> > Joe1 Close Combat 17 (17 AP)
> > Joe2 Close Combat 2w (22 AP)
> > Joe3 Close Combat 17w2 (57 AP)
> This has been discussed and it was suggested that, as in the real
> world, inrease in skill is not linear with effort invested or, in
> other words, Joe2 has learned just enough to get himself into
> trouble. Yes, there is a decided non-linearity here but fixing it
> causes too much complexity in the system.
I don't know if this has been discussed before, but wouldn't it be logical to force a bump down on the other guy when a bump up on your side is no longer possible ?
This would mean pushing the non-linearity a bit further as even when both Joes roll a success (which is the most likely), Joe3 would get a bump up to critical and Joe1 a bunp down to failure. It even works with Joe4 and Joe5 (2w3 and 17w3 respectively), with Joe5 getting a bump up to critical and Joe1 a bunp down to fumble.
I know that bumps down should be rare, but are no-masteries going to fight 2 masteries that often anyway ?
Philippe
Powered by hypermail