RE: Re: Augmentation

From: Dave Bailey <dave.bailey_at_...>
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2000 12:58:30 +0100


        What I was trying to say is that attempts at augmentation lead to penalties which mean you play it safe and go for smaller edges/bonus. If you fail you get a penalty, my reading of the underlying reason to implement a house rule was that the price of failure compared to the potential benefits wasn't working for folks. My proposal means that ties and marginal/major defeats don't yield a penalty, only the complete defeat. Lankor Mhy seems to have left me to my own devices, sorry but I hope this makes more sense?


> Not sure what you're saying. My idea is exactly the same as yours,
> except I roll low and use the degree of success, you roll high and
> use the rolled number. Or are you saying you have to roll the numeric
> ability (without masteries)? That would be unfair on a 2W2 ability,
> against say a 17 ability).
> Of course, you may just be commenting on the entire idea of flexible
> augments, in which case I agree, there will be higher numbers
> cancelling out, but still there should be a chance for the
> 'invisible' resistance to win with either of our systems.

The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and is intended only for the named recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient you must not copy, distribute, or take any action or reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender. Any unauthorised disclosure of the information contained in this e-mail is strictly prohibited.

Powered by hypermail