Offline
I know the draft is just about done but I wondered what the thoughts were on the players rolling everything (i.e. the GM can concentrate on the story).
So, for combat, if attacked, a player would roll add defence and try to beat 9 + attack bonus to avoid being hit.
It already works this way for Priority and can easily be used for most other task rolls (which are usually all made by PCs anyway). So, for example, to hide, a player would simply roll, add any relevant bonuses and subtract based on the npc/creature trying to locate them. No need for the creature/GM to make a roll. The only issue I can see is if the creature has a perception boon.
Last edited by Simon W (3/10/2014 7:39 am)
Offline
Definitely gets my vote! Having run a number of Apocalypse World based games I like this method.
Offline
That would work. I do that a lot in othe games.
A simpler system with only one stat for combat (no defence) would also work and beating the number of not would represent the hero winning the assault or being beaten by the opposition.
Either system works OK.
Offline
What about the creatures "perception-type" boon. Perhaps heroes/players take this as a flaw on their roll?
Offline
Yeah, for all the beast boons and flaws just switch them around and apply them to the players
Offline
I like the idea but would prefer it to be offered as an Optional Rule rather than the default. Sometimes it's good to put more than one option in the game rules to allow players to choose their style of play and to demonstrate the flexibility of the system. Sure, anybody can houserule a game but I always find it amazing how many gamers still use the idea of "Canon" rules to help decide whether something is viable or not.
Offline
The GIT! wrote:
I like the idea but would prefer it to be offered as an Optional Rule rather than the default. Sometimes it's good to put more than one option in the game rules to allow players to choose their style of play and to demonstrate the flexibility of the system. Sure, anybody can houserule a game but I always find it amazing how many gamers still use the idea of "Canon" rules to help decide whether something is viable or not.
I agree with this. It would be nice as an option.
Offline
Simon W wrote:
So, for combat, if attacked, a player would roll add defence and try to beat 9 + attack bonus to avoid being hit.
So an enemy would have two main stats:
-Roll against to hit him;
-Roll against to defend his strikes.
(And I'm sure you'll find a better name for them, like "Defense Ability" and "Lethality")..
I like this. Simplifies many things and allows a streamlined way to depict monsters in a single line of text.
Offline
Also, how do you rule about the enemy having the chance of rolling a Mighty Success? If he doesn't roll he can never roll a 12.
Offline
The GIT! wrote:
Also, how do you rule about the enemy having the chance of rolling a Mighty Success? If he doesn't roll he can never roll a 12.
Good question. I suppose rolling a 2 would qualify for that?