Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@****.ORG>
Subject: Re: (Skill+Att)/2
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 1997 08:29:53 -0600
Gurth wrote:
|
| David Buehrer said on 13:50/11 Jul 97...
|
| Now I'm even thinking on the same wavelength as David. I must be getting
| senile... :)

Nope. If you're on the same wavelength as Spike, you're getting senile.
If you're on the same wavelength as me you've crossed the fine line between
creativity and... uh, something :)

| > Hmm. And if you don't have a related skill all you would get would
| > be the bonus dice, if any (instead of tracing through the skill
| > web) with, say, a +1 modifier to the TN.
|
| The only problem here is how do you attempt tasks for which you don't have
| the skill _and_ the related Attribute isn't high enough to give bonus
| dice? Unless of course you want to keep the skill web, but it looks to me
| like the whole point of trying to incorporate Attributes into skill tests
| is to do away with that.

Well, I'd like to see a system that doesn't necessarily allow a character
to default to every skill. When I first started playing we misinterpreted
the rules and subtracted 2 dice per dot. A character with low attributes
couldn't default to everything. However, Fubar the Troll didn't need to
take any combat skills because his physical attributes were so high (after
being modified by cyber- and bodyware).

If you take FoF's recoil table (or a version of it) and modify it to
equal the number of default dice per attribute and subtract one die
per dot passed through on the skill web, I *think* it would work.
And yes, a low attribute would mean that a character wouldn't be able
to default with that attribute, which IMHO is realistic.

-David
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
--
"Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing
which ones to keep."

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.