Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 6775073" data-attributes="member: 22779">In other words, you're okay with it being inconsistent.&nbsp; The result of a hit in combat is damage, but, the damage you deal is irrespective of training.&nbsp; A peasant with a great sword does the same damage as a 20th level fighter.&nbsp; There is no difference.&nbsp; An untrained character gets lucky and equals the trained character in a check.&nbsp; But, unlike combat, suddenly the trained character gains bonuses to damage (a better result) because of training.&nbsp; No, it does not model reality.&nbsp; It might satisfy your reality, but, it certainly doesn't mine.&nbsp; Like I said, you're basically doubling the advantage of a character with training and high stat.&nbsp; You're pretty much saying that natural talent doesn't matter.&nbsp; Or at least matters less than training.&nbsp; My point is, a 1st level character with no stat bonus and training is identical to a +2 stat character and no training.&nbsp; Eventually, that trained character will be better.&nbsp; But, playing Schroedinger's result based on whoever is doing the check strongly disadvantages non-trained characters.&nbsp; ANd, no, you did not show how to apply it to all skills equally.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 6775073, member: 22779"] In other words, you're okay with it being inconsistent. The result of a hit in combat is damage, but, the damage you deal is irrespective of training. A peasant with a great sword does the same damage as a 20th level fighter. There is no difference. An untrained character gets lucky and equals the trained character in a check. But, unlike combat, suddenly the trained character gains bonuses to damage (a better result) because of training. No, it does not model reality. It might satisfy your reality, but, it certainly doesn't mine. Like I said, you're basically doubling the advantage of a character with training and high stat. You're pretty much saying that natural talent doesn't matter. Or at least matters less than training. My point is, a 1st level character with no stat bonus and training is identical to a +2 stat character and no training. Eventually, that trained character will be better. But, playing Schroedinger's result based on whoever is doing the check strongly disadvantages non-trained characters. ANd, no, you did not show how to apply it to all skills equally. [/QUOTE]

Verification