Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5785912" data-attributes="member: 54877">I did something like this for a completely rewritten Fantasy Hero damage system for an AD&amp;D-like game. We even broke down those damage results into 7 or 8 discrete spots on the table and named them. Then when you hit, we didn't even say the numbers. Instead, &quot;I hit. Smashed him,&quot; or &quot;Got him with a Spattered,&quot; or &quot;Oh man, I only Nicked it.&quot; It worked very well for us. In our case, &quot;Nicked&quot; versus &quot;Smashed&quot; and so on was relative to the target--i.e. if young hero &quot;Nicks&quot; the dragon, that may be close to the most he can do.&nbsp;I doubt going as far to label them would work as well in your proposal, and the 3d6 might be a better idea.&nbsp; But just an anecdote to say that the general principle of such a chart is sound.&nbsp; It was very fast in resolution for us, too, even with the indirection of the names instead of numbers.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Crazy Jerome, post: 5785912, member: 54877"] I did something like this for a completely rewritten Fantasy Hero damage system for an AD&D-like game. We even broke down those damage results into 7 or 8 discrete spots on the table and named them. Then when you hit, we didn't even say the numbers. Instead, "I hit. Smashed him," or "Got him with a Spattered," or "Oh man, I only Nicked it." It worked very well for us. In our case, "Nicked" versus "Smashed" and so on was relative to the target--i.e. if young hero "Nicks" the dragon, that may be close to the most he can do. I doubt going as far to label them would work as well in your proposal, and the 3d6 might be a better idea. But just an anecdote to say that the general principle of such a chart is sound. It was [B]very[/B] fast in resolution for us, too, even with the indirection of the names instead of numbers. [/QUOTE]

Verification