Editing FANGS: how to start up

Jump to: navigation, search

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision Your text
Line 22: Line 22:
 
* Need to put more categories on all pages.
 
* Need to put more categories on all pages.
  
== Notes from Steve Perrin ==
+
== Notes from Steve Perrin =-
 
 
 
 
  
 
On Friday, May 13, 2005 10:33 AM Steve Perrin wrote:
 
On Friday, May 13, 2005 10:33 AM Steve Perrin wrote:
:One place where I am hanging up is in deciding what to do with Resisted Rolls. There are three ways to approach this.  
+
: One place where I am hanging up is in deciding what to do with
 
+
: Resisted Rolls. There are three ways to approach this.  
::1. If you make the roll, you make the roll. If an attacker rolls 33 and the defender rolls 21, the Defender succeeds and that's that. It takes a Special Attack vs. a normal Defense to do damage to the defender. This can really drag on a combat, but it simplifies the GM's task. See BESM for a system that uses this.     
+
:
 
+
: 1. If you make the roll, you make the roll. If an attacker rolls 33
::2. Simple comparison of results. If the attacker rolls 26 and the defender rolls 25, the attacker wins and damage is done. This is quick, simple, and means the GM has to do a bit more work balancing the opposition to get the result he wants.   
+
: and the defender rolls 21, the Defender succeeds and that's that. It
 
+
: takes a Special Attack vs. a normal Defense to do damage to the
::3. The Attacker's success is subtracted from the Defender's success chance. So if Attacker and Defender have the same skill total of, say 15, the Attacker rolls 25, which subtracts 5 from the Defender's roll, so the Defender must roll 10+d20 instead of 15+d20.   
+
: defender. This can really drag on a combat, but it simplifies the
 
+
: GM's task. See BESM for a system that uses this.     
:This last possibility is how it is written now, and I think it is how the original rules were written. It tends to slow down combat as calculations are done in mid-battle - something that is not necessary for either of the other possibilities. Do you have a preference?   
+
:
 
+
: 2. Simple comparison of results. If the attacker rolls 26 and the
:Similarly, I really wonder if the various combat maneuvers are useful. I know I tend to forget at least half of them in the middle of a combat and I tend to prefer a much looser combat system, more like Champions or BRP. Splitting things up into Missile, Melee, Movement isn't bad, but I know that I do not worry about Second Melee - I just have them make both attacks at the same time. The whole concept of Engaging but not attacking in a round is also counter-intuitive to my mind, which is why I added the Charge maneuvers.         
+
: defender rolls 25, the attacker wins and damage is done. This is
 
+
: quick, simple, and means the GM has to do a bit more work balancing
:It's your call, though feel free to dump it back on my lap if you just want me to do what I think will work without paying a lot of attention to what came before...
+
: the opposition to get the result he wants.   
 +
:
 +
: 3. The Attacker's success is subtracted from the Defender's success
 +
: chance. So if Attacker and Defender have the same skill total of, say
 +
: 15, the Attacker rolls 25, which subtracts 5 from the Defender's
 +
: roll, so the Defender must roll 10+d20 instead of 15+d20.   
 +
:
 +
: This last possibility is how it is written now, and I think it is how
 +
: the original rules were written. It tends to slow down combat as
 +
: calculations are done in mid-battle - something that is not necessary
 +
: for either of the other possibilities. Do you have a preference?   
 +
:
 +
: Similarly, I really wonder if the various combat maneuvers are
 +
: useful. I know I tend to forget at least half of them in the middle
 +
: of a combat and I tend to prefer a much looser combat system, more
 +
: like Champions or BRP. Splitting things up into Missile, Melee,
 +
: Movement isn't bad, but I know that I do not worry about Second Melee
 +
: - I just have them make both attacks at the same time. The whole
 +
: concept of Engaging but not attacking in a round is also
 +
: counter-intuitive to my mind, which is why I added the Charge
 +
: maneuvers.         
 +
:
 +
: It's your call, though feel free to dump it back on my lap if you
 +
: just want me to do what I think will work without paying a lot of
 +
: attention to what came before...

Please note that all contributions to RPGnet may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see RPGnet:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)

Template used on this page: