Re: Re: Starting a group...

From: donald_at_...
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 14:16:22 GMT


In message <BAY110-F321021943D084BC24594EDA8D00_at_...> "Mike Holmes" writes:
>
>>From: donald_at_...
>>
>>Do you really expect to make a living independantly with a 5%
>>chance of mucking up a straight forward job completely and a
>>further 10% chance of failing to complete it? That's what an
>>ability of 17 represents.
>
>Yeah, but it doesn't get a lot better with skill. Down this
>particular road lies madness. Every day things attempted by a
>hero fall under Automatic Success as things that nobody (much
>less a self-respecting hero) should have to roll for.

I disagree. If it's everyday stuff that's irrelevant to the story we don't roll for it because it doesn't matter whether it's a success or failure. We may also choose to abstract many everyday tasks into a single roll - does the PC earn enough to support their family?

And it does get a lot better with skill. As soon as you reach 1W there's a 95% chance of success in straight forward tasks and no chance of making a complete mess. If you get to 1W2 you will succeed. Furthermore if it's a bad harvest and there's a resistance of 10W the farmer with a skill of 17 will probably go hungry.

>The resolution system doesn't resolve for this sort of stuff,
>only for the dramatic stuff. And, as such, it gives the
>underdog a very good chance of success even in pretty extreme
>cases.

Depends how you view the world you are playing in. If you consider survival is a matter of routine which no hero could fail at then that's so. Personally I feel that's both unrealistic and uninteresting - at odds with both the real world and most fantasy literature. It can be a source of story as well - the farmer fails to feed his family, can he persuade his brother to help out? or does his wife leave him and return to her mother?

-- 
Donald Oddy
http://www.grove.demon.co.uk/

Powered by hypermail