> > OK, I'm going to need some of the references to thes methods. Alex
>implied
> > that the d10 method would have the same rate of crits and fumbles as the
>D20
> > method. The "obvious" method of using 1s and 10s seems to contradict
>this.
> > So I'm wondering what he's talking about.
>
>Well, not a d10 method, but the particular "W is 10 TNs" I suggested,
>from the ever-wider food-group of same. (And same on average, not same
>case-by-case.)
I'm still not reading you. It seems to me that these methods produce a different number on average than the standard. Were you just talking about the non-d20 versions?
>Sorry I wasn't more explicit, but I've posted on the
>method a few times now, and was getting mildly self-conscious about
>repeating myself.
No prob. I was familiar with the ideas at the links that you posted (in fact, I've referenced the Forge one more than once). I just thought there was a method that both went with the d10 advantages, and which had the same crit/fumble (bump) ratio.
Looking at the bump up and down method, I think I may try that. I like the open-endedness of it. You do keep rolling if you keep getting 11s or 12s, right? Or do you count them as success/fail after the first?
> > I'm not sure if it wouldn't just dissappear in play. In fact, the HP
> > "problem" might as well.
>
>I think whether that's a problem or not is certainly going to depend on
>what a given group (and assorted other parameters), depending what a
>usual/desirable rate and "width" of ability increases is going to be
>(taking into account also other things one spends HPs on). It was a bit
>of an issue with our group, as we went from the d20 to the d12 system in
>mid-game, and didn't really want to change the bais and rationale of HP
>use.
Yeah, I think that in a long established game it would certainly be more problematic. That's true of changes in general. I think that I'm at an early enough point with one game that I might give it a try, however.
Mike
Powered by hypermail