Input on Cycle of Play

When revising my texts in Forged Facets, I have run into a structural issue I haven’t considered before, that I like to get some feedback on. I’m thinking about how I have described the cycle of play, and where you’re supposed to roll dice.

In short, the cycle of play consists of three reoccurring phases, or steps, in which 1) everyone collaborates on the narration through conversation, until a dangerous situation occurs. Then, 2) the involved persons have to face a challenge, which consists of a player describing what a character does, the Gamemaster describing what factors affect the challenge, so the dice can be rolled. Finally, 3) during the outcome phase the Gamemaster evaluates how the results from the actions affect the character(s) and the world, which in turn affect the narration (the first step) in the next cycle.

I can see and argue for making dice rolling in both phases. So my question is; When would you find it most natural to roll the dice; in the second phase (A) or the third phase (B)?


Thanks ahead, /C

Whether it’s the end of step 2 or the beginning of step 3 doesn’t seem to matter, except for aesthetic reasons.

In actuality, rolling dice is the bridge between those two steps…is there a mechanical significance to linking it to one step in particular that I’m not seeing?

You could just put a big “ROLLING THE DICE” between the two on the diagram? Maybe put ENCOUNTER DANGER between 1 and 2 and GO BACK TO TALKING between 3 and 1?

3 Likes

I have posted this question on Reddit today as well, and got the same type of feedback. I have realized it is a presentation thing, and how the game flow is communicated to the players, I just didn’t see it. The diagram will be used in a more detailed version later, with annotations and substeps similar to a scrum process flow.

Thanks for your input. Together with other I’ve had today makes me realize I need to revisit the text from a more cosmetic perspective. Big up!

1 Like

Would it be wrong to suggest there’s a space for rolling dice in both ‘B’ and ‘C’? The start of B seems to be the correct time for the GM to roll dice is the crisis/encounter/problem or threat is acting on the player or for determing any random setting gacts/events that resulted from A. The end of B would be the place for rolling the dice for player response or for a player instigated attack. The start of C is a place for rolling dice that determine larger effects and/response to the players action - but I think this exchange of dice can go back and forth between player and GM multiple times in many systems before A resumes?

Ultimately though I also wonder about the efficacy of such procedural rigor. Do the stages need such clear delineation? Does offering such a structure risk rigidly forcing a universal structure onto aspects of play that need not be so defined? What’s gained by formalization?

1 Like