From: Burton Choinski (burt@ptltd.com)
Date: Mon 21 Jun 1993 - 21:48:01 EEST
Joerg Baumgartner comments on rolls.
------------------------------------------------------------
| Opposed skill resolving with the last digit method:
| >Well, I don't think it would be too bad, after all you only need to know
| >your level of success, but maybe it would be easier using the "last digit
| >on roll" method.
|
| One still gets lots of results with the same level of success, and has
| to take care of those first hand. They tend to make up the majority of
| events, in my experience (average skills ranging 50 to 80%), and the
| standard system ought to be cut for this case, not for special cases.
| I still vote for the level of success solution whe applicable.
I tried the "level of success/hi-roll if same" system in my last session.
It worked pretty good for the non-combat stuff (we did not try it in combat,
but we do handle parries in the same way as dodges). If you used this for
combat it would get pretty bloody.
| What I would welcome would be optional variations of hit location
| determination - not necessarily an "aimed blow only" system, but a more
| generalized aiming area, e.g. by rolling d10 plus some modifier on the d20
| table. I always found it annoying that 40% of all hits in fistycuffs went
| to the legs. Honestly, even if one fights dirty and concentrates on hitting
| between the legs, one doesn't hit the knees this often!
We do not use the Melee table at all now...just the Missile table for melee
and missiles. Using the Melee table resulted in too many lopped limbs
as far as we were concerned. This ain't "Conan in Glorantha" :)
In general we use 1d10+10 for high hits (punches, attacks from mounted
characters to unmounted characters and 1d10 for low hits (ground people
attacking riders, kicking). It seems to wok well enough.
-- Burton
0,,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:28:00 EEST