Not Always ‘Yes and...’

As players and DMs we are taught “Yes and...” very early. This is to encourage us to play while moving things forward, to not block the ideas of others and to foster a joint story. This leads to some unforgettable moments when both sides of the screen lean into creating a story. But something people don’t want to do is talk about how sometimes “Yes and...” isn’t the answer needed. It can actually kill the experience and the story when overused or used in improper situations.

Now before you go grab those pitchforks and torches to flood my comments hear me out. While it is a great technique for new players and DMs to help them become comfortable and familiar with a new system while providing a framework for RPing with little to no extra work, it’s just that. A beginner technique. It’s great for what it does in laying the groundwork but there is much we can do to elevate our gameplay beyond that.

At the table the improving breaks down into two categories we see with everything - players and DM. This is pretty standard since either side of the screen has different responsibilities to make sure the game is engaging and fun for everyone. On the players' side “Yes and...” can quickly become frustrating because it seems to ping pong things in every which direction. A group, especially a large one, is going to have a lot of ideas and thoughts about the path ahead and what should happen. The players have to act as a kind of council with each other trying to find a path forward but that means compromises. This can’t be done unless the players are honest about what their character, and sometimes the players themselves, want. To communicate this we need to be comfortable with the word NO. I’m not saying hard stop everything, we aren’t shutting down a government here in a tantrum. What I’m saying is in order to build compromises we need to know where everyone’s boundaries are. This gives the framework we can work in to build the story together.

For DMs our job is to act like the world the players exist in. It’s not always going to give in and to do so would make it seem less real and immersive. There will always be avenues by which to reach a goal or accomplish something but it might not always work the first time or happen via the path the players want. That’s okay. It is in no way a failure. It’s actually a great part of the game and building this world. Without conflict, there would be no chance for heroics, no moments that make everyone shout at the dice and no stories to tell others for years to come about taking out that dragon with a combo of immovable road and flesh to stone. A world that pulls the players in to create conflict for them to overcome is our goal. But that can’t be done with simply “Yes and...”. Don’t get me wrong for new DMs this is a great tool. You are already trying to take on the task of managing expectations, balancing encounters and pillars of play, learning how to pull in the characters further into the worlds you build. It’s honestly a thrilling and overwhelming experience already. It is also a trial by fire that needs to happen to strengthen you for each campaign you run after. The best way to grow those DM muscles quickly is with “Yes and...” by having your players throw whatever they can at you forcing you to improve scenarios, dice rolls and outcomes on the fly in a never-ending merry go round. Often the first game or campaign a new DM runs feels like pure chaos for these very reasons. It’s a lot for the brain to wrap around so going with reckless abandon into the flow helps manage some of that. But as you gain your footing as a DM you should be able to direct that flow rather than letting it drag you along.

But what can we replace “Yes and...” with and how do they work in our games. It’s fair after being drilled for so long that it’s the only way to go we are left questioning how to evolve our gameplay. I would suggest slowly incorporating these into use so they don't feel too overwhelming especially as they all take a little bit of prep on the DMs side to be comfortable. Well, let’s look at a few things we can add to our toolbox and how they’d function in action to show ya what I mean.

“Yes but...” This is half of our classic example of failing forward. It lets the players succeed at what they were attempting but at the cost at an additional complication. They get that jewel but set off the alarm. The paladin manages to sneak inside of the manor but has lost their armor to do it. Using this starts having your players practice thinking about cost vs reward. Often as I introduce this to new players I will also integrate a way for them to push the roll or skill check to see if they can tip it over from that 'Yes but...' back to the 'Yes and...'. However I make it very clear it might drop things squarely into the next option if they fail at the same thing a second time. When I say the same thing I mean attempting the same skill check or the same outcome without coming at it another way. Like failing your Sleight of Hand check under pressure of the guards trying to find you so you use the check again for a higher DC to make it before being spotted. Where the first time the 'Yes but...' but be that you make it thru the door but you lose your tools in the process the 'No and...' might be an unopened door and guards rushing you.

