Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Scud.NZ" data-source="post: 4378458" data-attributes="member: 73097">Thanks for your feedback, Stalker0, and thanks again for designing such a good alternative to the official system!I'll consider what you said about Intimidate. What was going through my mind when I put pen to paper was Stargate Atlantis. I was kind of thinking about how Ronan and Sheppard intimidate McKay on occasion to get him to grit his teeth and &quot;press on&quot;, or shut the hell up when they are surrounded by bad guys. Is this a little too micro-management, should I be thinking in more general terms?When I read again Q1 in your FAQ, I think I may have answered my own question. &quot;Mechanically, helping your party is the same skill check as taking a more active role&quot;; so if my big, burly PC describes intimidating the weak, unfit PC and makes the skill check then the successful check that he has earned effectively is the bonus that would, in the official system, be awarded to the weaker PC because big, burly has contributed to the successful completion of the challenge. Is my line of thinking here correct?Looking through my player's character sheets I see that the Warlord has CHA18, and only CON12. So, it would definitely be in his interest to try to use a Social skill at some point in the challenge (once per player per encounter, yes?). Given that he has +9 Intimidate, compared to +6 Endurance, and taking the primary skill bonus in turn 1, he is marginally better off going with Intimidate. Does this sound reasonable?PS: I like your idea about intimidating the ghoul in the last turn, as it adds to the &quot;just in time&quot; suspense I want to generate.Finally, How can I model good leadership contributing to the challenge? [Seeing that the Warlord is meant to be an inspiring leader not a bully] At first, I might say its a kind of &quot;positive&quot; Intimidation, and use that skill. However, there is no guarantee that the Warlord is trained in that skill? So, I'm not really sure. How would you handle this?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Scud.NZ, post: 4378458, member: 73097"] Thanks for your feedback, Stalker0, and thanks again for designing such a good alternative to the official system! I'll consider what you said about Intimidate. What was going through my mind when I put pen to paper was Stargate Atlantis. I was kind of thinking about how Ronan and Sheppard intimidate McKay on occasion to get him to grit his teeth and "press on", or shut the hell up when they are surrounded by bad guys. Is this a little too micro-management, should I be thinking in more general terms? When I read again Q1 in your FAQ, I think I may have answered my own question. "Mechanically, helping your party is the same skill check as taking a more active role"; so if my big, burly PC describes intimidating the weak, unfit PC and makes the skill check then the successful check that he has earned effectively [U]is the bonus[/U] that would, in the official system, be awarded to the weaker PC because big, burly has contributed to the successful completion of the challenge. Is my line of thinking here correct? Looking through my player's character sheets I see that the Warlord has CHA18, and only CON12. So, it would definitely be in his interest to try to use a Social skill at some point in the challenge (once per player per encounter, yes?). Given that he has +9 Intimidate, compared to +6 Endurance, and taking the primary skill bonus in turn 1, he is marginally better off going with Intimidate. Does this sound reasonable? PS: I like your idea about intimidating the ghoul in the last turn, as it adds to the "just in time" suspense I want to generate. Finally, How can I model good leadership contributing to the challenge? [Seeing that the Warlord is meant to be an inspiring leader not a bully] At first, I might say its a kind of "positive" Intimidation, and use that skill. However, there is no guarantee that the Warlord is trained in that skill? So, I'm not really sure. How would you handle this? [/QUOTE]

Verification