Douglas Seay wrote:
>
> My group gave HW a test drive last night: created characters and put
> them into a contrived fight just to see how things worked out. We had
> the case where some one tried to augment combat, and succeded, but so
> did the resistance role. The rub was the resistance was the lower die
> roll, so it was a marginal failure for the player, thus he had x1
> penalty. It was only augmentation of 2, so it didn't change things that
> much, but it didn't feel right.
Its a case of over doing it... Which is why its dangerous to get too greedy. That being said, I find it can be a bit galling as well.
> I think I'll try Complete/Major Success is x2, Minor/Marginal Success is
> x1, Tie and Marginal/Minor Failure is x0, Major Failure is x-1, and
> Complete Failure is x-2. Is this a common house rule? Did I
> misunderstand something?
>
This is not a common house rule but it seems like a rather interesting idea. I can see one drawback in that you may find that a lot of folks will make marginal successes (if you bid a +2) and this will make that sort of agument yield 0 points.
At least that's how it looks to me, from a math standpoint. Most PC groups will be in the 17 to 5w range for their magics (with magic affinities costing so much to raise, they tend to stay there) And a marginal success is a very likely until the 2w+ level is reached, especially if one wants to get a +2 augment (which is a good number, I might add). It gets even more problematic if the user wants a +3...
Jeff
Powered by hypermail