Hi all

So, in my upcoming session my PCs are going to have to defuse (and not, as I kept accidentally typing, diffuse) a bomb. Well, actually more than one bomb, but that's neither here nor there. Anyway, I'm trying to nail down how I think that "defusion" check would work, so that I don't end up having to make something up on the fly for such an important check.

For context: the bomb is a thermal detonator, and it has been placed inside the chassis of an oblivious droid. The PCs will have to find the droid and either immobilise it or convince it to let them conduct some impromptu surgery before they get to the point when they can defuse the bomb. It should be pretty tense.

This is what I've got so far for possible results of the check:

• Basic success is easy - the bomb is defused.
• Basic failure is harder. My instinct is that this should not have the device explode, and instead allow the PCs to try again. There is a timer on the bomb, and it's gonna be pretty **** tight, so being forced to take the time to re-attempt the check is a definite cost.
• Success with Despair - I have no idea what to do with this one. Success implies "yes, you defused the bomb", but you want that Despair to be worth something. I guess I could do a "breaks your tools" thing, but that seems really, really lame for a check that (hopefully) will be as tense as this one. At the same time, I don't want to deny the players their success. Thoughts?
• Failure with Despair - The worst possible outcome, you might say, so surely this should set the bomb off. No?
• Success with Triumph - Again, I have no idea what to do with this that is actually interesting. I guess "reduce time" is pretty good, especially as (as I mentioned) there is more than one explosive to deal with, but I feel like there should be something cooler here. Any ideas appreciated.
• Failure with Triumph - This one's actually a bit easier: if we assume that basic failure allows a re-try, then we can just apply the upgrading rules on that check (as per RAW); narratively, this is quite easy to explain, as the PC gets to grips with the situation they're in.

NB: Yes, I have listened to the Skillmonkey episode on this subject. Skillmonkey is great, but it generally (and, in this case, specifically) only really deals with Despair and Triumph in the context of Failure and Success, respectively; there is no "Success with Despair" or "Failure with Triumph" suggestion.

Success with despair can mean the character suffers a critical injury or a wound. You can also think of some kind of exposure to dangerous chemicals as a side effect that makes the player sick or noxious, perhaps upgrading their checks for a while. Or, if it's important, damage to the droid carrier. Misinformation is a good one--if they have to disarm more explosives down the road, despair can mean they made a mistake but didn't realize it, and future attempts to replicate their past 'success' could be problematic.

Success with triumph can mean salvaging the explosive, though that might not be ideal for you. If you have them deal with more than one explosive, it could mean a permanent downgrade or reduction in difficulty on future attempts. If there's an investigation going on, there could be left a clue or something that leads the PCs to the culprit.

Here's the thing about a bomb that needs that kind of action to defuse: it had better do it's job if it goes off, otherwise the panic is overrated. If the PCs take some wound damage and maybe a crit...honestly, what's the big deal? And in this game you can easily survive a thermal detonator. So Failure with Despair setting it off means TPK or something tragic (the hostages die, the passengers get sucked into space, etc).

I would try to make sure there is more than one chance to do something about the bomb. For these kinds of things I prefer to use some kind of bean counting, e.g.: you need 5 net successes to defuse the bomb, and you have 5 minutes (5 rounds). Also, when constructing a grid I always try to separate the axes so they aren't dependent on each other. So:

Basic success: you make progress towards your goal

Basic failure: a flat result means you make no progress, but also don't lose ground. You lose ground at the rate of 1 per net failure. So if you needed 5, got 2 successes last roll, but one net failure this roll, you need 4 more.

Advantages: for 3A, you find a way to gain time, slowing the clock by freezing it or whatever. You can also do the usual things with advantages, like giving yourself a boost die next time ("I see the yellow wire!")

Threat: for 3T, the GM can reduce the time left (I wouldn't use this on the last minute...)

Triumph: you've stopped the clock for a number of minutes equal to "skill ranks"

Despair: you've set off a security trap, a small charge equal to a grenade that goes off now. Or some henchmen show up and need to be fought off. Or...

At this point you can combine things, like if they meet the 5 success requirement and there's a Triumph: they can keep the bomb and use it for their own nefarious purposes later; or it has some parts that are very valuable; or ...?

