Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Guest 6801328" data-source="post: 7004062">Well, if you can't see the difference I'm not sure I can help you.Oh, yikes.&nbsp; If you want an RPG that models 6 Sigma I think you'll probably have to write it yourself.&nbsp; (And probably play it yourself.)But take a gold star for pedantry, anyway.Uhhh....yeah.&nbsp; I'm not claiming to be clever or new, was just asking what people thought of it.&nbsp; And upstream I pretty clearly said that an opposed roll can sort of accomplish the same thing as long as it's secret; the only difference is what probabilities result, and how aware the players are of those probabilities.&nbsp; (And also that there are cases (i.e. choosing between passages) where it's not obvious who or what is rolling which opposed skill.)I'm sorry that you don't seem to understand that my system, as flawed as it may be, produces different probabilities.Slave, thou hast slain me!&nbsp; Villain, take my purse: if ever thou wilt thrive, bury my body, and give the letters which thou find’st about me to Edmund earl of Gloucester. Seek him out. O, untimely death!That's a curious conclusion.Nope, no hostility at all.That's the fascinating part, isn't it?So let me get this straight, you don't perceive your responses as being personally hostile AND you're an engineer?&nbsp; Honestly, I couldn't be more shocked.Not official mechanics. But nevertheless is that a reason for hostility?&nbsp; I'm not creating mechanics in your game....Errr...yes.&nbsp; I had an idea that I was looking for feedback on, even though I know it's not perfect and am willing to admit it.&nbsp; And asking for input because I'm willing to consider that it's not a great idea.&nbsp; That's called &quot;inquiry&quot; and &quot;discussion&quot;.&nbsp; I'm not trying to win the internet.&nbsp; How about you?If we made bombs with the reliability of our lie detecting we would never risk going to war.&nbsp; If we could detect lies with the reliability of our electronics manufacturing we wouldn't have crime.&nbsp; (Oh my god, I can already hear the argument about why we would still have crime because blah blah blah blah blah.)Yet, as the saying goes, you want to take the existence of twilight as evidence that there's no difference between day and night.The irony in all of this is that you seem to think that you've succeeded at your game theory skill roll, and therefore are 100.0% certain that you are right.&nbsp; And yet...I'll bow out of this &quot;conversation&quot; with:[ATTACH]80373[/ATTACH]</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Guest 6801328, post: 7004062"] Well, if you can't see the difference I'm not sure I can help you. Oh, yikes. If you want an RPG that models 6 Sigma I think you'll probably have to write it yourself. (And probably play it yourself.) But take a gold star for pedantry, anyway. Uhhh....yeah. I'm not claiming to be clever or new, was just asking what people thought of it. And upstream I pretty clearly said that an opposed roll can sort of accomplish the same thing as long as it's secret; the only difference is what probabilities result, and how aware the players are of those probabilities. (And also that there are cases (i.e. choosing between passages) where it's not obvious who or what is rolling which opposed skill.) I'm sorry that you don't seem to understand that my system, as flawed as it may be, produces different probabilities. Slave, thou hast slain me! Villain, take my purse: if ever thou wilt thrive, bury my body, and give the letters which thou find’st about me to Edmund earl of Gloucester. Seek him out. O, untimely death! That's a curious conclusion. Nope, no hostility at all. That's the fascinating part, isn't it? So let me get this straight, you don't perceive your responses as being personally hostile AND you're an engineer? Honestly, I couldn't be more shocked. Not official mechanics. But nevertheless is that a reason for hostility? I'm not creating mechanics in [I]your[/I] game.... Errr...yes. I had an idea that I was looking for feedback on, even though I know it's not perfect and am willing to admit it. And asking for input because I'm willing to consider that it's not a great idea. That's called "inquiry" and "discussion". I'm not trying to win the internet. How about you? If we made bombs with the reliability of our lie detecting we would never risk going to war. If we could detect lies with the reliability of our electronics manufacturing we wouldn't have crime. (Oh my god, I can already hear the argument about why we would still have crime because blah blah blah blah blah.) Yet, as the saying goes, you want to take the existence of twilight as evidence that there's no difference between day and night. The irony in all of this is that you seem to think that you've succeeded at your game theory skill roll, and therefore are 100.0% certain that you are right. And yet... I'll bow out of this "conversation" with: [ATTACH=CONFIG]80373._xfImport[/ATTACH] [/QUOTE]

Verification