skip to main |
skip to sidebar
- For the last several weeks I've been saying to myself "Luke was first level in the original movie" as a sort of mantra. No PC kills kobolds in sewers for copper pieces in Star Wars, no matter what their level. But here's my new twist: Han, Chewie, Leia, and even Obi-Wan were all first level, too. Maybe the Saga Edition doesn't map out the character's abilities that way, but it 'A New Hope' was that party's first adventure in Lucas's campaign. Our new campaign should strive for that same level of excitement, despite the low levels of the newbie PCs.
- Recommended reading: Jonathan Tweet's article There Is No Try. Tweet's main point is that a blown skill roll does not always have to be an indicator of utter, dismal failure. Sometimes a PCs can blow a roll and the GM can offer a less than perfect, but not totally suck alternative. "You failed the climb roll? Then you make it partway up the mountain. Interestingly enough, there's a cave near the point where the cliff becomes too steep to climb further. What do you do now?" "No good on the knowledge check? Okay, you don't know the location of the Jing-Soon Temple, but you do know the guy who does. He lives on Coruscant, in the underlevels below the UltraMegaMallPlex." (I should mention that Tweet, S. John Ross, and Ron Edwards all seem to have independantly discovered this idea. Any one of them can have a bad idea. Any two of them, maybe. But all three? I doubt it.)
- PCs in my campaign get two stat options. They can roll 4d6, drop one. Or they can choose the Awesome Array: 17, 16, 14, 13, 10, 10. If someone rolls a better set of numbers than that, that set immediately becomes the new Awesome Array. We like high stats. It allows us all to more easily pretend that we're cooler than other people.
- Dear Wizards: Money, WTF? The players are really supposed to roll to see if their starting characters can afford to buy blasters? Doug's pilot doesn't get to start with a stupid orange jumpsuit because it costs too much? Forget that crap. Pat and I banged out some random initial weapons and armors tables. Past that whether a PC can afford something or not will be a simple function of asking how hard it would be for Han Solo to buy it.
- I'm thinking that every PC should have a short list of People They Care About. Some of these people will die, to make the Empire look evil. Others will mysteriously disappear and return as masked cyborg sith types. Etc.
- Pat made this, and it is awesome:
%202.png)
.JPG)
.png)
.gif)
Posts
Heh heh heh. R2-B.A.
ReplyDeleteHeh heh heh heh heh heh.
Oh, by the way. Odlly, Jeff, I was thinking about Tweet's article yesterday in the shower. Now, how weird is that?
ReplyDeleteThat I was thinking of it, too, not that I was taking a shower.
That's...that's fairly common actually.
Huh?
ReplyDeleteDon´t all GMs do that all the time?
Interesting.
Set, can you be more specific? I'm not sure which of my bullet points is obvious to the rest of the world.
ReplyDeleteShare these tables! Please!
ReplyDeletebullet point "there is no try"
ReplyDeleteThat approach to skill rolls is my main gripe with roll under:
Players will tend to just say:
"I dind´t make it", which in my book is totally different from: "I´ve got a 14!"
A fourteen is an achievement, just one pip short of the fifteen that was needed.
A failed roll is just a failed roll.
The Mathematicians and Physics guys in my group used to try to convince me it was irrelevant.
But in actual play, I could prove to them, that roll under systems lend themselves to a way more binary interpretation of a skill check, because only binary results are communicated.
I think "everyone is first level in New Hope" is intuitive for me right up until Obi-Wan. He always felt like a clear NPC to me, meant to help drive the plot and keep the party from being offed by Vader, who clearly outclasses them at the time (in personal combat -- obviously, you can still sneak up on him if he's in a TIE fighter...).
ReplyDeleteDon´t all GMs do that all the time?
ReplyDeleteI think most GMs do, most of the time ... no matter what kind of system they're using. And I'm a bit embarassed (and worried) that Jeff would describe such a thing as a "discovery." Ron Edwards maybe would (because to him, any belaboring of the obvious is a breakthrough), but I just call it the observations of a GM who knows how.
[...] roll under systems lend themselves to a way more binary interpretation of a skill check, because only binary results are communicated.
Rather, lots of rollunder systems are driven by margins/degrees of success and failure (both above and below the target) and lots of rollover (and dice-pool and other) systems are geared toward binary readings. Similarly any other die-gimmick can fall either way; it's an entirely separate design choice (and retrofitting it in either direction is a separate GMing choice).
Saying that a given broad category of die-rolling tends toward binary readings is about as accurate as saying that "class-based systems tend to encourage people to play Halflings."
And Pat's image is awesome, yea verily.
ReplyDeleteMaybe calling it a discovery is overstating it a bit. But it's a trick that isn't always articulated in binary skill check systems, leaving lotsa room for stupid GMs to interpret a slightly blown roll as the opposite of a success, rather than as a mitigated success or an almost success.
ReplyDeleteSometimes, I am that stupid GM. *shrug*
Maybe calling it a discovery is overstating it a bit.
ReplyDeleteExcept re Ron Edwards, because Ron Edwards doesn't fart, he has insights that lead to the discovery of flatulence theory.
Sometimes, I am that stupid GM. *shrug*
Sometimes, we all are. That's the way better GMs get made :)
Yes, I love that characters get iconic equipment. HERO, and GURPS does this, I think M&M as well. Some characters gadgets and tools are just a part of them.
ReplyDeleteSett,
I don't see it. I think I almost did.
GURPS in part depends on margin of success and failure. That dependence upon margin of failure and success in contests of skill influences game play so much, that every role is measured by margins.
In BRP when you need that 60% to push the last of the shuffling mound over the cliff and disastrously roll a 61%, 'I got a 61!' comes naturally. And so does the urge of the GM (at least in me) to allow for something (even if it still means the total mental destruction of the PC's) (hmmm a TPI? TPM? instead of a TPK?) regardless of the RAW.
Just my two centimes, but Han, Leia, and Chewy all were a bit more (a LOT more) "worldly" than Luke. Whether that translates to Levels or not, I can see how there might be some debate.
ReplyDelete