[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

*To*: <tft@brainiac.com>*Subject*: Re: (TFT) An Even More Radical Re-Imagining of TFT...*From*: "Ty Beard" <tbeard@tyler.net>*Date*: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 10:24:59 -0600*References*: <BAY4-DAV41Gmig3ScSv000099e5@hotmail.com> <017c01c3e02f$502088a0$8600a8c0@youroxg2elbf6o> <003101c3e037$e3e45140$e164a8c0@etclink.net>*Reply-to*: tft@brainiac.com*Sender*: tft-owner@brainiac.com

----- Original Message ----- From: "Neil Gilmore" <raito@raito.com> > I could see allowing a figure to reduce their DX in order to reduce > opponent's DX, but not increase it. If you don't have the technique, going > all out does NOT guarantee that you'll throw an effective blow. No, but all out aggressiveness and a willingness to take a shot probably does. It does in martial arts (my only area of experience) at any rate. We call it the all-out blitz rule and it's very popular with my players. > > Also, it's very hard for highly skilled fighters to cut down large numbers > > of faceless hordes ala the Conan movies. > > Personally, I don't see this as a problem. Read "On Thud and Blunder" > www.sfwa.org/writing/thud.htm, for the reasons why. Yes, I read that in a collection of articles about R.E.H.'s Conan some years ago. It was also reprinted in the Thieve's World RPG supplement by Chaosium. But sometimes I want to simulate epic fantasy, not reality. I'm proposing this rule for more cinematic campaigns. > > 2. Roll 1d20 for each figure and add the figure's DX and any applicable > > modifiers. Do this for all figures that are (a) attacking; (b) casting > > spells; (c) doing any action requiring a roll. Each figure makes a melee > > "attack" on every enemy figure in its front hexes. A figure's melee attack > > succeeds if his roll equals or exceeds the roll(s) of the target(s). > Combats > > can be handled in groups where convenient. A missile attack, spell casting > > attempt or other task succeeds if the modified roll is 21+. > > Too many dies rolls. No more than would occur in a normal TFT fight. > It removes the simple elegance of a single die roll for > combat. Well, the system actually seems to play quicker than normal TFT fights -- but this is based on my internal playtesting. I've not tried it with players. > It is, however, a good way to do opposing rolls. This can be quicker > than the usual TFT alternative, where both figures involved roll until one > fails, or one gets a critical success. This can take quite a long time if > the figures involved have high applicable abilities. Agreed. > > Options and Comments > > > > 1. Of course, the math can get flaky. One solution would be to express the > > attribute as a + or - number, with a 0 being the current equivalent of 10. > > So a fighter with an adjDX of 12 would have a +2 modifier. Success for > > missile spells and attacks happen on an 11+. That makes the calculations a > > bit easier. > > Personally, I dislike the d20 system (for TFT anyway), because I rather like > the bell curve of 3d6 (though I do recognize the problems with extreme > abilities). In both d20 and 3d6, an score of 10 represents 50% chance of > success. But in d20 11 represents 55%, and in d20 60-some%. > > In my (real-world experience, if that can be said to apply), the 3d6 system > more closely models reality. At the rarified upper levels of skill, a point > difference makes much less difference than a point at the mid-level. And at > the low level, nobody's hittig anybody. My reasons for preferring the d20 have been discussed before -- the archives have them, so I won't bore everyone with the same stuff again. Except to note that a d20 allows for very high attribute characters to be more meaningful (and very low attribute characters as well). A 2d10 approach would produce less of this benefit, but preserve the bell curve. Personally, I see no real benefit in a bell curve for its own sake. > > 2. On a d20 system, critical hits occur on a natural 20 (then roll 1d6 1-3 > > automatic hit; 4-5 double damage; 6 triple damage) and failures on a > natural > > 1 (then roll 1d6 -- 1-3 automatic miss; 4-5 drop weapon; 6 break weapon). > > For 3d6, simply make 16, 17, and 18 work like 3, 4 and 5 (and vice versa). > > Your crits happen with slightly more frequency than with 3d6 -- 10/200 vs > 10/216, and within that 30/60, 20/60, 10/60 vs 36/60, 18/60, 6/60 (numbers > massaged to make it easy to compare them). But you knew that. <shrug> Yep -- some distortion will inevitably occur when moving from 3d6 to d20. > > 5. A defending figure adds 5 (or 3 if using 3d6) to his roll, but never > hits > > a foe. > > This definitely messes up the bell curve. Howso? If you use 3d6, the bell curve is preserved and 3 is a close approximation of the effect of adding a 4th die. Is the 4d6 bell curve really all that fabulous? --Ty ===== Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com. Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body "unsubscribe tft"

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: (TFT) An Even More Radical Re-Imagining of TFT...***From:*"Neil Gilmore" <raito@raito.com>

**Re: (TFT) An Even More Radical Re-Imagining of TFT...***From:*Peter von Kleinsmid <pvk@oz.net>

**Re: (TFT) An Even More Radical Re-Imagining of TFT...***From:*dwtulloh@zianet.com

**References**:**(TFT) An Even More Radical Re-Imagining of TFT...***From:*"Ty Beard" <tbeard@tyler.net>

**Re: (TFT) An Even More Radical Re-Imagining of TFT...***From:*"Neil Gilmore" <raito@raito.com>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: (TFT) An Even More Radical Re-Imagining of TFT...** - Next by Date:
**Re: (TFT) An Even More Radical Re-Imagining of TFT...** - Previous by thread:
**Re: (TFT) An Even More Radical Re-Imagining of TFT...** - Next by thread:
**Re: (TFT) An Even More Radical Re-Imagining of TFT...** - Index(es):