Author: Paolo Marino (---.64.26)
Date: 09-11-2002 00:11
Your idea has its merits, but (unless I missed something) you propose to assign various separate difficulty levels to actions, and use these to adjudicate if the character needs to roll. It is not clear how many you propose... in an example you start at 5%, and can go up to 100%.
If I got it correctly, I'd say that 20 levels create an excessively fine-grained scale. Most of the games using difficulty levels tie them with a simple adjective (e.g. routine, easy, average, difficult, desperate, impossible).
My proposal is to reduce the number of levels to 5, something along the following scale:
Easy | 20%
Average | 40%
Difficult | 60%
Formidable | 80%
Impossible |100%
The "trick" is that it is easier for the GM to decide (even on the spot) the relative difficulty by relating it to the adjective (e.g. "Climbing the fence would be *difficult*" or "Looking for this on Google is *Easy*").
If you introduce 20 distinct levels you make more difficult (for the GM) to decide if something is 80% instead of 90% difficult...
Apart from this, a good idea. Thanks for having proposed it.
P.S.:
I have dabbled a little with Classic Traveller myself (http://www.mclink.it/personal/MC4799/traveller/trav0001.html) so I'm curious what you'll take will be.
|
|
