Josh Sawyer on Historical RPG Project, Save-Scumming, and More

Obsidian Entertainment’s Josh Sawyer continues to crank out answers to community-submitted questions over on his Tumblr page, with the latest topics including the mechanics in Fallout: New Vegas used to deter “save-scumming”, whether he’d consider licensing Ars Magica or Darklands for the planned historical RPG project, Pillars of Eternity combat mechanic effects, and more. A sampling from the latest post:

yellowthirteen asked: Hi Josh. I’ve seen you mention previously how some mechanics in New Vegas were implemented in order to deter save scumming (e.g. hard speech checks). Do you think that, in general, systems which are susceptible to save scumming also tend to be less fun for players? Or would heavily percentage/RNG-based game elements be just fine in a world where save scumming didn’t exist?

Tabletop RPGs are the world in which save scumming doesn’t exist, so I think it serves as a reasonable subject for comparison. In TTRPGs, most GMs/DMs/storytellers/god emperors won’t allow players to re-roll or take back the consequences of a stand-alone check (e.g., trying to pick the lock on a door). The game may have built in mechanics for retrying a check, but otherwise the player has to live with the results. Some games also have a caution to let the results stand, e.g. Burning Wheel’s “let it ride” recommendation won’t let the player test again unless the circumstances surrounding the test change significantly.

In these situations, the tension/exhilaration/relief/anguish comes from the “no take back” stakes. Here’s a video from a D&D game we played a few years ago. Darren’s character would die if the incoming damage were over a certain threshold:

https://www.instagram.com/p/kFyR2sJxy4/

That sort of reaction happens in a TTRPG because you can’t reload from it. The chaos of die ranges normalizes in a combat, which is why save-scumming is not usually as big of a deal outside of early combat save-or-die effects.

There is also a different feeling for many people that comes from rolling physical dice rather than seeing a RNG spit out a result. A lot of people like an element of randomness in games. It increases tension and uncertainty. It doesn’t really matter that people are colossally awful at understanding probability (e.g. listen to people cry about “bad beats” in poker). The emotional aspect of rolling is more compelling than the rational analysis/problem solving aspect of considering the odds.