Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5614319" data-attributes="member: 54877">It is not a trivial issue, in that sometimes people have a bit of trouble adapting to it. But is not nearly as awful as it sounds coming from the persective of many other systems, since BW skill checks don't happen nearly as frequently. They only happen when they matter. The problem for BW for some people, BTW, is not the bookkeeping of skill logging, but the time when the rules say you should do it--immediately. If you get that last test that advances your skills, by BW RAW, you get an improvement to the skill right then. In a "Fight!" or "Duel of Wits" you'll have more checks, but repeated checks of the same skill only count once, and thus don't matter for the rest of the scene unless you get the same check with a higher difficulty--easy to check if logging right away. For some, this messes up the narration, because you might have a big scene taking 15 minutes where everyone averages only one test each, perhaps with some helping in there too. (Helping counts as doing the test, and needs to be logged.) So some forgo the "immediate" skill up opportunity and log the tests after the scene. Having tried it both ways, I prefer that too, as it creates a little pause in the action, and helps with players that don't know the rules as well. I might feel different in an all experienced group, where after all the player can log the tests while someone else is acting. And of course BW is an extreme case. You could always go with some variant of RuneQuest skill "checks" if you want this kind of dynamic.  But the reservation is well noted. If you are going to use this kind of logging for advancement, you have to make sure that the handling time is not onerous, and that necessarily contrains how often checks can happen. BW makes this a virtue (actually, make checks infrequent anyway for other good reasons, and thus the checks aren't onerous).</blockquote>

Verification