Forum

I'd like some opinions on how your table interprets a few rules. The thought process behind this is that I like to minimize rolls and especially if there is nothing or very little at stake, why roll? Stakes mean that you have something to lose as well, not only gain.

1. Hiding camp, PM p.148
It doesn't seem to cost any "camp actions" to hide it. Nor does there seem to be any downside to trying to hide it. Why would anyone not hide their camp? I have been playing with the idea of it causing a -1 to making camp skill check due to time being devoted into hiding it etc. Or maybe failing hiding the camp causes a mishap of some kind, not as hard as making one but something.
Overall I'd like hiding the camp to be an action that causes players to think is it worth it time/effort wise. Now it is a no-brainer.

2. Movement, foot PM p. 58 and vehicle p. 82.
As I understand it, you can roll mobility after fast AND slow actions if you really want to haul ass to get extra hexes to movement. So that is two rolls. As I understand it, the vehicles follow the same logic (with DRIVING roll), although the example of Diaz driving IMO is not the clearest since shes only pushing for extra movement on the slow action.
Anyways my main point is with foot movement: Why not roll extra hexes? Once again there is nothing to lose here. I believe at some point in alpha failure meant falling down but it happened too often and made PC's look totally incompetent. Still, I would like there to be some downside to going for the extra hexes. I want players to go "I could get behind that corner if I really try but is it worth it? What if I fail?". HAve you implemented any downside to extra hexes MOBILITY roll?

I am thinking along the lines of "failing forward" here: maybe a mag is dropped in all the fuss when you are running, maybe a weapon/vehicle/piece of gear is stored the wrong way when hiding camp causing it to lose durability etc...

The idea is that if you fail a skill roll, something has gone wrong. It is up to the Referee to decide any consequences for a failure. Sometimes the failure itself is consequence enough (combat skills for example), but other times the Referee have to come up with a consequence why the skill failed. If you sprint for example and failed, could mean that the character have slipped. A failed attempt to hide your camp could mean that the character have drawn attention to his camp building.

Yup Fenhorn exactly my point but I worded it poorly.
What kind of "consequences" have you given players for failing extra movement or hiding camp?
To be honest the whole "failing forward" thing feels a bit tacked on in TW2000. I love it and since I am very much familiar with pbta and "Forged in the Dark" -family of games I find it semi-easy to come up with consequences. But the TW2000 book is pretty thin on examples, and sometimes I like to pick the brains of other GM's on what their consequences are for some actions.
For failing movement I have gone:
- Drop an item.
- Short of breath, -1 to action next round or two if applicable, mby -2 if shooting with scope
- Finger slips on the trigger, lose D6 rounds (good for civilians with little combat training)
- Of course the classic of going prone
- Sprain an ankle, 1 point of damage
- Gear hits something, item/weapon loses durability

The camp hiding is a bit more tricky though. Usually I tend to attack players resources. Sometimes hiding it might mean it is not as comfy as regular meaning a STA roll to avoid something etc.

This could be worded better in the rules IMO.

Failing Forward is used for skill rolls that is important to let the story go on. A fantasy example (easier to come up with examples in that genre) of this is if the players search for a secret door into the temple, a failure shouldn't stop them from finding the secret door because that would stop the adventure, the story. The GM in in this case should instead let the group always find the secret door but if he wants a skill roll, let that be to avoid something bad to happen, like alerting the priests and guards inside the temple. If the outcome of the skill roll doesn't have such impact, then a failure is just a failure.

Consequences can be hard to come up with. Combat skills have consequences already (if you miss him, he will not attack you). You only make skill rolls when you do something dramatic or hard so making a mobility skill check to run further means that you do something difficult. A consequence for a failed mobility check could be that you fall prone or that he dropped part of his gear. I have used both of those for my players. It is hard to run in rough terrain after all, but sometimes the situation is consequence enough. If a player tries to run across a street to get from cover to cover and fails so i he standing in the middle of a street, then the situation could be considered enough of a consequence. Failing when trying to hide the camp, could just mean that the camp wasn't so good as you first thought, so not only is the camp not hidden, you have to roll on the camp mishap as well. Another consequence here could be that you draw attention to someone nearby, if there is someone nearby.

