Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="RodneyThompson" data-source="post: 3432888" data-attributes="member: 3594">Actually, one of the reasons we made some of the changes we did was to empower the players more when they take actions. For example, it's deflating to make an attack roll with, say, a grenade, only to have the DM roll roll roll...oh, sorry guys, your grenade didn't do as well as you'd hoped. Or the following scenario:Player: "I roll a 25 on my Move Object check! That's my best roll tonight!"GM: *rolls dice* "Nice roll, but the bad guy resists with a higher roll."Player: "Awww."Now becomes:Player: "I roll a 25 on my Use the Force check! That's my best roll tonight!"GM: "Well, that exceeds his Will Defense, do you successfully hurl him away."And so forth. Basically, we wanted to make the game more proactive than reactive, because the players are almost always more proactive than reactive (i.e. they're more likely to make more attacks than they will be the target of). Now I certainly understand a player wanting to save himself from being harmed; who doesn't? But if you can accept a static Defense score, you can accept the changes in the Saga Edition rules. Also, if you *do* want a more dynamic defense, it won't be hard to reverse engineer a bonus as opposed to a flat score. However, the core game doesn't support this, because the "roll to exceed a difficulty number" mechanic leads to much, much quicker gameplay that fits in better with a lot of the other mechanics in the d20 system. And, all that having been said, we do have some "Save your own ass" mechanics in the game, including one involving the new destiny mechanics.</blockquote>

Verification