difficulty levels

From: Andrew Joelson <joelsona_at_cpdmfg.cig.mot.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 16:33:24 -0500


andrew behan:
> The open-ended, non-linear difficulty systems mentioned suck. They
> are very dice intensive and expect GMs to assign difficulties when there
> is no way they can be expected to work out the resultant probability of
> success on the hoof.

        It doesn't have to be this way. TORG had a weird-looking d20 + chart system. But you used _one_ d20 (open-ended up), and then looked on the chart _once_. I taught any number of players how to use this system, and after about an hour they invariably said, "Oh! I get it, this is pretty simple after all!" Then, the rules book came along and gave you a difficulty chart for standard types of actions. It also gave generic difficulty numbers for tasks that were easy, medium, hard, very hard, herioc, and never-tell-me-the-odds. In essence, they went out and calculated the odds _for_ you. This was one of the best-balanced systems for varying levels of ability that I have ever seen.

        As far as suggesting stuff to David Hall is concerned, I don't think this will prove very usefull. I believe (perhaps wrongly) that G:tRPG has been worked on by many people for 18+ months. Most of the major elements have been worked over at least twice, and David is simply going to polish it up. (Eric R., please feel free to correct me on this.)

                Andrew Joelson

PS Orlanth-Cola, official sponsor of Glorantha Con IV!

	 Rosemont, Illinois   Jan 24-26, 1997
	Orlanth-Cola, a real Windy City drink!

------------------------------

Powered by hypermail