Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Paul Farquhar" data-source="post: 8694464" data-attributes="member: 6906155">Whilst brave is worthless (on a par with elemental resistances - also worthless), Lucky is popular because its fun, not powerful. Although it's not as weak as &quot;5%&quot; appears. If your chance of success is very high, you may be in the situation where you can only fail on a 1, in which case Lucky makes success almost certain. If you can only fail on a 1 or 2, Lucky halves the chance of failing. It's more a case of protection from bad luck than it is good luck. And the more times you throw the dice (e.g. lots of attack rolls) the more likely it is to come up. You don't see people complaining critical hits are worthless do you? Lucky is a reverse critical.There is no need for them to be integrated into anything. They are in the book to be player characters, not socio-economic building blocks.What's the difference between altering them and creating a new race?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Paul Farquhar, post: 8694464, member: 6906155"] Whilst brave is worthless (on a par with elemental resistances - also worthless), Lucky is popular because its fun, not powerful. Although it's not as weak as "5%" appears. If your chance of success is very high, you may be in the situation where you can only fail on a 1, in which case Lucky makes success almost certain. If you can only fail on a 1 or 2, Lucky halves the chance of failing. It's more a case of protection from bad luck than it is good luck. And the more times you throw the dice (e.g. lots of attack rolls) the more likely it is to come up. You don't see people complaining critical hits are worthless do you? Lucky is a reverse critical. There is no need for them to be integrated into anything. They are in the book to be player characters, not socio-economic building blocks. What's the difference between altering them and creating a new race? [/QUOTE]

Verification