Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 8269979" data-attributes="member: 29398">There's another aspect I forgot to mention: it's quite uncommon in my games that a party's composition is really set up for heist or stealth work in the first place.  There's almost always a clanky warrior or three in the party that they have to figure out what to do with, which crimps things considerably.  But on the odd occasion when they've gone stealth-first - more often for espionage work than for heists, admittedly - it hasn't gone too badly.Oddly, now that I think about it, most of the "heist" situations I've run are ones where the item they were trying to steal was a person.  In other words, they were more kidnapping (or rescue) missions rather than theft.You're equating failure rate with system used.  The only ways I can see that holding water are a) if for some reason the players plan better in one system than another, and-or b) different degrees of granularity of resolution.  Yes a more granular system gives you more opportunities to fail, but in turn the granular-level failure would (usually) be a mere setback to the overall plan; it'd take a series of these, or failure on something critical, to blow up the whole caper.</blockquote>