Yup I agree that there should be bit more guidelines. Especially to new GM's who are not so familiar with "story driven" -approach. And lets face it, TW2000 leans a bit more into the traditional rules -side than story telling, though I prefer the mix personally.
Story based systems like Blades in the Dark have pretty good rules and guideline on how "hard" you can go on the players with consequences, and in Blades for example you are pretty much supposed to tell before the roll what could happen if you fail it. PBTA has examples of "hard moves" and "soft moves" etc.
In TW2000 the consequences, if any, are left totally for the GM to decide and when the system is otherwise pretty heavily rules -based, some players might find it unfair and go "wait a minute! Why did my character drop his magazine? Where does it say so that I drop my mag if I fail my roll?" etc.

<>
In TW2000 the consequences, if any, are left totally for the GM to decide and when the system is otherwise pretty heavily rules -based, some players might find it unfair and go "wait a minute! Why did my character drop his magazine? Where does it say so that I drop my mag if I fail my roll?" etc.

They should know that failing a skill test will have consequences. When it comes to running extra for example, no one forced them to do so.

... and yes, there will always be players that wants everything in print but that would be a very thick and costly rulebook.

I'm not sure what the problem is here. The game allows a roll to fail with no consequences, but provides a "Push the Roll" mechanic. If you really want to hide that camp and fail your Recon roll, you have the option to Push the Roll. If you really need to reach that piece of cover in a hurry and fail your Mobility roll, you have the option to Push the Roll. Only then do you risk some negative consequences, 1 point of Stress for hiding the camp, or 1 point of Damage for running. Failing a roll doesn't automatically cause negative effects but it "tempts you" to have another go, which might result in negative effects.

I think OP talks about the consequence for a failed skill roll, not the possibility of taking damage when pushing a skill roll.
In combat for example, a player can make skill roll to run further. If there are no consequences for failure, there is nothing to stop a player from doing this every single time he moves, even if he doesn't need the extra movement. A Referee here should add a consequence for failing a running further attempt (a reason he didn't get any additional movement). With this in mind, players will only try to running further if they really need to.
For many skill rolls, it is obvious what the consequence of failing is, there are even mishap tables for some skill rolls, but for other skill (like mobility when running further), the Referee might need to come up with a consequence.

And again, this has nothing to do with pushing a skill roll, on the contrary, a reason a player might want to push a skill may very well be to avoid the consequences for a failing a skill.

The concept of consequences for failing a skill roll exists in all YZE-games to various degree. In Mutant: Year Zero for example, all failed skill rolls have consequences.

The concept of consequences for failing a skill roll exists in all YZE-games to various degree. In Mutant: Year Zero for example, all failed skill rolls have consequences.

Ah, right, so it's essentially about the "Art of Failure" section then (PM, p44). The "something went wrong" suggestion is indeed pretty vague and could do with more examples, especially when the first sentence under "Pushing Your Roll" reads, "Your initial skill roll reflects a safe and controlled action". If something goes wrong when doing a safe and controlled action it presumably isn't that bad. Maybe just a narration for dramatic effect of how the player "nearly" fell over when running. [EDIT] I suppose a consequence of nearly falling over is that it might attract the attention of an enemy and they might switch their fire towards you.

Mutant: Year Zero is a little bit of a hardcore when it comes to consequences for failing. It isn't not that much of a problem in MYZ because you only make important skill rolls there and important skill rolls always have consequences. Actually the first YZE-game that I have seen the problem is T2K4E and to be honest in just the extra movement rule.

They have the same concept in T2K4E of course, that you are not supposed to make a skill roll unless it is dramatic or dangerous or something like that but that leaves the mobility roll for extra movement. Without a fail consequence there is nothing that stops a player from making a skill roll just to see if het gets more move, regardless if he needs it or not. Sure the Referee could stop the player from making unnecessary mobility skill rolls because they slow down the game or he could tell the players that a failed skill roll have consequences, even if it isn't obvious.

I'm lucky, my players doesn't make unnecessary mobility skill rolls in combat, but they have also played a whole lot of YZE-games so they know that there should be a consequence for any failed skill roll, not just the skills that have a mishap table connected to them.