The Solar System discussion

[aplath]

Hey, you made up the guideline. I never agreed with it. Personally, I think you've got it absolutely wrong. You're looking at it like the original BDTP, where I made things confusing by using conflict resolution concepts in task resolution, which makes it very hard to conceptualize.

I know I made the guideline ... and I did had a feeling that I had it wrong. :-)

And you are right, I was still thinking about conflict in BDTP. So it's task. Now it makes much more sense.

Thanks for explaining.

Andreas

[J B Bell]

Secret:  "It's just a flesh wound"

Spend one point of Vigor to "shake down" your wound track.  Move all marks for wounds so that they are collected at the bottom, with no spaces between.

You could add "water off a duck's back" for social "damage."

[dyjoots]

I'm not sure how much I like the separation of damage types.  If it's an abstract measure of player control and power, and a countdown until the player can no longer affect the SIS, the separate damage tracks clash, in my mind.

[Clinton R. Nixon]

I'm not sure how much I like the separation of damage types.  If it's an abstract measure of player control and power, and a countdown until the player can no longer affect the SIS, the separate damage tracks clash, in my mind.

It's how much influence the player can have over the story in that arena, now. Which is interesting, I think.

What's SIS? (If it's one of those terms - and you know what I mean, hundred-dollar gaming terms that mean stuff like "story" - then I don't need to know.)

[dyjoots]

What's SIS? (If it's one of those terms - and you know what I mean, hundred-dollar gaming terms that mean stuff like "story" - then I don't need to know.)

Sorry... it was in the provisional glossary here, I thought it was an accepted term.  

"Shared-imagined Space" -- The fictional content of play as it is established among participants through role-playing interactions. See also Transcript (which is a summary of the SIS after play) and Exploration (a near or total synonym).

[Clinton R. Nixon]

What's SIS? (If it's one of those terms - and you know what I mean, hundred-dollar gaming terms that mean stuff like "story" - then I don't need to know.)

Sorry... it was in the provisional glossary here, I thought it was an accepted term.  

"Shared-imagined Space" -- The fictional content of play as it is established among participants through role-playing interactions. See also Transcript (which is a summary of the SIS after play) and Exploration (a near or total synonym).

Oh, ok. I get it, I guess. I don't read the glossary and that stuff, but it makes sense.

[aplath]

I tested the new BDTP yesterday with a friend and noticed something funny. In some instances there was a very large amount of ties going on.

This slowed pace a lot in BDTP.

Then today I took a look at the numbers and realized that in resisted ability checks where the abilities involved differ by one (neophyte vs. greenhorn, for instance) the chance of a tie is around 50% (actually 56% if no modifier dice are used).

Maybe I've got my math wrong, but it seems consistent to what we experienced in play.

Looking further, it seems this is the worst case scenario. If ability levels are equivalent the tie chance is around 10% and if they differ by two (say, neophyte vs. journeyman)  it goes down to 35% and lower as the difference in ability levels grow.

Just thought I'd report this back since the BDTPs where we had lots of ties were a bit annoying.

Andreas

[Vaxalon]

You can ameliorate that by choosing an offensive stance.  That way even if you tie, you do some damage... which might end up killing both sides, but there you go.

[First Age]

If you're staying with the Ability level names I prefer Apprentice to Greenhorn. Actualy I'd prefer just about anything to Greenhorn.

But maybe that's just me.

Cheers

[dyjoots]

Two friends and I played over the weekend, and my only comment is that characters seem a lot more competent in this version of the game than in the previous.

I see this as a good thing.

[Yasha]

If you're staying with the Ability level names I prefer Apprentice to Greenhorn. Actualy I'd prefer just about anything to Greenhorn.

I just have a problem distinguishing Novice and Greenhorn.
 
According to the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, a Novice is

1. A person new to a field or activity; a beginner.
2. A person who has entered a religious order but has not yet taken final vows. Also called novitiate.[/list:u] and a Greenhorn is

1. An inexperienced or immature person, especially one who is easily deceived.
2. A newcomer, especially one who is unfamiliar with the ways of a place or group.
[/list:u]
At least according to these definitions, one does not seem any more advanced or experienced than the other.

-- James "Yasha" Cunningham

[Clinton R. Nixon]

You guys are correct re: Greenhorn.

However, I can't find a good term for a level between Novice and Journeyman. "Apprentice" isn't a good term - it implies a relationship to someone else. If anyone has any good ideas - including moving down Journeyman, and putting something between it and Master, let me know.

[Bankuei]

Hi Clinton,

I was fiddling around with the idea of using your mechanics for something I've got cooking and the term I preferred was "Trained".   It pretty much summarized exactly what I figured a person was at that point- routinely trained, like most people in their day to day lives.  They've got the basics down, but it's not like they're going to do much of anything spectacular with their abilities- they're trained.

Chris

[Andrew Morris]

Not to throw a kink in it, but "journeyman" carries as much of a relationship connotation as "apprentice." Which is to say, they both may or may not be defined by a relationship to a more skilled worker. So, if you're uncomfortable with one term for that reason, you might want to get rid of both. Or, just use both.

[Clinton R. Nixon]

Not to throw a kink in it, but "journeyman" carries as much of a relationship connotation as "apprentice." Which is to say, they both may or may not be defined by a relationship to a more skilled worker. So, if you're uncomfortable with one term for that reason, you might want to get rid of both. Or, just use both.

You gurdurn semantic wugnuts, you know what I meant. You are someone's apprentice. You're never someone's journeyman. That's the point of being a journeyman - it signifies you're qualified to do a task alone.

Seriously, you guys are smut-bonzkers.

Oh, Chris - "Trained" is good. It's dry as mazoola, but what are you going to do, you know? I may just suck up the pyoli that's fed to me and use it.