Critical Poll

[Rurik]

O.k. Until we have actual game material to discuss I'll come up with some assumptions. It is a fair bet to say these options will be represented through optional rules but this is to see what people like for 'special' results, either a single special/critical result or two.

[badcat]

Pointless, because if the book is what has been claimed it will cover all those options and more. If you want to do polls, why don't you come up with something that has a point?

[Simlasa]

It's nice to see, sometimes, what other people are doing with the rules... which options they employ... regardless of what the rules offer.

[Joseph Paul]

Badcat - I think that is unrealistic. There needs to be a rule for specials but I can't see making variants in how the special success is defined. What it does yes (impale, slash, crush etc) but not how it is defined. If there are a lot of variants on things as basic as how specials are rolled wouldn't that affect how any scenarios are played out? I mean in one system I can bet on specialing one in five shots that I make. In another only half as many. That would change how I would fight.

Joseph Paul

[Lord Twig]

It looks like most people agree on what a Special/Critical should be. I wonder if this will be the default?

[Joseph Paul]

Shall we start a "second guess" thread?

Joseph Paul

[Trifletraxor]

I think the Mongoose idea of 10% criticals was a good one. 20% and 5% add extra calculations/looking at tables.

(See, I can say something good about Mongoose too! )

Sverre.

[Rurik]

I was torn between 10% criticals and the RQ style special/crit. I like the simplicity of the 10% crit (I think Stormbringer uses one 10% crit as well but it has been a while), but being a RQ'er at heart I voted the more complex method. It has worked for me for over 20 years now.

[soltakss]

I think the Mongoose idea of 10% criticals was a good one. 20% and 5% add extra calculations/looking at tables.

Pah! 20% is a fifth, 5% is a 20th, both really easy to calculate on the fly.

In any case, you only need to calculate them if you roll roughly the right amount. So, if I have 60% Pedantry and I roll 40 then clearly I haven't specialled or criticalled. If I roll 05 or 15 then I need to work it out because they are close to special or critical.

It does irritate me when people say RQ was maths-heavy and hard to work out. Maybe when you add all the bonuses and penalties together it takes a bit of working out, but that's what calculators are for.

[Sorloc]

For 10%, you simply move the decimal point one place to the left, correct? Easy enough for everyone?

For 5%, you halve the 10% result, for 20%, you double it.

Is everyone capable of multiplying and dividing by 2? My 7-year old is...

guess RQ math isn't beyond him yet; he will have to play dnd for a few years to get that bad at math.

62 -

10% = 6.2

5% = 3.1

20% = 12.4

33 -

10% = 3.3

5% = 1.65

20% = 6.6

89 -

10% = 8.9

5% = 4.45

20% = 17.8

It's not rocket science; even Americans should be able to do that much math.

[Trifletraxor]

For 10%, you simply move the decimal point one place to the left, correct? Easy enough for everyone?

For 5%, you halve the 10% result, for 20%, you double it.

It's not rocket science; even Americans should be able to do that much math.

It's not rocket science, but it is a calculation. Dividing by ten is not. Add some alcohol, and calculations take longer time.

Sverre.

[Atgxtg]

I'm actually in favor of even more degrees of success. In general the games that have them tend to be easier to play, and allow for better opposed task resolution, since then you can compare "degrees of success". I think several 10% or 20% brackets could work out well.

It's the ability to subdivide the D100 into several different results that is one of its strengths. If you use a simple succeed-fail mechanic, there is really little point in using percentiles rather than D20, D10, etc.