Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Morrus" data-source="post: 7308662" data-attributes="member: 1">That just means that OLD hasn't been updated to v1.2 yet, like NEW has. The rules are the same for all three games. NOW has a slight advantage in that it's 1.0 will have had the benefit of NEW 1.2 before publication.OLD will join those two with the 1.2 rules once NOW is out there (same layout person, so they happen in serial, not parallel).Personally, that's too many steps for my taste (an attack roll, a damage roll and an attribute check). I generally try to make an attack require only one roll - so I'd personally just make that an attack vs one of the four DEFENSEs.A good spin I like is to make one attack roll, and have it have different effects depending on which DEFENSEs it beats. So you could have a melee attack for the damage, and if it beats VITAL DEFENSE, they get stunned, too. Or vice versa. I feel that's a little more elegant than sequential checks, which tend to slow the game down.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Morrus, post: 7308662, member: 1"] That just means that OLD hasn't been updated to v1.2 yet, like NEW has. The rules are the same for all three games. NOW has a slight advantage in that it's 1.0 will have had the benefit of NEW 1.2 before publication. OLD will join those two with the 1.2 rules once NOW is out there (same layout person, so they happen in serial, not parallel). Personally, that's too many steps for my taste (an attack roll, a damage roll and an attribute check). I generally try to make an attack require only one roll - so I'd personally just make that an attack vs one of the four DEFENSEs. A good spin I like is to make one attack roll, and have it have different effects depending on which DEFENSEs it beats. So you could have a melee attack for the damage, and if it beats VITAL DEFENSE, they get stunned, too. Or vice versa. I feel that's a little more elegant than sequential checks, which tend to slow the game down. [/QUOTE]

Verification