Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Derro" data-source="post: 4147205" data-attributes="member: 51010">Makes sense. And inspires another question. Does the damage bonus only apply when the attacker would qualify for a full attack routine or even during standard attacks? I suspect by your wording that it is the latter. Which doesn't break anything, IMO.Ablative is likely more enjoyable because it extends the duration of encounters on a round for round level rather than on an individual action level. In that manner there is more room for sudden reversals of fortune, longer term maneuvers and set-ups, and villainous monologues.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />&nbsp; So while combats may last relatively the same amount of real time there is actually more action during the encounter. And there is less likeliness of somebody's poor initiative combined with a statistically improbable full attack destroying a quarter of the parties resources in one round. Combined with your reaction system (which I have already yoinked, thank you very much) I can see combat being much more dynamic with less by rote tactics. This will most likely solve some of the higher-level issues that many claim to be present.It's heartening to see the ideas of a proven game designer parallel (though unquestionably further along) to some of my own ideas. Even without large amounts of playtesting or number crunching I feel like a may have been on the right track. So thanks, Wulf, and good gaming to you.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Derro, post: 4147205, member: 51010"] Makes sense. And inspires another question. Does the damage bonus only apply when the attacker would qualify for a full attack routine or even during standard attacks? I suspect by your wording that it is the latter. Which doesn't break anything, IMO. Ablative is likely more enjoyable because it extends the duration of encounters on a round for round level rather than on an individual action level. In that manner there is more room for sudden reversals of fortune, longer term maneuvers and set-ups, and villainous monologues. :) So while combats may last relatively the same amount of real time there is actually more action during the encounter. And there is less likeliness of somebody's poor initiative combined with a statistically improbable full attack destroying a quarter of the parties resources in one round. Combined with your reaction system (which I have already yoinked, thank you very much) I can see combat being much more dynamic with less by rote tactics. This will most likely solve some of the higher-level issues that many claim to be present. It's heartening to see the ideas of a proven game designer parallel (though unquestionably further along) to some of my own ideas. Even without large amounts of playtesting or number crunching I feel like a may have been on the right track. So thanks, Wulf, and good gaming to you. [/QUOTE]

Verification