v0.1 wrote:Attribute: A character’s innate physical and mental capabilities. The core attributes are Agility, Brawn, Cunning, Perception, and Will.
The way I see it there are two physical (Ag, Br), two mental (Cu, Wi), and one hybrid (Pe). I really like it how you reduced the list from 8 attributes to 5 while keeping the symmetry between mental and physical. As for Social, I can think of all 5 attributes serving as a Social attribute under the right circumstances. Yes, even Br and Ag.
So, Thumbs up on cutting Attributes down to size.
v0.1 wrote:Derived Attribute: secondary attributes (such as Reflex or Trauma) derived from the core five attributes a character possesses. Derived attributes can only be improved by increasing the primary attributes that compose them. Derived attribute checks may not tap any of the attributes upon which they are based.
There are obviously 10 combinations (Ag+Br, Ag+Cu, Br+Wi, etc...). Waiting to see what kind of and how many derived attributes there will be. As opposed to 16 (8 Pr + 8 Der) BoB had. Especially some (like KD or KO) were too niche to my own liking.
v0.1 wrote:Skills: Characters may use the value of a related skill or the most relevant attribute, whichever is higher or more applicable. When substituting an ability in this fashion, all dice from that pool (including any from other sources) are rolled at FTN6.
This should be changed from "When substituting an ability in this fashion, all dice from that pool (including any from other sources) are rolled at FTN6"
to "rolled against Req +2"
, or something equivalent.
v0.1 wrote:Fixed TN (FTN): a static TN that is not modified by advantage, disadvantage, or any kind of impairment on the character’s part.
creates some awkward situations.
One example that comes to mind is this:
CharA has Agility3(+0T) Athletics3 and is injured (BTN6).
CharB has Ag6, Athletics0, and at full health.
CharA gets 3D vs BTN6.
CharB gets 6D vs FTN6.
As I write it, when trying to perform an Athletics (Agility) related action CharB performs better.
Not only that, charB continues to function equally well (or bad) across the Wound chart.
To make it even worse, Disadvantage is immaterial.
Full health, no advantage/disadvantage? 6D vs FTN6.
Lv5 Wound and prone (disadvantage)? 6D vs FTN6.
In order for CharA to perform equally well in this situation requires him to tap 3 dice (3 abilities 4~6, 1 ability 4~6 and 1 ability 7~9, or 1 abiity 10) into his Athletics pool.
But the funny part is that CharB can also tap, even if rolling at FTN6.
And two concerns
- Given the above I fail to see how the "Ability+Tap" concept really beats the "Attribute > Skill" issue.
- Really wonder why it came to the point killing the "Atr+Skill" concept, which requires as much narration as "Ability+Tap".
Surely I'm dissecting a draft here, I'm sure there is more to come. Still, at a first glance, I'm not really convinced.
Unless ofc I've misunderstood things or missed dsomething, in which case I apologize in advance.
thirtythr33 wrote:Is the character sheet going to have two listings for each ability to show Rank and Tap (like dnd does for attribute and modifier) or are we going to be doing (divide by 3, round up) on the fly?
I'm going to have a little triangle with three circles beside each entry. You fill in the bubbles It will make it easier to see what you actually can tap into at a glance, and it's more visually interesting than writing 6 (2), 5 (1), etc.
That's pretty neat.
And a question/idea. Rank defines the number of dice that can be tapped from the Ability. Why not als odetermine the number of tappings you can get in that Ability pool instead of a flat number?
Tbh I'd hate to have situations where someone with Skill 1 can tap in 6 dice. I believe there should be more granularity.
v0.1 wrote:Abilities can’t ‘double dip,’ across a cascading check. If an ability is used in any way on a check, whether as the thing being tested, tapped, or used as help, it can’t then be checked, tapped, or used as help on any future checks in that same chain even if being used by different characters. The same characters can help across multiple checks, however, they just have to use different abilities for each check.
<insert example, dude A uses Mercantile as the basis for the first check to cascade into a Stewardship roll by dude B. Neither dude A nor dude B can use Mercantile as a tap or help for the second roll because it’s already come into play. On the other hand, Dude A could always try to help with some other ability if they had one that applied>
I liked this quite a bit for solving the above neatly, but it also then prevents us from using cascading rolls as-written for, say, a foot chase..or some kind of crafting roll over time, etc.
Or solve a riddle/scale a sheer cliff when time is of the issue. Or enforce your opinion in a hours-long meeting on how the coming battle should be resolved.
Things that Full Contest modelled perfectly and handled with minimum fuss.
Really, why did you kill Full Contest? That was a pretty cool mechanic.