I'm finding that I really like having failure mechanics in my games. For those unfamiliar with the concept, the idea is that players gain a token or dice when they fail a roll they can 'cash in' later for a bonus on rolls when they really need it. DM Scotty's Luck Dice rules and the rules of EZD6 are the best examples of these kind of rules I can think of.
In my opinion it adds a really interesting dimension to games. Rolling hot still feels great - but failure becomes more of a choice when you can spend resources. Failing a roll also stings less when you know you are getting a bonus you can use down the road. Instead of just trying to build the most mathematically optimal character, it becomes important to manage your resources as well.
Going from EZD6 to playing a low-level 5e game gave me a bit of whiplash. It definitely doesn't feel good to know you have about a 50% chance of hitting an enemy or essentially wasting your turn. Nothing is more disappointing than waiting 10 minutes for your turn in combat for it to end in 20 seconds after missing your single attack per turn.
Recently I've been playing a lot of EZd6, and I'm planning on adding DM Scotty's Luck Dice mechanics to a game of Vaults of Vaarn I'm planning as well. I think I'd like to add some kind of failure mechanic to all of my games going forward.
What do y'all think about failure mechanics? Is it something you also play with? Are you curious about it? Or do you have negative feelings or experiences with failure mechanics? Let me know!
That sounds cool, I might check them out! I think it's hard to draw a balance between randomization and making games feel like luck isn't a huge factor. I love betrayal at house on the hill, but it definitely feels like luck is a huge part of the game. I really like King of Tokyo and Wingspan because they have a lot of randomization, but it always feels like you're given enough choices that the randomness doesn't matter as much.