't need to use those tools. To reiterate, rules are for simulating actions that we cannot do, but we can have conversations at the table, and we can use our judgement about whether to create a character who is a poor speaker or better, and to play our characters accordingly.

There are games that do not mechanize speech (for example, GURPS and Cogent Roleplay don't have a personality stat, all versions of D&D that I can see prior to 3e use Charisma for reaction, loyalty, and hiring rolls, that's it). These are some other games I've heard of that supposedly don't use speech rolls, but I haven't verified myself: Troika, Cypher System, Into the Odd, Mausritter, Electric Bastionland, Principia Apocrypha, and Cairn. Cairn in fact in a section called Principles for Players, under a subsection called Agency, states your stats do not define your character, they are tools. In other words, stats should NOT define your character to the extent that it affects your agency. I've heard Realms of Peril has a charisma stat but is loose about when / how to use it. Knave has a charisma stat, but I hear Knave 2e might not. I've heard Dungeon World (powered by the apocalypse) might just be RP over Mechanics enough to disregard the stat. RuneQuest (one word), Fate, Numenera? I know for a fact that Lamentations of the Flame Princes (LotFP for teh win!) explicitly states Charisma does not represent your beauty, appeal, or personality, and that the player must portray their character! This is way James E Raggi IV is the goat.

Here's my second complaint. In my experience, speech mechanics discourage player engagement. I have played low-charisma characters in types of games which emphasized dice rolls for speech. Essentially, I played characters not suited for an entire aspect of the game based on the rules of the game. Therefore, the rules of the game actively discourage me from trying to have conversations with non-player characters and from engaging with the setting. Even if the GM set the difficulty of a charisma check to easy, rules as written, that meant a 50/50 chance to fail to get what I wanted whenever I talk to anyone. I think it's fair to say that most players expect moderate difficulties instead of easy ones, which usually means a 75% chance to fail with no speech skill bonuses! This creates some disconnect in my mind where I could just plain make a damn good argument, then the GM calls for a roll (because the rules say so), I fail, then the GM has to come up with some arbitrary and unsatisfying reason why my argument was rejected, and it feels contrived. It feels like a badly written scene in a movie. I find it unsatisfying and immersion breaking. It doesn't FEEL FAIR. Most importantly, and this might get a little meta, if I the PLAYER use my own communication skills, it's not fun to roll a die for the CHARACTER'S communication skills. It feels punishing.

But wait, there's more! Before you start preparing a defense of speech rolls and preparing an explanation that speech rolls somehow do not discourage player participation, or that it encourages player participation, I submit for your consideration a hypothetical game table with one high-charisma character and a bunch of low-charisma characters. Yes, one player at the table makes a character who has a stat that says they're better at talking, even if the player is average or below average. Shy players will immediately stand back and let the high charisma character do all the talking, as well as players who are only here to kick ass and chew gum or hang out with their kids. And all players who are strategically minded will rationalize that one character has a better talking stat, and in a decision that might count as a form of metagaming, they will stand back and let that character do all the talking. This also diacourages Roleplay and engagement. This isn't all players, but many players. In fact, most players will recognize that when you create a character, you either commit to a high speech character, or you neglect the skill because most games encourage optimizing and min-maxing. So, you have some high stats and some low stats to allocate somewhere, might as well stick the high stats where you want to excel at, and then dump the low stats elsewhere. Mid-stats do what? 

What do you think of alignment in D&D? I think charisma is just another roleplay restriction like alignment. You have no choice but to have alignment and you have no choice but to have charisma. The game designers of modern D&D use this roleplay restriction (the charisma ability and its skills) to balance social interaction with the other aspects of the game, namely combat and exploration, and these aspects of the game don't need to be balanced against each other. Gaming doesn't need to be this way. In my experience with D&D, no one enforces alignment. Most players self-regulate their alignment if they use it. Most new RPGs I've read don't use anything resembling alignment. I do not think social interaction is an aspect of the game that needs balancing! Roleplay your character. Treat social interaction like a puzzle and solve it with your own creativity.

