Originally Posted by coredumped
The system makes sense in theory.
The current implementation is shit.
One of the examples is the kid thiefling dying due to snake bite. You either get lucky on a roll or she dies. It's retarded. Keep the dice roll if you want in order for me to maybe convince the bitch to not be evil to the child, but if that fails, then at least let me carry through with my intentions. If I could not save the kid by talking the bitch down, then let me intervene and fight them to protect her.
This is just one example of course, there are lots of other interactions such as this throughout the game where the player gets locked out of options due to RNG. It's poorly done. Failure could be interesting sure, but it's not in this game.

This is exactly why the die rolls should stay exactly as they are. Context is important, but is completely missed in this scenario. She's not planning to kill the child. She's planning to have a thief locked up until they're done with their ritual and release her. The fail circumstance is set by the child herself, who panics. Even if there was an option to attack, you wouldn't be able to prevent that by killing the druids. No matter what, you're always going to be locked out of options due to RNG, even if you "win" a roll, you're going to miss something.

"But Rob, I don't want to feel bad". That's great, I understand that, I do. I felt bad my first time in the grove, where I did fail that roll. But I didn't default to "I have to win this no matter how long it takes", I defaulted to "It's an RPG with consequences to not passing a roll". "But it's not fair, that check is too high". Go ahead, list out your arguments, and post them with a D20 roll, and I'll let you know when you change my mind. Here's a hint: You're going to need a natural 50 on that D20. While I tend to believe there shouldn't be a roll there at all, I believe that because I believe that it shouldn't really be possible to convince the de facto leader of the grove that thieves shouldn't be locked up, especially given what she stole. In three tries, so far, I have passed that roll twice. Lucky? Yeah, especially given my extensive history with RNG, and fail states, and considering that none of these rolls was save scummed to make.

What's lost in the "I don't have time for this" is that this is what RPGs with actual choices are all about, being able to replay for different results later. What's really ironic about it is, if the roll had no consequence, we'd be reading about things like "illusion of choice" instead... If this resulted in a game over screen, I might be inclined to change my mind, but as it stands right now? No. These pass and fail chances lead to different outcomes which, in and of themselves may be interesting. The immediate consequence of this fail may not be all that interesting, but what effect does it have on the rest of the story? I can't think of anything immediate, or in the rest of the chapter. Maybe the parents don't trust you when you lay out a plan for defending the grove, since you couldn't defend their child? That would be interesting. Interesting doesn't have to mean fun, however, or beneficial. There's an old Chinese curse, at least I've always heard it as credited to the Chinese: May you live in interesting times. I'm pretty sure they're not thinking "may every day be sunshine and rainbows" when they lay that curse out. That's why it's a curse, right?