“ No and...” At first this option can seem a little harsh to players that aren't use to it, or who aren't sure what are going on. I try to make very clear the outcomes to players while introducing this concept to them. There is a very high likelihood your situation will go badly, especially if you are pushing after an almost 'perfect' success. It also lets the world feel more alive in that things react to your players as they become aware to work against them. Providing them a foil in the moment for the players to sharpen themselves against rather then just some Big Bad or a monster of the session. Often times I find that I use this one the most when the tension is high from the situation being one that perhaps the players weren't as ready for as they thought. Or if they decided to try a brute force tactic for someone prepared for that. After the first few times you'll start to notice your players thinking about what the risk is for certain approaches and if the reward is worth. This does mean though that if that is the direction your story is in you need to make sure that the reward you are offering is something your players AND their characters would find worth it.

“No but...” The other half of our classic fail forward example. They do not succeed in getting the outcome they wanted but are instead offered something interesting that provides either another option entirely or a different way to attempt a similar path. You weren't able to disarm the trap so the item inside was destroyed but were able to roll out of the way so the chasing guards to the brunt of the damage. It should be something that is less directly beneficial to the players goal for that action then a 'Yes but...' would be, but should be a step forward all the same. Alot of the time in practice this ends up being a failure at the current check or task but shows another opportunity the players can attempt. You couldn't talk your way into the party but do notice that the kitchen door's lock looks weak - charisma failed but maybe some well placed strength will still get you into the manor.

This is seen in many other systems, a way to fail but to fail forward or to fail without halting the story. It does not cut the players or the DM off because of a terrible dice roll from their goal completely. It might shift where their focus falls or the best way to accomplish their goals. This allows boundaries from the world to be put in place but not lock in the game from moving forward. Now I am always a fan of learning from as many different sources as possible. I know most of you reading this play D&D with Pathfinder coming in as a hot second. So lets pull from a few systems that use this fail forward and utilize it in our games.

I am a huge fan of Monsterhearts 2 and one of those reasons as how they resolve dice rolls. You roll 2d6 and add 1 of the 4 stat modifiers that apply, this keeps things pretty simple to call out during game play when rolling with what players are doing. From there some actions have added effects for more then 10 but in general 10 is a success, 7 to 9 is a success but complicated and 6 or less is unsuccessful so get ready for repercussions. Its kind of like a gentle in for this style of resolving rolls which I like alot. But it also emphasizing how crazy this can make things as this rule set is built to lean into the chaos it can cause as you are a teenage monster.

When it comes to newer narrative heavy TTRPGs that show this off I would be doing a disservice not to mention Vigor. The outcome of the rolls are less about the skill check and more about the character and how they are tied to the story in that moment. Do the things that make up them - threads, roots, and natures - provide help at the roll. But also how does that help them play out the tiers of success? Well it gives this breadth to the game that allows the players to shift how they think about these kind of checks. Its less about how high of a modifier or die you are rolling and more about the character and the story. The more relevant they are the more dice they can roll to have a chance at moving up the Tiers of Success to a better outcome. Which makes incredible sense the more you think about it. Of course a magic student from the dark woods would have a higher likelihood of countering that black magic spell while having it go well. Sure the fighter could do it but their solution might simply be to leap in front of the spell to save their friend, but that would mean a sacrifice a 'No and...' or a 'No but...' depending on how powerful the spell was.

Lasers & Feelings is a one pager by One Seven Design, the rules for everything are simplified to just embrace the improve and failing forward mindsets. At first it might be hard to see where they have baked the things we've talked about into their rule set but its there under rolling dice. On the scale of 0 to 3+ success is where they have laid out our options - 0 is 'No and...', 1 is 'Yes but...', 2 is a normal yes, and 3+ is 'Yes and...'. Having this system lets the DM to improve the world with a little more of a tool kit despite being a single page of rules. It also lets players try whatever crazy thing they want to while know that there is something worse then just not making the roll. Making them have to balance in there head the risk vs reward as part of the RP. Honestly I love using this to introduce people to TTRPGs or at an event where you aren't sure someone's familiarity.

What we are looking for here is a system with a range of ways for us to interact with each other. At the end of the day TTRPGs are about collaborating to build a world and have a good time with some friends. The more tools we have to leverage for both sides of the DM screen the better that is able to happen. With that little rambling over with, I’m JustKay your regular DM Dalliance on the web and I’ll see you next post.