44 minutes ago, edwardavern said:

Skillmonkey is great, but it generally (and, in this case, specifically) only really deals with Despair and Triumph in the context of Failure and Success, respectively; there is no "Success with Despair" or "Failure with Triumph" suggestion.

Agreed, I always wondered about that, but he does an amazing job getting the gist of it in 10 minutes or so.

Success with Triumph - they have figured out the mad bomber's methodology - all attempts to remove the other bombs get a blue.

Success with Despair - they *think* that they have figured out the mad bomber's methodology - all attempts to remove the other bombs get a black.

The only way I would have the bomb go off is if they get Failure with Despair - and then they get the countdown - with an Athletics attempt to get away/reduce damage taken/take cover... but it's bye-bye to the droid, and all of the information that it carried...

44 minutes ago, edwardavern said:

Basic failure is harder. My instinct is that this should not have the device explode, and instead allow the PCs to try again. There is a timer on the bomb, and it's gonna be pretty **** tight, so being forced to take the time to re-attempt the check is a definite cost.

For this I would just say it didn't work. The time is still going down, but their attempt to cross the wires, while not defusing, also didn't make it go boom. It just didn't do anything at all.

45 minutes ago, edwardavern said:

Success with Despair - I have no idea what to do with this one. Success implies "yes, you defused the bomb", but you want that Despair to be worth something. I guess I could do a "breaks your tools" thing, but that seems really, really lame for a check that (hopefully) will be as tense as this one. At the same time, I don't want to deny the players their success. Thoughts?

This is really dependent on the situation. For example, let's say the bomb was wired into a ships internal systems. The Despair could be that in defusing the bomb, the PC inadvertently disabled the hyperdrive (because the hyperdrive never works), and the ship is about to be under attack by TIE's! Or all of the power was disabled in the ship, and now they are adrift, without power, gravity, or life support, and have to find a way to fix this new problem. They went from quick immediate death, to slow, agonizing death. There really isn't any one answer for this, you just have to consider the situation and environment, and how you could alter an element of the environment in a way that makes things worse for the PCs.

You forgot to include Threat/Advantage into that equation, so I'll summarize those here.
Failure + Threat Not only did they not defuse it, but now the timer is going faster! And they only have seconds instead of minutes to defuse it! I think that's probably the most thematically appropriate use of threat, that and tossing lots of strain damage on the person with the cutters. I mean, defusing a bomb IS pretty stressful of a job. Or, to yoink a great example from The Abyss, the lighting goes out in the area, and defaults to emergency lighting, washing out all the color differences in the cables, making it harder for them to tell which one to cut.

Success + Threat Damaged tools, excessive strain damage, slightly damaging other systems of the thing about to blow up (similar to Despair above, but instead of total system failure, it's just...quirky now. The environmental control systems are stuck on a colder temperature than normal, and everyone is suffering a setback for the next day or so, due to it being COLD in the ship. Minor stuff like that.

Failure + Advantage They didn't defuse, but have an idea on which cable is the right one, and get a boost on the next attempt to defuse the bomb.

55 minutes ago, edwardavern said:

Failure with Despair - The worst possible outcome, you might say, so surely this should set the bomb off. No?

Yep, I would say BOOM is definitely a valid result of that.

57 minutes ago, edwardavern said:

Failure with Triumph - This one's actually a bit easier: if we assume that basic failure allows a re-try, then we can just apply the upgrading rules on that check (as per RAW); narratively, this is quite easy to explain, as the PC gets to grips with the situation they're in.

Yep, sounds good to me.

Here's one you didn't list:

Failure + Triumph + Despair

For this one, I would again take from a classic movie, Lethal Weapon 2. They fail to stop the bomb going off (Despair + Failure result), but the Triump allows them to delay the detonation a few seconds (one turn), perhaps letting them find some cover to hide behind, and not be at ground zero for the blast.


So yeah, really, just try and be flexible. If it were my table, I would try to make sure the bomb was wired into some kind of mechanical device. One because it would be easier to hide it that way, and 2, it would allow you the above mentioned options for Threat/Despair, of having the other mechanical bits getting screwed up as a result of the defusing.

