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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="SpiralBound" data-source="post: 2215631" data-attributes="member: 8396">This raises an interesting consideration.  If we assume that some method is devised such that this system can be implemented in a fast and easy way, then we have a system which stresses the virtue of more closely approaching realism by attempting to model the interplay between ones ability to achieve a given action versus their body's ability to withstand damage.  This increases the lethality of combat as well as decreases the immediate effectiveness of healing.  So... would it then be fair to keep such things as "critical damage" in such a system?  It countermands the implied goals of this system, retaining a dice-driven mechanic that grossly magnifies the effects of a single blow without taking into account any of the same "naturalistic" theory that underpins the damage and healing systems.It seems that if one is to shift the balance of the "receiving damage" and "recovering from damage" system components, then it is only fair that the "dispensing damage" aspect of the system be similarly adjusted to fit.  Otherwise you will be allowing characters to suffer to a greater degree than they would otherwise.  Also, since the receiving character can not control, predict, or compensate for the probability of a roll of 20 on a d20 attack die then this would not be received damage as a result of a stupid mistake and would instead be unfair damage that couldn't be avoided.Just a thought to ponder... When you shift the balancing point of one system component, you may discover that the rest also needs to be shifted to maintain the system as a whole in a state of cohesiveness.  I wonder what else needs to be shifted to maintain total system balance?</blockquote>

Verification