Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="John Dallman" data-source="post: 8558956" data-attributes="member: 6999616">Well, I mostly play and run GURPS 4e, which is fairly detailed. We do not try to drag in rules that aren't applicable to a setting or genre, but there is quite a lot of material for D&amp;D-style fantasy, and for semi-historical settings. Replying with that in mind: All rolls to see if you can do something are 3d6 roll low. You want to roll high for damage, and you want the GM to roll high for social reactions (players don't need to roll those). This works fine; the classes of roll are clearly separate. Occasionally you need to look up a skill's description, but there aren't any more charts. There are charts for critical hits and misses in combat, but you only need them when you've rolled a critical, and they're one more 3d6 roll. Basically, roll against your skill. If you want to attack specific hit locations, or make the opponent's defence roll harder, there are subtractions to your skill, but those are optional, and controlled by the player. Ranged combat requires asking the GM for for the range penalty, and if you're using a weapon that fires multiple shots, a very small division to find out how many shots hit. Roll your damage, subtract armour, apply it to the opponent. Reasonable in the era of PDFs. In the print-only times, keeping down the page count was important. Some game designers seem to have a &quot;cargo cult&quot; view of mechanics. &quot;This worked great for me in (really cool campaign I ran years ago), so all my games should work that way.Whereas we aren't really into system-hopping. Different players in the group play with different default levels of detail, and nothing breaks. We had a campaign run by our least technically accomplished player in 2019; she just ran it as &quot;human being with skill rolls&quot;, much in the style of CoC.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="John Dallman, post: 8558956, member: 6999616"] Well, I mostly play and run GURPS 4e, which is fairly detailed. We do not try to drag in rules that aren't applicable to a setting or genre, but there is quite a lot of material for D&D-style fantasy, and for semi-historical settings. Replying with that in mind: All rolls to see if you can do something are 3d6 roll low. You want to roll high for damage, and you want the GM to roll high for social reactions (players don't need to roll those). This works fine; the classes of roll are clearly separate. Occasionally you need to look up a skill's description, but there aren't any more charts. There are charts for critical hits and misses in combat, but you only need them when you've rolled a critical, and they're one more 3d6 roll. Basically, roll against your skill. If you want to attack specific hit locations, or make the opponent's defence roll harder, there are subtractions to your skill, but those are optional, and controlled by the player. Ranged combat requires asking the GM for for the range penalty, and if you're using a weapon that fires multiple shots, a very small division to find out how many shots hit. Roll your damage, subtract armour, apply it to the opponent. Reasonable in the era of PDFs. In the print-only times, keeping down the page count was important. Some game designers seem to have a "cargo cult" view of mechanics. "This worked great for me in (really cool campaign I ran years ago), so all my games should work that way. Whereas we aren't really into system-hopping. Different players in the group play with different default levels of detail, and nothing breaks. We had a campaign run by our least technically accomplished player in 2019; she just ran it as "human being with skill rolls", much in the style of CoC. [/QUOTE]

Verification