Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Started by Eldrad, September 06, 2007, 09:16:17 PM
Quote from: apeiron on January 08, 2008, 11:31:12 AMThere's free form and there's jello. This requires quite a bit of trust between player and GM. The example of Buffy and Ol Man Jenkins trying to do a triple flip is missing any sort of objective/external standard for what each should be able to do. It relies heavily on agreeing what the two should be able to do. i think people will find this easier if there was something beyond "what ever you feel should happen". i don't want GM fiat to prevent Buffy from doing <AWESOME THING> because it would mess up his plan, i want to be able to say "she should be able to do this because of traits X and Y. Rules can be protective as well as limiting. If you're assuming that level of trust, great. i'm not against that. Many folk who grew up referring to Chart 16-b on page 419 of the revised edition, will be. Personally, i'm somewhere in between.This reminds me of Fudge. Is that a coincidence?As for d20 vs. 3d6 - It depends on what sort of feel you want. The 3d6 causes a classic curve that many games use. Great for making a game feel realistic, where terrible and great results are rare. d20 is better for an epic feel where crazier things can happen. 2d10 might give a nice middle ground.2 Coins would work as well. Heads = Better than you expected, Tails = Worse. 2 Heads = Woo hoo!, 2 Tails = Doh!, Heads + Tails = Meh. No curve, but very very simple. No chart either. For a more epic feel, flip one coin, then have the results "explode" in one direction or another. As long as you keep getting Heads, your result keeps getting better.Have i gone an committed thread necromancy again?