Why do D&D 5e and other games with speech mechanics (so many games these days!) get applauded as well-designed games? To me, speech mechanics are a glaring weakness in a game's design. Do these game designers not recognize that players are actively disincentivized by their own games from playing the game? If it's a roleplaying (spelled r o l e) game, why are we using rollplaying (spelled r o l l) instead? Why is it important for there to be a line item on the character sheet that describes my character's ability to engage in conversation as well as rules for when and how to use it? Why isn't this something that is left up to the skill of the player, and the logic of the scene, characters, and story being told at the game? I would rather play a game where my character sheet and in essence the rules of the game don't effectively BENCH me for an entire aspect of the game, thank you very much. I do not see how this mechanic improves the game, and I think it's definitely not necessary.

Here's two games that are a bit more freeform and rules lite. Neither have alignment, either at all or as it is conventionally understood. Basic Fantasy Role-Playing Game (BFRPG) is a game that is based on D&D Basic from the 70's and 80's. In BFRPG, in the section where the game breaks down the six classic abilities, it tells you when you apply your charisma bonus or penalty, and it lists only three things: Reaction Rolls, Number of Followers, Loyalty. Rules as written, BFRPG has no charisma checks or even ability checks. Lamentation of the Flame Princes (LotFP) is another game based on D&D Basic. In LotFP, it explicitly states what charisma does not represent, and it explicitly tells you that the player must portray the character.

Before I move on for good, I'll remind you all in case you forgot that Skyrim has no personality stat! Speech gets you discounts at stores. Queue Darth Vadar's theme Imperial March for your Daedric Armor-clad beefcake on his way to get a hot deal! Praise Todd, it just works!

HOW TO TALK TO PEOPLE

OK, so as promised, here's how you do speech in games. First, the only mechanic you need is a roll to randomly determine the starting disposition of a randomly generated NPC, modified by the PCs reputation or something, with room for the Game Master to veto the need for a roll in the right circumstances. Established NPCs with an established relationship with the player characters do not need a die roll as they have their previous experience with the PCs to inform their opinion. Older D&D called this roll a Reaction Roll, and it was a 2d6 roll which meant it had a bell curve distribution that favored average results (like a neutral reaction) over extreme results (like immediately hostile or immediately friendly). I speculate that this was intended to simulate what it would be like to meet someone random in real life. People tend to not have a strong opinion of complete strangers.

Let's discuss Persuasion. As an FYI, in D&D 3e, this skill was called diplomacy. Diplomacy does not require charm, thought it helps to be respectful. Diplomacy is about two parties finding compromise. Simply put, I want something you have, here's what I have to offer. It's a trade offer. That's it. Two parties who are interested in making a trade try to find an agreement that is mutually beneficial. People who are fair and who are engaging in good-faith diplomacy understand this might mean some compromise. You're not trying to take advantage of the other person. Your goal is to get something out of them, and to make it worth it to them. That encourages them to trade with you again in the future, less they get a bad taste in their mouth or buyer's remorse. Everyone wins. This for that, tit for tat. No, you cannot seduce the dragon. Don't even try. Seduction BTW is IMO a bad player behavior because it ruins the tone of the game, and the mechanics of the game should not support it. Charisma and Persuasion sounds like they could be multipurposed for seduction. Nay. Reject.

Let me ask you this before moving on. If you find any of this primer persuasive, do you think that's charisma or intelligence? I'm not speaking. I'm working out ideas and just trying to make sure they make sense. In that regard, are there any of you who think charisma should be restricted to charming people only and not dull speakers who just make a lot of good points and do it clearly? Are you at least having second thoughts about only using Charisma for speech?

Now for deception. Most people are decent folks who assume that most other people are also decent folks. When someone tells you something that seems plausible, you don't usually doubt it. Let me repeat that for you in case you missed it. If a story is plausible, most people don't doubt it. "My girlfriend left me, my dog died, and I got let go from my job this week." is a plausible lie. All of this misfortune in one week? Unlikely, but stranger things have happened.

