Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="aramis erak" data-source="post: 9266816" data-attributes="member: 6779310">From where I sit, ther've been two modernizations that matter: the move to single rolling mechanic per game, and the more common use fixed difficulties. (Traveller 2300 and MegaTraveller both did both of these in 1987.)Many games have two core mechanics: one for combat, one for non-combat; some have 3 or more. Amongst these are D&amp;D prior to 3E, Palladium even now, The Arcanum, Tunnels and Trolls, The Fantasy Trip, Forward To Adventure, and many more.BRP has three-to-four mechanics as well, but not the same split: Skills unopposed: 1d100 ≤ skill; Attribute Rolls unopposed either 1d20 ≤ Att or 1d100 ≤ Att × 5, by game; Opposed attribute rolls (cross index active vs passive and roll under the percentage listed); and the combat defense rolls (unopposed, but must get at least the same level of success as the attacker did). And that's not counting the &quot;Roll &gt; skill to advance it if you got a check this session in it.&quot; At least they're all roll low. (Except for Pendragon, which is high-but-under.)Pendragon's another 1987 &quot;Modernization&quot; - All abilities are using the same &quot;high-but under&quot; on 1d20 ≤ ability+mods. It's not quite a single mechanic simply due to the effects of skills adjusted to 20+. But it's pretty close. White Wolf used a single mechanic for resolution across all the WoD games, albeit VTM 1e was different from the rest (variable TN for ≥1 success vs fixed TN for successes ≥ difficulty).Those two factors make many of the modern games, most especially the 5E derivatives, feel modern and streamlined. It's easier to teach one unified mechanic, and easier to run if there's a single clear difficulty scale.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="aramis erak, post: 9266816, member: 6779310"] From where I sit, ther've been two modernizations that matter: the move to single rolling mechanic per game, and the more common use fixed difficulties. (Traveller 2300 and MegaTraveller both did both of these in 1987.) Many games have two core mechanics: one for combat, one for non-combat; some have 3 or more. Amongst these are D&D prior to 3E, Palladium even now, The Arcanum, Tunnels and Trolls, The Fantasy Trip, Forward To Adventure, and many more. BRP has three-to-four mechanics as well, but not the same split: Skills unopposed: 1d100 ≤ skill; Attribute Rolls unopposed either 1d20 ≤ Att or 1d100 ≤ Att × 5, by game; Opposed attribute rolls (cross index active vs passive and roll under the percentage listed); and the combat defense rolls (unopposed, but must get at least the same level of success as the attacker did). And that's not counting the "Roll > skill to advance it if you got a check this session in it." At least they're all roll low. (Except for Pendragon, which is high-but-under.) Pendragon's another 1987 "Modernization" - All abilities are using the same "high-but under" on 1d20 ≤ ability+mods. It's not quite a single mechanic simply due to the effects of skills adjusted to 20+. But it's pretty close. White Wolf used a single mechanic for resolution across all the WoD games, albeit VTM 1e was different from the rest (variable TN for ≥1 success vs fixed TN for successes ≥ difficulty). Those two factors make many of the modern games, most especially the 5E derivatives, feel modern and streamlined. It's easier to teach one unified mechanic, and easier to run if there's a single clear difficulty scale. [/QUOTE]

Verification