Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Edgar Ironpelt" data-source="post: 9632220" data-attributes="member: 32075">For most things I find a binary success mechanic to be perfectly adequate. Either you pick the lock open, or you don't. You find the hidden compartment when searching the desk or you don't. Your assessment as to whether the border guard is open to a bribe is either correct or it isn't. Your jump over a chasm either makes it or falls short. The described details of the success or failure can be left to GM or player description, without that description having mechanical effect - those details are below the level of abstraction of the mechanics, even when the mechanics are crunchy ones. (And often those details can be left out, as falling below the level of abstraction wanted even for description. &quot;No, Darvi, we don't want to spend time listening about the style and panache you showed in picking that lock.&quot;)For some things I do want a degree-of-success mechanic, mostly for when one character's actions set a target number for a second character to overcome. Other cases are a small (if important) minority of situations. How long do you have to work on a lock in order to pick it? What happens if you fail a climb - do you get part way up and then fall, or are you able to give up the attempt to climb as being too hard?On the far side of this, I dislike &quot;critical successes&quot; - and I hate &quot;fumbles&quot; with a blazing burning passion. I'll blanket-ban any fumble mechanics and even auto-misses in anything I run, and I'll grudgingly tolerate auto-hits and criticals only if the players really want them and I'm trying to limit the volume of my house rules.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Edgar Ironpelt, post: 9632220, member: 32075"] For most things I find a binary success mechanic to be perfectly adequate. Either you pick the lock open, or you don't. You find the hidden compartment when searching the desk or you don't. Your assessment as to whether the border guard is open to a bribe is either correct or it isn't. Your jump over a chasm either makes it or falls short. The described details of the success or failure can be left to GM or player description, without that description having mechanical effect - those details are below the level of abstraction of the mechanics, even when the mechanics are crunchy ones. (And often those details can be left out, as falling below the level of abstraction wanted even for description. "No, Darvi, we don't want to spend time listening about the style and panache you showed in picking that lock.") For some things I do want a degree-of-success mechanic, mostly for when one character's actions set a target number for a second character to overcome. Other cases are a small (if important) minority of situations. How long do you have to work on a lock in order to pick it? What happens if you fail a climb - do you get part way up and then fall, or are you able to give up the attempt to climb as being too hard? On the far side of this, I dislike "critical successes" - and I [I]hate[/I] "fumbles" with a blazing burning passion. I'll blanket-ban any fumble mechanics and even auto-misses in anything I run, and I'll grudgingly tolerate auto-hits and criticals only if the players really want them and I'm trying to limit the volume of my house rules. [/QUOTE]

Verification