Lanefan
Victoria Rules
Who says the scale has to stop at 30? (or at 1, for that matter, though there's a too-wide gulf between 0 and 1 which would require lots of 0.x values to fill in e.g. the strength score of a common butterfly might be 0.3)
D&D General D&D Editions: Anybody Else Feel Like They Don't Fit In?
- Thread starter JohnSnow
- Start date
Thomas Shey
Legend
As Aldarac says, if you view it as ranking rather than magnitude, it shouldn't. While not my gig in other ways, that's essentially the way Amber Diceless and its successor work. I'd tend to do it as 1-16, where 1 was defined as the absolute peak of normal humanity, but other than that...
Thomas Shey
Legend
The problem is that to do that properly if you're assuming linear progression requires massive numbers in some cases, and that'll probably drown any easy application of the numbers to other mechanics.
(Of course you don't have to have the numbers be linear in their expression, but outside the stylization of superhero games, that can have its own issues, especially if you want a 16 point range).
Thomas Shey
Legend
Even outside of MHR a lot of the more well constructed superhero games use a doubling scale to handle everything. Of course outside of coarse direct-map-to-reality things like lift, they don't really mean mechanically what you'd expect from that, but that's because they usually don't in the genre either, in practice.
TaranTheWanderer
Legend
I haven’t read the entire thread. Has anyone suggested World Without Numbers?
Spells are limited but slightly more powerful in that they usually last a scene.
It’s the Feats (or talents - I forget what they are called) that are super interesting and really define the characters.
I’ve been enjoying it quite a bit.
Thomas Shey
Legend
"Need" is subjective here. What one set "needs" can vary rather radically from someone else.
ezo
Where is that Singe?
Sure, there are games that do it this way. I just think if you are going to use a roll-under approach, this makes more sense than the "1 is best" version.
Edgar Ironpelt
Adventurer
So what happens when the God of Archery shoots an arrow at the God of Dodging Ranged Attacks?Within the scope of bounded accuracy, I think it is enough personally.
For things you might want outside that scope, I would just rule automatic. For example, a god of archery never misses with their bow--- NEVER. No roll is required for such an entity, nor should it be IMO.
(And this is coming from someone who despises "automatic" things in 5E...)
I want mechanics that don't pack it in when the absurdly difficult meets the ridiculously capable. Or when the absurdly easy meets the ridiculously inept. That's why I prefer inflationary numbers, despite their drawbacks, to most any sort of bounded accuracy.
One exception to my no-bounded-accuracy preference would be the nominal 'lockpicking' roll needed to 'open the lock holding shut' an open doorway. And yes, I do define this in my homebrew based on The Fantasy Trip.
On the other hand, there's the question: "What is the DC (in 3.5e) for a Spot check to spot a mountain?" I've never carried things quite that far, but I have worked out that the DC to spot a Gargantuan creature who is moving and not trying to hide is DC -36 (negative 36). Given enough penalties (e.g. for distance) it is possible to fail to notice such a creature.
Similar Threads
