The Enquiry Table has been one of the mainstays of our story-jamming activities. We use it for miniature wargames as well, and it would have easy application for a conventional role-playing game, though this is not something wedo any more.
Its last use was for the Strange Seas game at the Nunawading Wargames Club where I unleashed it on a totally naive audience. My impression is that it was received well. It certainly received questions and requests for copies.
Through repeated use I have found room for improvement. The original nine categories were derived from Mythic. When used, this seems to cause a brain freeze for many people as there seems too much choice. Often, the selection of category was either in the middle (50/50) or the extreme (million to one). The intermediate categories are so similar that they are redundant.
Reducing the number of categories to seven greatly improves this situation. Million to one, to Long shot, to A possibility, to 50/50 is an easier progression. Another advantage of the seven point scale is that it fits perfectly into a FUDGE/FATE interpetation, and I have added those alternate words for alternate use at the bottom. I used Steffan O’Sullivan’s new interpretation: VG (Very Good) FUDGE, as I think it is a superior and intuitive scale.
Below that I find that the seven point scale elegantly fits our Silhouette dice system, and below that the Savage Worlds dice system as well.
Technically, this tool covers everything required for a role-playing, story-telling, and wargame system. And it has built in conversion to the published systems that I admire.
The picture at top is just for illustrative purposes. Get a nice version here: enquiry resolution table v11
BEUZEVILLE 
Hi, I am very interested on the table, it looks like that condense a lot of options and info to be used in RPG, but, how do you use it for wargames.
I think that an example could be very enlightening.
Thanks, Slorm
It depends how you and your group like to handle ‘doubt’.
A very simple and minimal use of the table would be in the case of visibility: can this figure see that figure? You have a look at the table and the terrain models, check range, consider atmospheric conditions, how alert the watcher is and how secretive the other character is. Then you come up with a description of that probability ranging from there is only a Million to One chance of being seen, through to he Cannot Fail to be seen. Usually your probability lies somewhere in between (in fact the table gets the most use when the rules are not clear and it is a 50/50 chance). This is a judgement call, interpreted by your own common sense and spirit of fair play, rather than depending on a concrete rule.
Then roll your two six sided dice of different colours and find the answer. Let’s say the answer was ‘No, but’. We would say, for example, that the figure did not see the other figure, so he cannot take any direct action such as shooting or raising the alarm. But he is suspicious, so we would allow him to make a move in that direction to investigate. Or if the result was a ‘Yes, and’, we might say that he gets a clear view of the enemy and can take an extra action to raise an alarm, or get a free shot, or whatever is suitable for the game being played.
You can take this all the way and do away with [nearly] all rules if you really want to, making every event and interaction a negotiation that gives a probability that results in a number of outcomes. Des this figure successfully shoot that figure? Does this figure successfully jump the chasm? And up the scale: does this battalion respond to orders and form a square this turn? And so on.
This last form does not suit everyone. It’s no good for tournament play, for example. But it is related more closely to Matrix Games, which can bring a lot more life into a game.
Hope that helped.
Andrew
Let’s see, in the next scene, please tell me what is wrong, or what do you think that could be done on a different way using the table.
My thief wants to open a lock, he is fair opening them, first dice score 5, them a 6, so Yes (as described). He opens the door and enter in the room, there there is a guardian,.
Is he surprised? Long shot. 2 and 3. Not but…. he has his weapon ready.
As the guardian isn’t surprised, he attacks to the thief.
Guardian. Fair sword. Thief Good Dagger, Good Avoid
Guardian attacks, 6 and 3, Yes as described. Thief tries to avoid, 3, 1. Not but.. The thief can’t avoid the impact, but it hits on a nonvital area. The weapon wound one level lower.
Sword damage Good. In this case instead Good, is Fair, Guardian rolls 6, 2. Result Yes as described. Hoe can I read de damage in the table?
If I follow USEME ruleset, the wargame that I normally use 6 (Guardian) against 2 (Thief), +4 for the Guardian, the Thief is dead.
If I follow SBH, the Guardian has doubled the Thief, he is dead.
As the result was “Not, but… ” we can consider that the Thief is lethally wounded, but the Guardian is not going to give him the “coup de grace”. So… the guardian, call for help, and the thief is brought to the infirmary.
Something like that? How works the damages?
If the table works like I have done, WOW, you have created the minimalist and the most useful table in the RPG/wargaming world. Congratulations
Thanks
You have just used the Enquiry table exactly as I would have done myself. Thank you for the compliment.
OK, Andrew.
As I am so happy with your table, I have explained the use of it on my blog, with some recommendations to be used with USEME.
You can take a look on it here: http://slormwargames.blogspot.com/2011/11/useme-enquiry-table-for-useme.html
That table is incredible!
P.D: You didn’t explain me how to read the damage on the table. Publish a short scene using it!
Two things, though.
When it say’s ‘Yes, But’, you are trying to think of something that did not go right. So the guard, for example, was not surprised. He was alert when the door opened and so the thief could not sneak attack him. BUT, even though he was not surprised, he might not have been ready to defend himself – he may have been facing the door expecting a friend – so perhaps you might have given the thief a first strike bonus, but not a complete backstab.
Secondly, feel free to use this table with your friends, or even incorporate it into a publication. All I ask is that you mention where you saw it first 🙂
Thanks,
Andrew
I see you have beaten me to it 🙂 NIce write up on your blog. Thanks again for your interest. Hope the Enquiry table gives you some good games.
Andrew
No doubt about it 🙂 It works smoothly 🙂
Thanks
Hello Andrew,
Could you send me that table as .doc or .odt to translate it into Spanish?
I have been using it for dungeon crawling, and it works perfect!