GMMichael
Guide of Modos
My 2 cents, then: change that die progression. Because once you get to d20+2d12, the following ranks look like a complete waste of time. And with the d20 mixed in with the smaller dice, your bell curve looks more like a washed-out-plateau.I want a system where the target number for "very hard" doesn't have to be moved up to something unreasonably high at high level. Because of how bell curves work, high level characters become frighteningly consistent at very hard tasks (24) and can even try harder than hard (27, 30, 33 ...) - but eventually the curve peters out. Each point raised beyond thirty lowers the odds, even for high level characters with lots of dice, by an order of magnitude or more. 44 is the max target number with d20+xd12 keep 2.
I suggest lowering the d20 to a d12. This will make your curves more bell-like, and possibly make the d20 look more attractive if it's involved in special mechanics.
Let's look at the opposite of rule zero: player rule. Go ahead and write a game that's so comprehensive that the rules handle every eventuality. Then you'll have players telling the GM what happens, and interrupting every other NPC action with an exciting dip into the rulebook to show the GM that he's wrong. Players rule.which is NOT an excuse to write a game system so shoddy the GM has to routinely invoke it. In my mind, any time the GM invokes this "rule" the game system has failed. No system can cover all situations, but if the GM is constantly overruling the system rather than using it then something is wrong.
There should be an exciting discussion of this topic here:
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?352129-Rules-heavy-bad-light-good
When I hear "rule zero," I think "expediting gameplay." You're welcome to call it "overruling the system," but what you're getting at is a fundamental design question:
Do I want my rulebook to be heavy or light?
Last edited: