Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="WizarDru" data-source="post: 4488622" data-attributes="member: 151">I'd be curious in seeing some of the numbers.&nbsp; I glanced at your system...and I'll be honest, it seemed to make the whole process a lot more complicated than I really wanted.&nbsp; Is the general issue that of the existence purely of the success/failure mechanic, with no option for partial success/failure?&nbsp; Is it just the cumulative math involved (i.e. the greater the number of checks, the lower the PCs chances of success go)?&nbsp; Could this simply be alleviated by changing the conditions for success/failure (i.e. make it four failures instead of three, allow players to sacrifice an action point or healing surge to counteract a specific failure, etc.)?While your system looks very detailed (and I've only glanced at the 12 page version, not the longer one), it seems to sacrifice one of 4e's biggest appeals to me; specifically the speed-of-use and relative simplicity.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="WizarDru, post: 4488622, member: 151"] I'd be curious in seeing some of the numbers. I glanced at your system...and I'll be honest, it seemed to make the whole process a lot more complicated than I really wanted. Is the general issue that of the existence purely of the success/failure mechanic, with no option for partial success/failure? Is it just the cumulative math involved (i.e. the greater the number of checks, the lower the PCs chances of success go)? Could this simply be alleviated by changing the conditions for success/failure (i.e. make it four failures instead of three, allow players to sacrifice an action point or healing surge to counteract a specific failure, etc.)? While your system looks very detailed (and I've only glanced at the 12 page version, not the longer one), it seems to sacrifice one of 4e's biggest appeals to me; specifically the speed-of-use and relative simplicity. [/QUOTE]

Verification