Reductionism Roleplaying

I think about often because I see a great many systems that are lists of stats and weapons, and while that is useful, (and of course guides about culture and stuff), a lot of players can get hung up on designing the character and optimizing it.  I don’t think this is necessary or desirable, and over the years I have designed some systems that seek to do away with that idea.

CoActionDrama (CAD) Is designed with freedom in mind, but was supposed to be quick to set up, in practice it is as slow as any other system, and discussions with friends recently led me to think about the minimum possible nuanced system.  that’s an important idea, nuance, because any fool can come up with a system than just punches numbers.  I want something that I can run with thought and discretion, but is genuinely quick to set up and easy to run.

The reader will find the following, which draws on some34 years of Roleplaying experience to be similar to many things and nothing.


This is the character sheet.  you can see it devoid of almost everything, which does mean you can make note on it.  You need a single D6 to play.

The scores for each set are scribbled inside the circles, preferably rolled, but assigned as the GM sees fit.  Total to be, I suggest 10.  Could be more, maybe as much as 12.

Each category is a paradigm for those kind of activities.  Doing is not just about doing, it is about strength, agility etc.

Keep that D6 because it is the testing die.

So How would I use this as a character and a GM?

Say climbing a fence is a task the player and the GM are not sure about, will the character make it.  There’s time, not being chased, so the character has time to Think and Do.  The GM assigns a difficulty out of a 3-18 range, 3 dead easy, 18, hardest thing ever.  Average 9 or 10.  Gm sets a difficulty/challenge of 9, players has Thinks and Does of 3 and 4 respectively, rolls a 2, adding for a total of 9.  Same score.  The GM can decide that the wall required more Thought and less brawn, and fail the task, the thinking component was lower.  OR the gm can simpl decide that this is good enough.  If the player had rolled a 3, for a total of 10, the GM has to describe the event as happening, a success, if the die roll was only a 1 for a total of 8, a failure is described.

What happens if the pass is a pass automatically?  Well in all fairness there has to be a chance of failure, so the die is still rolled, if a 1 then it is rolled again, if it’s a 1 again, then the task is failed.


With this approach and some creative thinking, there needs to be no skill list, (the GM can provide a bonus or penalty of up to 2 for a declared expertise or incompetency), and a game can proceed with the smallest of setup and interference.

Now I need some people to test it with.

Leave a Reply