Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Pool Use (was; Summer Time)
Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 10:36:52 +0100
Wafflemeisters said on 16:44/20 May 98...

> Ideally, If you used two or more pools, each would be reduced by the
> same fraction as the other, as you only have so much attention to spread
> around, IMO. This is not at all practical, but is a good "base
> concept", I think.

It makes for a lot of bookkeeping -- remembering how many dice have been
used and from which pool, so the others can go down accordingly -- but in
theory this would be the best solution to keep characters from using all
the dice from all their pools.

> A simpler mechanic would be that any dice used in one pool that do not
> exceed those in another pool come out of both pools. Sound complex, but
> is actually simple; If you have 8 combat and 5 magic, and use 3 magic,
> combat goes down by 3. If you then use 3 combat, magic does not go
> down, as combat is 5, magic 2- both go to 2. If you then use 2 from
> EITHER, both are gone.

IMHO it would be better here to simply make all pools go down by the same
amount, which can take them to 0 but not below. This reduces bookkeeping
again, because you don't have to remember which pools to reduce -- they
all do. The pool actually in use would determine how many dice are
available, of course.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html - UIN5044116
En ik zal het heen twee keer zehhen.
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

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.