The Test

One of the first things I tell people when describing Talisman Adventures RPG, is that the game has a system that really puts the focus on the players, and that the crux of this is the game's central Test mechanism. Of course, many other RPGs use a central Test system, and many would also put a fair claim to being player-centred, so this description does require further elaboration. Thus, this.

Talisman, like all the smartest RPGs, is a d6 system. Polyhedrals are fun, and the "fistful of gems" appeal was surely one of D&D's big draws back in the Times of Yore. But even from the very earliest days of RPGs, savvy designers eschewed the exotic lure of the d20 and the side-use-as-caltrops of the d4, to stick with the fundamentals of the familiar, yet ever-open-to-statistical-creativity, d6. Traveller and Tunnels & Trolls being fine early examples. 

Talisman adventures uses a 3d6 Test. A given activity has a difficulty number assigned to it (e.g: 9 for routine, 13 for challenging, 17 hard, 19+ for heroic). Skills, abilities and circumstances add (or subtract) modifiers to the roll. If the target or higher is rolled, the player has achieved a success. Clearly, the magic of the bell-curve alone gives the 3d6 roll an edge over the flat percentages produced by your d20. Where Talisman's Test really gets interesting and picks up some colour and game-play fun, is how samesies (ie any doubles or triples rolled) are treated.

You see, rolling a Success in Talisman is not enough. Any standard Success (ie, with no samesies) is generally considered to be a mixed result - the desired outcome achieved, but with some drawback, disadvantage or extra cost. For example, in combat, this would involve striking your foe, but taking some damage in return.

To get an unqualified success (in game terms, a Great Success), the player needs to roll doubles somewhere among the three dice. Triples will result in an Extraordinary Success, and some better-than-anticipated or legend-inspiring outcome. 

There's more: one of the dice rolled is a different colour from the others, and referred to as the Kismet Die. Unlike the other dice, rolls of the Kismet Die cannot be altered by special abilities or effects. A roll of 6 generates Light Fate, which might be banked by the player or trigger some immediate bonus effect (or spent to turn a Standard Success into a Great Success, but never a Great into an Extraordinary, triplsies must be rollsied). A roll of 1 by contrast generates Dark Fate, triggering misfortune, or indeed being banked or spent by the GM (e.g. to activate a colourful range of Enemy special abilities).

I referred to the player rolling doubles on a Test. What happens when the GM rolls doubles? Prepare for your mind to be blown: The GM does not roll for tests! OK, I don't doubt that there are other game systems that have tests rolled by the players-alone (I'm unfamiliar with them myself though), but the concept is rigorously applied in Talisman, and well-explained throughout the rules.

It's not just that players make the rolls, the GM is encouraged to allow players to outline the parameters of success and what outcome they expect from their roll (which the GM will arbitrate and interpret with their usual Godlike finality, naturally). It is around this aspect where I have found some real scope creativity from the players is strongly encouraged and rewarded, leading to some interesting situations, and a more collaborative style of story-telling and play.

There are lots of standard situations (combat, exploration, encountering Strangers) that can be resolved by what risk becoming standard checks, but as players and GM get familiar with the mechanism, it will hopefully be put to more novel use. 

I ran an adventure which had reached its climax (and the end of our allotted game time) with the heroes facing a horde of foes overwhelming in number, and the Golden Wotsit in an unreachable position. So between them, the players described their implausible and comedic heist, we agreed what Tests they would roll against, and the hoped and feared outcomes, then between us we narrated the final, show-stopping outcome, wherein the Ghoul masqueraded as a Cabbage Salesman, the Troll demanded the return of his stolen Pitons, and the pixie made an Indiana Jones style swoop for the Wotsit, exeunt all pursued by a befuddled and outraged horde...

Hm, maybe you had to be there. Anyway, as I play, I find myself increasingly inclined to push control of what will happen next into the hands of the players. There are admittedly times where this works better than others, and I find that the challenge can be to manage it in a way that doesn't undermine the players' suspension of disbelief. There needs to be a  firm foundation of GM-expected outcomes and situations (ready to be amended or dispensed with), or things risk getting very random and chaotic. 

That the game system is fun to play has been a baked-in failsafe, regardless of whether players want to take the lead on the narration. Combat is fast-moving and entertaining, following the exact same Test system, though with a lot of suggested Tests for actions and outcomes to give a solid framework to fall back on. The level of challenge for a bunch of heroes can vary a lot depending on the make up of warriors and spell-casters, but this again tends to lead to creativity (either in the levels of outrageous mayhem inflicted, or in the schemes and tricks to avoid annihilation). 

There's a lot more to be said on this subject and I will likely return to it again. Next week: Spooks, Enemies, and Scenario Ideas.