RE: Re: Request for some math

From: Mike Holmes <mike_c_holmes_at_...>
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 14:31:06 -0500


Depends on your perspective, I guess. That is, I find that the small marginal differences in odds shift, over the whole range to be a feature of HQ resolution. It makes it possible for underdogs to come from behind and succeed, and it makes it so that the character fails sometimes when you wouldn't expect them to do so. Which has it's own dramtic benefits.  

I personally don't want a system where I can predict well the outcomes. Note that (despite a fallacy that says otherwise), it's always better to have a higher level of ability. This is the only incentive that the player needs in that direction. The fact that lots of augmenting still won't make victory certain is yet another reason why my players don't bother looking for every augment imaginable, just the ones that are entertaining to cite. The fact that characters are always going to fail in HQ, from time to time, is a godsend (well, to me, anyhow). It's meant that I have to be prepared to make defeat interesting for my players, instead of trying to engineer every "encounter" so that they succeed. Now I can throw a dragon at the small guy, and see what happens with it. I don't have to wait until he "levels up" to be able to meet that dragon. Better yet, the player can charge that dragon... knowing that while he'll most likely lose, he may just win... and if he loses, it'll be even more interesting. So, you know, as I said, a different perspective.  

Mike



More photos; more messages; more whatever – Get MORE with Windows Live™ Hotmail®. NOW with 5GB storage. http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_mini_5G_0907

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Powered by hypermail