Thanks for the comment! For your question, I don't have problems with game systems that has target numbers but in AFF, it just goes a little faster without temPożeracz zwłok wrote:Ave!
For Seth's sake! Quite emotionall review! And again I've caught it all.
Best question for me: "You don't have to bother with Target Numbers"It's real traouble to do it stat (out of hand?).
These days TNs are widespread, just about any system has it. Cortex, D&D, d6 system and many others. Only Savage Worlds and BRP (and its children) are without them. What can we do? Adapt or reject Oh I actually think it does go faster with target numbers. My players always get confused about whether to roll under or roll higher, and if you ask out of the blue for them to roll something, if you reveal that it's an opposed SKILL check they're going to know there's going to be something there.d6&d6 wrote:Thanks for the comment! For your question, I don't have problems with game systems that has target numbers but in AFF, it just goes a little faster without temPożeracz zwłok wrote:Ave!
For Seth's sake! Quite emotionall review! And again I've caught it all.
Best question for me: "You don't have to bother with Target Numbers"
For the most part, I prefer default AFF (without TN -- although that's slightly inaccurate to say that, as roll under has an implicit TN, so it's probably best to say I prefer roll under), and I have no problem switching back and forth. However, if I were running a game and some players had difficulties, I'd probably default to roll under and ask them to declare how much they passed by (Margin of Success (or "MoS")), although I'd be open to roll over + TN if necessary (although that really feels odd to me).MountainPeak11 wrote:Oh I actually think it does go faster with target numbers. My players always get confused about whether to roll under or roll higher, and if you ask out of the blue for them to roll something, if you reveal that it's an opposed SKILL check they're going to know there's going to be something there.
There's a lot of options that works with AFF... isn't it amazingspaceLem wrote:For the most part, I prefer default AFF (without TN -- although that's slightly inaccurate to say that, as roll under has an implicit TN, so it's probably best to say I prefer roll under), and I have no problem switching back and forth. However, if I were running a game and some players had difficulties, I'd probably default to roll under and ask them to declare how much they passed by (Margin of Success (or "MoS")), although I'd be open to roll over + TN if necessary (although that really feels odd to me).MountainPeak11 wrote:Oh I actually think it does go faster with target numbers. My players always get confused about whether to roll under or roll higher, and if you ask out of the blue for them to roll something, if you reveal that it's an opposed SKILL check they're going to know there's going to be something there.
I know some people on other forums see to have a pathological hatred of roll under systems, demanding roll over even when it makes things far more complicated (e.g. d% roll over 100+difficulty, and report MoS? ugh), however I've just finished a two year campaign where the dice mechanic was d20 roll under skill and report MoS, and no one had a problem with it at all. I think if you say "I beat my score by 3", or "I missed by 7" it becomes quite intuitive.
and the good thing here is that they all work well. The choice here is based on how we are comfortable with a system and how our players are. My players are sometimes confused with roll higher... roll lower... I admit it. But for them, AFF was quite new some sessions ago but as we are playing, they're more and more used to it! For my part, removing target numbers, on the long run, will make the game a little more fast but that's my feeling. And it's a change since I've been playing most of my rpg life with TN.I'm a big fan of every games you mention here. Even D&D d20 with TN is in my list! It depends on the game you want at your table to make that kind of choice! AFF is magic because you can do it both way and it will still be AFF! The more I think of it, the more I think that this game rocksPożeracz zwłok wrote:Yes, a bit
I haven't got any incredible problems with TNs, for I usually use standard TN, sometimes modified a little. Simplification however is easier and gives higher comfort whilst playing.
Settings are good, but I don't like gargantuan increasing in HP. Engine is unbalanced and so indigestible. Certainly for meD&D d20 with TN is in my list!
I wait for DND NEXT - there'll be better, I think. I might, considering I've half-written the one for Escape From Hammerfall. I'm not able to do it actively at the moment however because my final university deadline is coming up. Afterwards, though, I'm free as a bird.Hullalla wrote:Are you going to make your adventure modules available for everybody?
Thanks for the reviewMountainPeak11 wrote:Here's my take on Blacksand after it arrived in the post.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9M6gNQul3Q
There are sketches for Lord Azzur's Palace elsewhere on this forum. 