Re: (TFT) An Even More Radical Re-Imagining of TFT...

[Peter von Kleinsmid <pvk@oz.net>]

Oops. Sorry, I mis-read the suggestion. Self-correction:

I was thinking the basic system was "hit on 21+" for melee, not "hit if 
your roll is greater than the enemy roll". All of my comments about the 
value of using "Option 4" become irrelevant, because it appears to me now 
what I meant by "Option 4" is actually the same as the main suggestion, and 
the actual "Option 4" has no effect - it just changes the way you talk 
about the numbers. So to respond to some of my own comments:

At 09:46 AM 1/21/04 -0800, Peter von Kleinsmid wrote:
> In fact, your basic system (rules 2 and 3, without option 4, and without 
> the "if critical" part of rule 3), I would expect to butcher-high DX 
> characters without armor. ...

Ok, with my re-read of the proposal, the skill does help defense, so this 
is ok.

However, the suggested rule does seem to result, about 90% of the time in 
one of every pair being hit. 5% is a critical miss, and there's usually a 
5% chance of a tie (which is undefined - either both hit or both miss, I 
suppose - hopefully you'd roll to see which, so both an exchange of hits or 
misses could be possible). Exchanging blows will be quite rare. While some 
fights may proceed faster, slug-fests between accurate well-armored 
opponents may go more slowly, since usually only one per turn will hit.

As for Captain Kill, he's still a valid example of why there needs to be a 
cap on the skill bonus for an all-out attack. However in the suggested 
system, adding the same amount to everyone's melee skill would seem to have 
no effect at all - the highest roller still hits, and doesn't get hit.

PvK
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"