Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5964923" data-attributes="member: 54877">Agree with this.&nbsp; I have noticed for some time now, such that the observation now approaches personal dogma*, that if you want interesting game resolution with player decision enabled, you need at least three truly independent dimensions in the mechanics.&nbsp; A damage roll separate from a success check is largely independent, whereas a single success or failure against a count has been rolled into the skill check itself.&nbsp;What the third independent dimension should be in a D&amp;D style game, I'm not sure.&nbsp; Burning Wheel uses &quot;fate&quot; (Artha) here, to good effect.&nbsp; Whatever it is, I do think it should be a player-driven resource, at the moment in the game, as skill checks and &quot;damage&quot; are mainly not.&nbsp; &nbsp;* in the real sense of the word dogma, that it is now a conclusion reached from reason for which I'll entertain objections if one wants to discuss those reasons or objections to them, but otherwise will take as true.&nbsp; &nbsp;One of the not inconsiderable benefits to having &quot;damage&quot; in non-combat is that it becomes far easier to wing it, by granting modifiers to the damage portion instead of the skill check, or in some cases, automatic damage (or &quot;healing&quot;).&nbsp; Moreover, this makes the skill system integrated, in that a &quot;single skill check&quot; now works exactly like the rest of the system.&nbsp; That is, a &quot;single skill check&quot; is one where the hit points of the challenge are low enough that the first capable character that goes after it can knock it out.&nbsp;Also agree with the implications of delericho's post that a single mechanical structure for all non-combat is probably not the best solution.&nbsp; It might not be a bad one as a framework to hang other things on, but I'd like to see those other things specific to social, exploratory, survival, etc. challenges.&nbsp; That is, concrete things that can be deployed by the DM and players in those challenges, that work seemlessly with the main challenge framework.&nbsp;I believe all of this is consistent with the goals pemerton has expressed, and which I also agree with.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Crazy Jerome, post: 5964923, member: 54877"] Agree with this. I have noticed for some time now, such that the observation now approaches personal dogma*, that if you want interesting game resolution with player decision enabled, you need at least three truly independent dimensions in the mechanics. A damage roll separate from a success check is largely independent, whereas a single success or failure against a count has been rolled into the skill check itself. What the third independent dimension should be in a D&D style game, I'm not sure. Burning Wheel uses "fate" (Artha) here, to good effect. Whatever it is, I do think it should be a player-driven resource, at the moment in the game, as skill checks and "damage" are mainly not. * in the real sense of the word dogma, that it is now a conclusion reached from reason for which I'll entertain objections if one wants to discuss those reasons or objections to them, but otherwise will take as true. One of the not inconsiderable benefits to having "damage" in non-combat is that it becomes far easier to wing it, by granting modifiers to the damage portion instead of the skill check, or in some cases, automatic damage (or "healing"). Moreover, this makes the skill system integrated, in that a "single skill check" now works exactly like the rest of the system. That is, a "single skill check" is one where the hit points of the challenge are low enough that the first capable character that goes after it can knock it out. Also agree with the implications of delericho's post that a single mechanical structure for all non-combat is probably not the best solution. It might not be a bad one as a framework to hang other things on, but I'd like to see those other things specific to social, exploratory, survival, etc. challenges. That is, [B]concrete[/B] things that can be deployed by the DM and players in those challenges, that work seemlessly with the main challenge framework. I believe all of this is consistent with the goals pemerton has expressed, and which I also agree with. [/QUOTE]

Verification