Now, the important question is what does this person want out of you? We assume that when someone lies, they either want something or they want to avoid something. If this person then asks if you can buy them one drink, that sounds reasonable, and you might not have any objections to the request. If this person asks you to pay for a meal, that's kind of pushing it. If this person asks you to pay for their hotel room, that's a really big ask and you'd have to be really generous to say yes. If this person wants to stay at your place till they get back on their feet, that's also a really big ask and you might even be afraid to say yes or no.

A person might still believe in the lie because it's still a plausible lie, AND at the same time, they can also object to fulfilling the liar's request. Belief in the lie does not mean behavior will be affected by the lie. Some people might suddenly become skeptical, maybe because they're more untrusting or cynical. So, it's possible that they now DOUBT the lie simply because you asked for too much. Even still, when a person suspects you of lying, few people are going to be able to say THEY KNOW YOU'RE LYING. In fact, most people are too nice to accuse you of lying. To catch someone in a lie is not so simple, and accusing someone of lying wrongly is socially embarrassing and might make you feel guilty if the lie turns out to be true, especially if their story is about hardship. Catching someone in a lie usually requires finding details in a story that contradict other details, or details that contradict some other knowledge. You have to interview them. When someone gives you a simple lie, there's not that many details. If a person gives you a detail like "I got fired from my job as a builder from Bob's World Building Company," you now have some very concrete details. Maybe you know Bob from Bob's World Building Company, maybe you work for Bob and you don't know who this person is, or maybe you ARE Bob and you didn't fire anyone lately. Lies, in other words, need to be simple and plausible, and whatever it is you're trying to con someone out of or into needs to be somewhat reasonable or the lie becomes suspicious.

Now for Insight. In D&D 3e, insight was called Sense Motive. It was explicitly used to contest lying, and nothing else. To be clear, it was not an idea roll *spits*. It was not a psychic power that gave you all the answers or gave you certainty that someone was lying. It was not divination magic. As described in my explanation for catching someone in a lie above, you're a reasonable person. If someone's story doesn't pass the smell test, YOU DO NOT NEED TO ROLL. Useless skill! When you talk to an NPC and they tell you a story, if you really want to probe them for more details, just act like you've taken an interest in their story and just ask them questions to get more details out of them. More details mean you're more likely to find something that doesn't fit into place. It's hard for people to remember details they make up, or to keep them straight. And complicated stories are difficult to make up. Interrogations and interviews are ways people can find contradictions in the story.

Now for intimidation. By the by, I have a question for you. Do you use intimidation to creep people out? What if you wanted to? Just asking. For reference, if you did something creepy in-character, I think most GMs would just say, "yeah, that's creepy. Good job." We don't need a "creepy" stat. So why do we have an intimidation stat? If you're 7 feet tall and jacked, and you're irate and threatening indiscriminate violence, most people would find that intimidating. If you call for a roll for that, I will pull this game over. I will turn this game around right now! I mean it! Just watch me!

In order to do intimidation, you need something to legitimately threaten someone with. That's it. It's about having leverage over someone. A viable threat. Historically in many cultures, being thought of as a coward was a shameful thing. Some people might even prefer death to being a coward. Even average people might not give into yelling and screaming and threats of violence. So, you would intimidate people in secret rather than openly. That way, they're less likely to put on a pretense of bravery to impress anyone else and in effect they get to maintain their dignity. In addition, other people (witnesses) aren't going to have firsthand knowledge of you going around and openly threatening people, which is generally detrimental to your reputation.

