| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
VonDan
Legendary
Joined: 08 Jul 2008
Posts: 3249
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Locke
Novice
Joined: 19 Sep 2011
Posts: 56
Location: Springville, UT
|
 Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2012 12:44 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
I know that this idea will end up being essentially the same, mechanically, as adding in negative circumstance modifiers to the players' rolls, but what do you all think about requiring raises on rolls instead of imposing penalties? For example, the party needs to bypass security to retrieve the Macguffin from the Big Bad's super vault, but the vault's lock is so difficult to crack that the Thief needs to get two raises on her Lockpicking roll to succeed.
Again, I know it ends up being pretty much sixes on mechanics. It just seems like the players might be less likely to riot in this kind of situation. 
_________________
Josh Leavitt, Editor
PrepMyBook.com | Let's get you published |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
farik
Seasoned
Joined: 12 Mar 2008
Posts: 322
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2012 12:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Requiring 2 raises is like a-8 modifier. That's pretty harsh in my opinion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ValhallaGH
Legendary
Joined: 25 Apr 2010
Posts: 4475
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2012 1:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Locke wrote: | | I know that this idea will end up being essentially the same, mechanically, as adding in negative circumstance modifiers to the players' rolls, but what do you all think about requiring raises on rolls instead of imposing penalties? |
Penalties are kinder. There's more granularity. Each raise required is a -4 on the roll; there are three numbers before 4, and any of them may be a better representation of the penalty.
I've used "cumulative successes" before. "This requires three successes on a Lockpicking (-2)." I don't care if that's from a success with two raises or from three consecutive successful rolls - as long as there are three "got it"s then I'm happy.
Oh, and your suggestion devalues the Raise. Rolling a raise should be a good thing! It shouldn't be a 'crap, I almost got' moment. That's one of the reasons I tell my players most of their penalties up front - so when they roll a raise, it really feels like it. 
_________________
"Got a problem? I've got the solution: Rocket Launcher."
"Not against a Servitor."
"... We're all gonna die." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Locke
Novice
Joined: 19 Sep 2011
Posts: 56
Location: Springville, UT
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2012 2:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Those are excellent points, Valhalla. I hadn't considered that requiring raises for things might take some of the fun away from getting a raise. I think it came from prepping for the wrap-up of my Necessary Evil game, where the plot point mentions something about requiring two raises on a roll to accomplish something. I'll just need to work out exactly how I want to handle difficult tasks.
_________________
Josh Leavitt, Editor
PrepMyBook.com | Let's get you published |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
