[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: (TFT) Re: H3 System Revisited: Skewing the Bell Curve
In a message dated 1/10/2007 12:54:34 AM Central Standard Time,
> Hi Dan,
> Sorry it took so long to comment on this, things
> have been really busy and I just have not had the
> time / energy to study these rules before now.
> I like the smooth increase in difficulty as you
> go down the columns in your table.
> I was never much bothered by the always succeed /
> fail 4.5 % of the time. I agree it is illogical
> that it does not change at all. However, I tend to
> think that real combat is much more chaotic and
> random that TFT shows so the rules that weird things
> happen 4.5 % of the time are good enough for me.
> The auto-failure / auto - hit tables for four and
> more dice were always a big pain in the butt. I
> eventually just memorized them but they are a knock
> against the speed and damn few table look ups that
> I've always liked about TFT.
> Very good work.
> Warm regards, Rick.
A different preference here: I prefer to just dump auto-failure/auto-hit
chances (and critical hits & fumbles). For one thing I'm going for cinematic
combat rather than realistic, and for another my characters make a fair number of
rolls outside of combat where things are realisticly *not* so chaotic.
If I did keep them, though, and wanted to get away from the fixed 4.5%, I'd
use a roll-to-confirm. E.g. if a character had adjDx 16+ a roll of 16+ that was
still less than or equal to adjDx would require a second roll at -10 to
confirm the success. Likewise if the character had adjDx below 5, a roll of 5 or
lower that was above adjDx would require a second roll at +10 to confirm the
success. Yes this does require the occasional extra roll, but only 4.5% of the
time for characters with extreme stats. 95%+ of the time, the player would only
need to make the ordinary, simple roll.
Likewise, if I went back to using criticals and fumbles, I'd put in rolls to
confirm there, too. That way the number of criticals would be a fixed fraction
of *successful* attacks rather than a fixed fraction of *all* attacks
(including those that missed). And similarly, the number of fumbles would be a fixed
fraction of *failed* attacks rather than of *all* attacks.
Just my 2 cents
Erol K. Bayburt
Evil Genius for a Better Tomorrow
Post to the entire list by writing to email@example.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to firstname.lastname@example.org with the message body