From: Graeme A Lindsell (gal502@cscgpo.anu.edu.au)
Date: Wed 16 Jun 1993 - 18:46:27 EEST
Carl writes:
>
> John Medway writes:
>
> J>2. Keep it simple and consistent. Modifiers always affect base chance of
> > success, and the Critcal/Special/Fumble numbers are derived from this
> > base.
>
> Yup. One reason behind the "add to the die roll" version was
> (is) that it doesn't require one to calculate a new critical
> and special number every five rounds. Sure, most of us can do
> 73/5 in our heads, but why should we alienate the math-deprived?
>
The add to the die roll system is very simple, I agree. The problem as
I see it is that it is not compatible with the rest of the RQ modifier
system. Try this example for Ron the Rune Lord, 125% sword attack:
i) In battle with trolls, he has his leg cut from under him and has
to fight from the ground (-20%), a troll priestess casts Dullblade 6
on his sword (-30%), and the Blindness on him (completely blind, -75%).
Total modifier -125%. Rons chance of success 5%, special 1%, fumble 5%
ii) Everything else working fine, Ron gets tired: +5 to roll. Chance
of success 120%, chance of fumble 6%!
The problem is that the two systems are in confict. If you want to
rewrite the RQ resolution system to use die roll modifiers, go ahead,
Pendragon and Rollmaster use systems where mods to skill and to die
roll are identical, but I don't think using two conflicting systems
is a wise addition to RQIV. I think this is the largest single change
to the RQ system in the RQIV draft.
Graeme Lindsell a.k.a gal502@huxley.anu.edu.au
0,,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:27:48 EEST