NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Crimson Longinus" data-source="post: 9295187" data-attributes="member: 7025508">Some of my personal dislikes:Action rolls are 2d12 but attack rolls are d20! Why? This is system aesthetically jarring, I hate this! Use the same formula for both!Edit: It seems I was confused, and players roll 2d12 whilst GM rolls d20. That's less bad, but I still dislike the asymmetry.How the damage works seems unnecessarily convoluted. You roll the damage, and compare it to thresholds. So far so good. However, then instead of the thresholds actually corresponding different types of wounds, they're just used to convert the damage to hit point damage. This is inelegant. If the different thresholds do nothing more interesting than help to convert bigger damage numbers into smaller HP numbers they seems like an unnecessary step. Either use D&D style direct HP pools, or if thresholds are used then let them produce actually meaningfully different types of wounds.I don't like how the armour works. This game has already enough things to track. It also is hella weird how your armour can be rendered completely useless after few hits. And as many armours incur penalties for wearing them, the logical thing is to unequip them after they've been used up. Characters constantly equipping and unequipping armour this way would be weird and jarring. I think armour providing simple passive damage reduction would be more logical and easier to use. I get that making decisions whether to use the resource ort not is potentially interesting, but this game has enough of that already, and this is not particularly interesting decision. If it is a big hit you use it.</blockquote>

Verification