tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post4987286181395172739..comments2024-03-27T22:32:17.055-05:00Comments on Jeffs Gameblog: more on the new SW campaignJeff Rientshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17493878980535235896noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-51218484361832533942007-07-25T20:05:00.000-05:002007-07-25T20:05:00.000-05:00Just my two centimes, but Han, Leia, and Chewy all...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.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12139341130897627015noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-57214347455064901962007-07-24T22:24:00.000-05:002007-07-24T22:24:00.000-05:00Yes, I love that characters get iconic equipment. ...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.<BR/><BR/>Sett,<BR/><BR/>I don't see it. I think I almost did. <BR/><BR/>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.<BR/><BR/>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.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-27992460718167799862007-07-24T13:22:00.000-05:002007-07-24T13:22:00.000-05:00Maybe calling it a discovery is overstating it a b...<B>Maybe calling it a discovery is overstating it a bit. </B><BR/><BR/>Except re Ron Edwards, because Ron Edwards doesn't fart, he has insights that lead to the discovery of flatulence theory.<BR/><BR/><B>Sometimes, I am that stupid GM. *shrug*</B><BR/><BR/>Sometimes, we all are. That's the way better GMs get made :)S. John Rosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12284417121877141161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-37092557682974500502007-07-24T12:52:00.000-05:002007-07-24T12:52:00.000-05:00Maybe calling it a discovery is overstating it a b...Maybe 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.<BR/><BR/>Sometimes, I am that stupid GM. *shrug*Jeff Rientshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17493878980535235896noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-71715121776068393192007-07-24T12:39:00.000-05:002007-07-24T12:39:00.000-05:00And Pat's image is awesome, yea verily.And Pat's image <I>is</I> awesome, yea verily.S. John Rosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12284417121877141161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-36969400701347591432007-07-24T12:32:00.000-05:002007-07-24T12:32:00.000-05:00Don´t all GMs do that all the time?I think most GM...<B>Don´t all GMs do that all the time?</B><BR/><BR/>I 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.<BR/><BR/><B>[...] roll under systems lend themselves to a way more binary interpretation of a skill check, because only binary results are communicated. </B><BR/><BR/>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).<BR/><BR/>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."S. John Rosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12284417121877141161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-22907279751124953092007-07-24T11:41:00.000-05:002007-07-24T11:41:00.000-05:00I think "everyone is first level in New Hope" is i...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...).Alexhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04200883230437111275noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-21327914516772814332007-07-24T04:01:00.000-05:002007-07-24T04:01:00.000-05:00bullet point "there is no try"That approach to ski...bullet point "there is no try"<BR/><BR/>That approach to skill rolls is my main gripe with roll under:<BR/>Players will tend to just say:<BR/>"I dind´t make it", which in my book is totally different from: "I´ve got a 14!" <BR/>A fourteen is an achievement, just one pip short of the fifteen that was needed.<BR/>A failed roll is just a failed roll.<BR/><BR/>The Mathematicians and Physics guys in my group used to try to convince me it was irrelevant.<BR/>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.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-51887167055443560452007-07-24T00:58:00.000-05:002007-07-24T00:58:00.000-05:00Share these tables! Please!Share these tables! Please!Jayson Petershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04614536655190765654noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-12521746778561031252007-07-23T16:09:00.000-05:002007-07-23T16:09:00.000-05:00Set, can you be more specific? I'm not sure which...Set, can you be more specific? I'm not sure which of my bullet points is obvious to the rest of the world.Jeff Rientshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17493878980535235896noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-8334498236427558082007-07-23T15:35:00.000-05:002007-07-23T15:35:00.000-05:00Huh?Don´t all GMs do that all the time?Interesting...Huh?<BR/>Don´t all GMs do that all the time?<BR/><BR/>Interesting.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-8467697831922749932007-07-23T12:30:00.000-05:002007-07-23T12:30:00.000-05:00Oh, by the way. Odlly, Jeff, I was thinking about...Oh, by the way. Odlly, Jeff, I was thinking about Tweet's article yesterday in the shower. Now, how weird is <I>that</I>?<BR/><BR/>That I was thinking of it, too, not that I was taking a shower.<BR/><BR/>That's...that's fairly common actually.Dr Rotwanghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16750632906878388570noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-4958996743719385802007-07-23T12:28:00.000-05:002007-07-23T12:28:00.000-05:00Heh heh heh. R2-B.A.Heh heh heh heh heh heh.Heh heh heh. R2-B.A.<BR/><BR/>Heh heh heh heh heh heh.Dr Rotwanghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16750632906878388570noreply@blogger.com