RE: Digest Number 1415

From: Mike Holmes <homeydont_at_...>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 16:46:58 -0600


>From: "Greg Stafford" <Greg_at_...>
>
>Mike,
>
> >I'm not proposing doing away with rolling for Augments or >anything like
>that. On the contrary, I love rolling for >Augments, and am trying to get
>it to happen more.
>
>Much clearer. Thanks.
>I was confused.

Cool, I was worried for a bit that I'd really messed something up.

>I do understand what you were saying now but frankly am unsympathetic.
>Please forgive my callousness, but if my player was dismayed or griping
>about this I´d suggest to him that he make his life easier and stop
>augmenting then.
>Then when he failed some subsequent roll by one or two pips, I´d remind
>him that he could have augmented.
>Yea, maybe that is Narrator Cruelty.
>Just call me Jane. :)

Was that supposed to be Kathy? :-)

The problem is that it's not just some whining player, but myself who has the cognative problem, even as GM watching the player roll. As you point out, they player still has the incentive to use the augmenting rule, and still will whether or not they like how the outcome happens. So that's all fine, we get the cool exploration of the character. It's just the outcome that could be somewhat more in line with the effect.

But again, we're talking about a very minor subset of things here, and as I have no solution for it (and, in fact, have my own counter rationalizations that I use), I, for one, will be dropping it. :-)

Mike



Get a FREE online virus check for your PC here, from McAfee. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963

Powered by hypermail