You would NOT roll intimidation to demand a police officer or soldier to get out of your way if it's their job to stand in your way. By the same logic, you would not roll intimidation when threatening an enemy. If, however, you defeated half your enemies in a combat and your side still looked fit, you might shout a demand for their surrender or for them to flee with an offer to spare the rest of them. That's viable because you've demonstrated that you are dangerous to them. The GM would make a roll called a Morale Check in past editions of D&D. This was a roll to randomly determine how random NPCs felt about fighting. But one roll only, no piggybacking or dogpiling. A successful morale check meant the enemy has decided they're not giving up no matter the costs. Morale checks were an ordinary part of ALL combats (except maybe set piece combats). Further, it does not require an action *scoffs* to yell "gtfo losers and we'll spare you!" By the way, add this to the list of complaints; if yours is the type of game that makes GMs and players question whether it's a (major) action, or a minor (aka bonus) action, or a free action to yell a threat at someone, that's the kind of game that can go straight to hell. That's lousy design logic. What kind of world are your rules trying to simulate! Eff you!

To reiterate, intimidation requires having something to threaten someone with (like my ability to threaten you with shame for poor use of the rules and to affect the way you use them as in the end of the last paragraph). If you were in a street gang with a reputation for making violent threats and following up on those threats and getting away with them, then people took you seriously and gave in to your threats or suffered. If you told a city guard that you know a prostitute who could describe his birthmark to his wife, that could be an example of a viable threat if it's true. Were I a PC trying to coerce some behavior out of an NPC, I would also consider simultaneous use of black mail with bribery; Show them the stick, then force the carrot on them. Now they've accepted a bribe, and you can threaten them with that too. Intimidation is about threatening people, and you need something to actually threaten them with before they'll cave. If you have nothing to threaten them with, they'll just be offended and rightfully so, and so a FAILED attempt to intimidate someone, which can be determined WITHOUT ANY DICE, can and should backfire. Congratulations on making an enemy out of someone by being an asshole and nothing more.

CONCLUSION

So that's it! An explanation about why speech mechanics are stupid in a live TTRPG with live people, and how to actually use the so-called skills in real life or in play. So, when would you use speech checks in a game? What if you thought speech checks were fun and cool? Pfft. You don't. You want to use speech checks to SIMPLIFY the game because you either A don't feel like roleplaying every damn thing, and that's fine, just default to yes for all reasonable requests and no for unreasonable requests; or B you suck at talking and want to skip it because it's hard. I believe that part of the value of roleplaying games is that they are tools for teaching and learning, so learn to talk to people here and now, and stop using mechanics for every damn thing! Or maybe you think that speech mechanics somehow give the game some needed structure. With the exception of turn-taking and logical progression, actual conversations tend to be free-form and so mechanics can make a conversation conspicuously inauthentic, and stopping a conversation to roll dice is like pausing a movie! Stop it!

Substitute 3d6 System

I like the idea of learning to play paper and pencil rpgs by substituting a d20 with three standard six sided dice (3d6) because they're very common and you might not always have access to your fancy specialty dice. In other words, a 3d6 system. There are some differences between a d20 and 3d6 that will surprise and confuse you if you don't review the math. Refer below to this magnificent chart I made based on probability of outcomes rolling 3d6. Rate means rate of meeting or beating the result.

Let me simplify it like this:

1. An easy challenge is an 8.
2. A medium challenge is a 10.
3. A hard challenge is a 12.

But choosing a target number is not that simple. 3d6 is unlike the d20 which essentially makes 5 easy, 10 medium, and 15+ hard. Be aware, with 3d6, moderate results (8 to 13) become common and extreme results (3 to 6 and 15 to 18) become rare. Rolls are more likely to barely succeed or barely fail. Dice rolls are more predictable and chance is less of a factor.

Target Numbers
Pick a target number for a skill check based on the probability of success and adjust based on the player's modifier rather than an arbitrary DC based on easy, medium, hard. For instance, let's say your player is performing a skill check. You determine that the task should be challenging such that they have a 50/50 chance to succeed. A 10 is the same as 50/50. They have a +3. Tell them to roll 13 to succeed. Bear in mind, someone without any bonuses will have an approximate 17% success rate performing a skill check with a target number of 13.