57 minutes ago, edwardavern said:

Hi all

So, in my upcoming session my PCs are going to have to defuse (and not, as I kept accidentally typing, diffuse) a bomb. Well, actually more than one bomb, but that's neither here nor there. Anyway, I'm trying to nail down how I think that "defusion" check would work, so that I don't end up having to make something up on the fly for such an important check.

For context: the bomb is a thermal detonator, and it has been placed inside the chassis of an oblivious droid. The PCs will have to find the droid and either immobilise it or convince it to let them conduct some impromptu surgery before they get to the point when they can defuse the bomb. It should be pretty tense.

This is what I've got so far for possible results of the check:

• Basic success is easy - the bomb is defused.
• Basic failure is harder. My instinct is that this should not have the device explode, and instead allow the PCs to try again. There is a timer on the bomb, and it's gonna be pretty **** tight, so being forced to take the time to re-attempt the check is a definite cost.
• Success with Despair - I have no idea what to do with this one. Success implies "yes, you defused the bomb", but you want that Despair to be worth something. I guess I could do a "breaks your tools" thing, but that seems really, really lame for a check that (hopefully) will be as tense as this one. At the same time, I don't want to deny the players their success. Thoughts?
• Failure with Despair - The worst possible outcome, you might say, so surely this should set the bomb off. No?
• Success with Triumph - Again, I have no idea what to do with this that is actually interesting. I guess "reduce time" is pretty good, especially as (as I mentioned) there is more than one explosive to deal with, but I feel like there should be something cooler here. Any ideas appreciated.
• Failure with Triumph - This one's actually a bit easier: if we assume that basic failure allows a re-try, then we can just apply the upgrading rules on that check (as per RAW); narratively, this is quite easy to explain, as the PC gets to grips with the situation they're in.

NB: Yes, I have listened to the Skillmonkey episode on this subject. Skillmonkey is great, but it generally (and, in this case, specifically) only really deals with Despair and Triumph in the context of Failure and Success, respectively; there is no "Success with Despair" or "Failure with Triumph" suggestion.

• Basic failure - Perhaps instead of takes more time, the next check is harder? They've made a mess of the wires and circultboards, meaning that it'll be a pain to sort through.
• Success with Despair - You could go with the "Great, you shorted out the bomb by pumping 1.21 gigawatts through it. But you were in a rush so you forgot to ground yourself. When you wake up. . . ."
• Failure with Despair - Yeah, Boom is the obvious choice
• Success with Triumph - They manage to defuse the bomb in such a way that it's intact and they use it later down the road? You said there were more bombs - they now know the Bombmaker's "fingerprints" and the next checks are easier.
• Failure with Triumph - Yeah, what you have in mind works.

Also, relevant:

Generally, anything like this should be a single roll rather than an over-and-over thing.

In that vein I'd suggest that Failure with Triumph could result in it not being disarmed, but the character found some way to mitigate the damage when it goes off. The blast mostly goes in one direction; they found a convenient niche/hardened container/etc which blunts (not negates) the blast, etc.

Success with Despair resulting in the thing being disarmed at the cost of the PC being injured by volatiles is a good one. That or it could wreck something else important in the area.

5 minutes ago, Garran said:

Generally, anything like this should be a single roll rather than an over-and-over thing.

Normally I'd agree, but IMHO it depends what the bomb is for, how big it is, etc. If it's a "do this or the city is gone" scenario, then leaving it up to one dice result feels a bit flat.

1 hour ago, whafrog said:

Here's the thing about a bomb that needs that kind of action to defuse: it had better do it's job if it goes off, otherwise the panic is overrated. If the PCs take some wound damage and maybe a crit...honestly, what's the big deal? And in this game you can easily survive a thermal detonator. So Failure with Despair setting it off means TPK or something tragic (the hostages die, the passengers get sucked into space, etc).

