Now, I am given to understand that amount of AP isn't nearly as important as target number (and that has been my limited experience) but it still sometimes seems odd.
In addition, if you don't believe that rolls are always against an ability of the opponent (which - I think - is the position of the book) does that mean that the AP is determined by the resistance? (I've thought so.)
Now, I have not ever had chained simple contests adequately explained to me. I understand the logic in principle - you carry over successes in some way, but no one has presented me with mechanics for it. (Since the system only gives out penalties and not bonuses, how does that work? Do you use something like the Hero Questing rules, with carryover bonuses? Is it like a series of variable augments? How do you decide when it ends? )
LC
On April 28, 2007 11:06 am, Jane Williams wrote:
> Agreed about the problem of situational v. AP shift,
> and let me add another that I've never settled to my
> satisfaction. You're changing abilities all the way
> through, we agree on that. But the first one you use
> determines your AP for the rest of the contest. If you
> start off with something that's appropriate for the
> aims then, but you're not that good at, you're
> handicapped later on, when you're using your main
> skills (appropriate now), but still have only the
> measly few APs you started with.
> A reason, to my mind, to use chained simple rather
> than extended, simply because it means you no longer
> have to think about either of these problems.
>
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> Yahoo! Mail is the world's favourite email. Don't settle for less, sign up
> for your free account today
> http://uk.rd.yahoo.com/evt=44106/*http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/mail/winter07.ht
>ml
Powered by hypermail