From: David Cake (davidc@cs.uwa.oz.au)
Date: Tue 08 Feb 1994 - 03:46:31 EET
>
> In all three cases, the people who complain loudest will be those with "the
> most toys" -- people with high skills stand to lose most from a decrease in
> Critical and increase in Fumble chance. As an egalitarian type, who'd have
> cheered on the trollkin who gave Rurik one where it hurts, I enjoy this. A
> straight penalty to skill chance or cast chance would go all but unnoticed
> by those "heroic" Rune Lords, etc.
>
The problem is the penalty is too much a universally debilitating penalty when
used with criticals and fumbles. Given even a +10 modifier, no one criticals.
Why bother training to 150% when you get a bit tired and then critical
only as often as the guy with 10%? Not to mention there is very little
difference between the fumble chances. Mr 150% fumbles 11% of the time, Mr 10%
fumbles 15%. So we make fumbles much less important? Hell, why not remove them
altogether!
I thought that the original RQ rules where simple and relatively
elegant, and now we start sprouting bizarre rules like different classes of
fumble just to make fatigue crippling vs. high skilled folks? Hmmpph.
And Nick, while your egalitarian feelings are noted (probably by the
Lunar thought police), please remember that for those of us that like to play
high powered campaigns, and there are quite a few of us (I suspect because
high powered RQ is more religious and heavy roleplaying than other games, and
so does not descend into munchkinism as quickly), one of the major
motivators behind RQ4 was to make high powered combat more interesting.
Turning it into a fatigue competition, where Endurance is the most important
spell, is not going to help.
I really dislike this new mechanic of adding to dice rolls. In some
cases I can see its usefulness - but making it part of fatigue rules , which
makes it part of combat, just mucks around with game balance completely.
I give it the big rejection, and as I have already told Oliver, I
not only do not support it as part of RQ4 but will not use it if it does make
it into the final draft.
Cheers
Dave
>
> ====
> Nick
> ====
>
0,,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:34:28 EEST