Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5957246" data-attributes="member: 54877">@<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=94389" target="_blank">jrowland</a> , Right. Now think about what it means to the abstraction to get a situational, process-driven bonus to your attack roll. Let's say that you are fighting on ice, and everyone has to make balance checks. Fail, and you end up prone. If prone, melee attacks get a +2 to hit. &nbsp;Depending upon how you set up the mechanics and flavor them, sometimes that means that a &quot;bonus to hit means that you hit more often&quot; whereas other variations mean that a &quot;bonus to hit means that you do more damage&quot; (on average). &nbsp;I'm not saying that it can't be resolved somehow (or even several somehows, for different groups). I am saying that as soon as we mix mechanic styles, every single modifier or situation has to be examined in this light. And there are things you probably should not do, given a certain set of assumptions. Such as, if you think that people like the process-driven nature of the attack roll, don't remove it and embed it into the damage roll, as in my crazy d6 example.&nbsp; And we have worked backed to one of my intuitions on this topic, that in some of the discussions, people are not clear on the assumption, not so examining, and sometimes proposing ideas that will work about as well as my d6 attack/damage example. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin&nbsp; &nbsp; :D"&nbsp; data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Crazy Jerome, post: 5957246, member: 54877"] @[U][URL="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=94389"]jrowland[/URL][/U] , Right. Now think about what it means to the abstraction to get a situational, process-driven bonus to your attack roll. Let's say that you are fighting on ice, and everyone has to make balance checks. Fail, and you end up prone. If prone, melee attacks get a +2 to hit. Depending upon how you set up the mechanics and flavor them, sometimes that means that a "bonus to hit means that you hit more often" whereas other variations mean that a "bonus to hit means that you do more damage" (on average). I'm not saying that it can't be resolved somehow (or even several somehows, for different groups). I am saying that as soon as we mix mechanic styles, every single modifier or situation has to be examined in this light. And there are things you probably should not do, given a certain set of assumptions. Such as, if you think that people like the process-driven nature of the attack roll, don't remove it and embed it into the damage roll, as in my crazy d6 example. And we have worked backed to one of my intuitions on this topic, that in some of the discussions, people are not clear on the assumption, not so examining, and sometimes proposing ideas that will work about as well as my d6 attack/damage example. :D [/QUOTE]

Verification