A Game with Small Modifiers

To play an rpg by substituting 3d6 for a d20, you need to re-scale all the numbers including armor class, challenge rating, bonuses, penalties, and other modifiers because any small modifier matters a lot.  You'll probably have to adjust numbers impromptu too. A +2 is enough to make a hard challenge into a medium challenge and a +4 is enough to make a hard challenge easy.

Critical Success and Critical Failure

You have an approximate 4.5% chance of rolling a 5 or lower and likewise to roll a 16 or higher; therefore, treat a natural 3, 4, or 5 as critical failure and treat a natural 16, 17, or 18 as a critical success.

Advantage and Disadvantage

Rolling a 4d6 drop the lowest / highest is going to feel like the 5e advantage system, but that is going to increase rolls by an average of 3.5 which is substantial. Consider assigning a more modest +2 bonus for advantage and a -2 for disadvantage.

 

d66 for Tables: 

Roll 2d6 for a 6 base percentile die. Treat one d6 as a tens place and one d6 as the ones place, and you can roll any number from 11 to 66 excluding numbers with 7, 8, 9, and 0. You can roll 36 different results.

RPG Games: Guns v. Swords

No offense Spoony, but the gun is the stupidest RPG weapon ever and your brain is all clogged up with a sparkling blue buildup of benign nerd rage gunk and rainbow, glittering crazy goo. Love your stuff, btw. The number one rule of RPGs is the hero always uses a sword. If the RPG in question has no swords, it's not an RPG. No exceptions. In fact, if the supposed RPG has no swords, it doesn't technically exist. I know because I watch "Through the Wormhole with Morgan Freeman."

To reiterate, the gun is a stupid RPG weapon. How is it that my characters who use guns can do more damage because they level up and gain strength points? It doesn't make any sense unless they throw the bullets; probably flick them, in fact. Guns don't improve because you hit the gym. In a fantasy setting with monsters the size of a house, it only sensible to bring a sword the exact size and shape of the front door. Only a complete moron would bring a gun to a giant monster fight. If Luke Skywalker defeated the Rancor with a blaster, you'd shout "Fuck you too, movie!"

If you think about it, Vincent, Irvine, and Sazh, are the worst characters in any RPG ever. They're down right lazy. Even Aeris brought a magic battle staff and jumped in. Vincent just sort of hangs out in the back and even practices his little gun twirl while Sephiroth perversely skewered the poor girl. Irvine is just as bad. He and Sahz like to work on their performance trick shots while the party does actual work. At least Barret was creative enough to invent the cyber gun-arm and he'd even occasionally strap on a giant pair of atomic powered scissors or a chainsaw.

Face it, if you're in a party with people wielding a magic sword, a magic wand, and a magic bow with magic arrows, and you're the git bringing the gun, get the fuck out. A bullet from a gun you can bring to fight a giant monster with armored hide is as useful as a bee sting if the bee has no venom. Your gun better fire poison or turpentine darts if you except to be useful. I'm just saying when it comes to the fantasy setting, any fantasy at all, you can pack heat, but don't bitch to me when the evil wizards and fire breathing dragons nuke your sorry corpse because you put all your skill points into jacking off. Shithead.

Did anyone really bother to understand how the SeeD special forces soldier actually rolls? Your weapon is more like a fancy utility knife in case the sorceress catches you in between casting fuck off spells and summoning teh devil. Seriously, why carry a gun when you can Bolt 3 a guy? Unlike a gun, magic never misses or fails to do max damage. You can even successfully fry a whole group of sharpshooters with a wave of your hand. Only rarely do you encounter foes who eat magic, and that's really what the gunblade is for because those kinds of monsters take hits like small woodland creatures.

Three words: Ammo and Fuck you. U.S. soldiers carry field packs weighting 75lbs - 150lbs. You can't get away with that crap in fantasy. Uh uh. We need as much inventory space for all the piles of gold and treasure, you selfish asshole. Ditch the gun and trunk of ammo and carry your weight, dammit! I'm making a new rule: If we have to forfeit any loot because your stupid ass can't fence, we get your sister. Eat shit.