I would try to make sure there is more than one chance to do something about the bomb. For these kinds of things I prefer to use some kind of bean counting, e.g.: you need 5 net successes to defuse the bomb, and you have 5 minutes (5 rounds). Also, when constructing a grid I always try to separate the axes so they aren't dependent on each other. So:

Basic success: you make progress towards your goal

Basic failure: a flat result means you make no progress, but also don't lose ground. You lose ground at the rate of 1 per net failure. So if you needed 5, got 2 successes last roll, but one net failure this roll, you need 4 more.

4

That's fair enough on the size of the bomb - I might boost it to something a bit more powerful. There will be innocent NPCs in the area as well - the GM the bomber is a sick man.

I hadn't considered using the "number of successes" idea for this; that's interesting. And, potentially, it presents another way for the bomb to go off: you could have a certain number of failed checks = explosion, or something. Could rack up the tension nicely.

1 hour ago, Bishop69 said:

then they get the countdown - with an Athletics attempt to get away/reduce damage taken/take cover... but it's bye-bye to the droid, and all of the information that it carried...

1

Definitely have the 10-second dash from the explosion as an option. That poor droid though...

1 hour ago, KungFuFerret said:

Failure + Triumph + Despair

For this one, I would again take from a classic movie, Lethal Weapon 2. They fail to stop the bomb going off (Despair + Failure result), but the Triump allows them to delay the detonation a few seconds (one turn), perhaps letting them find some cover to hide behind, and not be at ground zero for the blast.

That's great, really good idea. Thanks.

1 hour ago, Desslok said:

Success with Despair - You could go with the "Great, you shorted out the bomb by pumping 1.21 gigawatts through it. But you were in a rush so you forgot to ground yourself. When you wake up. . . ."

1

Love this. Probably my favourite suggestion.

1 hour ago, Garran said:

Generally, anything like this should be a single roll rather than an over-and-over thing.

Really? I genuinely disagree with this - for me, having just a single roll feels anticlimactic. I don't necessarily want them to be rolling "over and over", but I would want the tension to build...oh god, another failure, and now there's only 2 minutes left...quick, spend all of the destiny points...everyone get ready to run, this is the last chance...etc.

Thanks for the suggestions, all - my adventures are always so much better for the help this community provides!

Also, anyone know why all my quotes have numbers in? Keeps happening, can't work out why.

1 hour ago, Desslok said:

Snip

You, you amuse me, continue you frustrated penguin, continue. *gives you a cookie*

44 minutes ago, edwardavern said:

Could rack up the tension nicely.

That is the main point. I agree with the earlier point that multiple rolls often = boring, so I don't use the "multiple rolls" thing unless there is a way to introduce and ramp up some kind of tension throughout.

For me, sometimes it helps to consider the desired outcome and maybe abstract it a bit more. So, for example, the actual goal of disarming the bomb is presumably to save the people, buildings, and things that the bomb threatens to destroy.

So success + despair might be you can't disarm it, but you somehow have just enough time to grab it and toss it into the bay/grab it with your Batplane airspeeder and fly it out into the bay/jump into the tub with a bomb blanket/use the Force to fling it away/etc - it's safely away from everyone and everything - yay! Success with despair - you disarm the bomb! Then a secondary bomb activates, or a squad of killer droids, or some other secondary threat (or maybe an enemy escapes while you're busy with the bomb). Boo!

Failure - I just had this come up, actually. The PC failed to disarm the bomb, but rolled several advantage, so I had them fail to stop the bomb, but they got clear. Blew up a building, causing civilian casualties. they're stormtroopers that are eventually supposed to defect to the Rebellion, so that works fine - builds the guilty consciences a little, and shows the Empire's callousness a bit, as the bomb going off wasn't mentioned by their superiors at all.

If it was some kind of mega bomb that kills everyone if it goes off, then I'd probably try to structure the entire situation a little differently - either provide for multiple skill checks, making it something like a skill challenge from 4e or a 2d20 style extended task, or have it set up so that failure doesn't inevitably and only lead to death - unless it would make a fine climax for the game.

Failure + Despair - well, I'd hope they have a destiny point to flip, and then maybe flip it and say something like "you wake up in Bacta tanks".

Threats or a Success with a Despair could mean that you rendered the Thermal Detonator useless and un-salvageable (which, I am sure the group would like to recover!)

reminds me of a T shirt I once saw