| Welcome to The Disciples Of Grell. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Out of Character Discussion | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Feb 11 2009, 05:06 PM (6,638 Views) | |
| Beowulf | Apr 25 2009, 01:33 PM Post #26 |
![]()
Canadian Ninja
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
LOL, Touchee! |
![]() |
|
| Grell | Apr 26 2009, 09:04 PM Post #27 |
![]()
DoG Founder
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
So, haven't seen much of Michael lately. Anyone know what's up? |
![]() |
|
| Beowulf | Apr 27 2009, 07:34 AM Post #28 |
![]()
Canadian Ninja
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Not sure, but the game's been a little stalled for a day or two, maybe he's just waiting for something new to interact with? |
![]() |
|
| dhorn | Apr 28 2009, 08:22 PM Post #29 |
![]()
Bio-Hazard
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Lunarmage, didn't you tell me that you'd used a similar (or the same) weapon in another game? I thought we figured this out, but I can't remember... nor do I have anything in my notes. What rifle is it? |
![]() |
|
| Lunarmage | Apr 29 2009, 01:20 AM Post #30 |
![]()
Priest
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
RE-7 / M-468 I am useing it in Grell's CE game doing 6d6/1d6x10+10 three round burst. |
![]() |
|
| dhorn | Jun 21 2009, 08:10 PM Post #31 |
![]()
Bio-Hazard
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Goin' fishing from the 21st - 25th. I won't be able to post during this time. If you can get your posts in by the 25th, I'll be ready to post my follow up at that time. |
![]() |
|
| VioWolf | Jun 21 2009, 10:16 PM Post #32 |
![]()
Faerie Snack
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Sweet! Have fun!
|
![]() |
|
| Grell | Aug 24 2009, 07:15 PM Post #33 |
![]()
DoG Founder
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
So, what's the deal with this climb roll for ascending the ladder? It seems to me that a physical check on a d20 may be more appropriate than a percentage base. As pointed out by Beowulf, the climb skill as written doesn't seem to fully apply to a rope ladder. If I may make a suggestion in the spirit of the perception rules? Use a d20 check and give a +1 bonus for every 10% of the climb skill (rounded down). Of course, feel free to totally disregard any suggestions from us clowns in the peanut gallery. Especially this salty specimen!
|
![]() |
|
| Beowulf | Aug 24 2009, 08:02 PM Post #34 |
![]()
Canadian Ninja
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Probably should take into consideration the weaher conditions too. As I understand it, climbing a rope ladder, in the dark, in the rain, in a high wind, suspended from a helicopter, is not the easiest thing to do (though far from impossible, especially if one has practice climbing a rope ladder, which I'm assuming all of our characters and most of us in RL do). |
![]() |
|
| Grell | Aug 24 2009, 08:17 PM Post #35 |
![]()
DoG Founder
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Hence putting it on a d20 check. Just seems to make more sense in this instance. |
![]() |
|
| Beowulf | Aug 25 2009, 12:18 AM Post #36 |
![]()
Canadian Ninja
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Either way, let's wait for dhorn's final call. I can re-roll if he wants me to. I was a little suprised that we had to roll a climb check at all for a ladder, but then I considered the conditions and it's not an unrealistic call. |
![]() |
|
| Grell | Aug 25 2009, 06:54 AM Post #37 |
![]()
DoG Founder
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The call is entirely valid and good to me, I just suggest an alternate mechanism for it. |
![]() |
|
| dhorn | Aug 25 2009, 05:10 PM Post #38 |
![]()
Bio-Hazard
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You haven't convinced me that this is more appropriate than a straight climb roll, but I'm all ears. I would certainly like to use the most appropriate approach. What is it about the d20 approach that makes more sense than the percentage approach? For that matter, how does it work? |
![]() |
|
| Grell | Aug 26 2009, 10:04 AM Post #39 |
![]()
DoG Founder
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I'm not trying to convince you of anything, I'm only proposing an alternate mechanic for the situation (see my above post). |
![]() |
|
| Beowulf | Aug 27 2009, 05:43 AM Post #40 |
![]()
Canadian Ninja
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
If you're going D&D style, then teh GM sets a challenge rating for a certain goal (in this case a physical feat) that a character has. For example, if I wanted to pick a simple lock then you might say 5, and I'd have to roll a 5 or better on a d20 after I added any bonuses or took any negatives into account. If I wanted to pick a complicated lock (say a privatley owned high security state of the art vault) the challenge rating might be 39, in which case I'd need a large amount of bonuses (at least a +19) and a high roll on a d20 to accomplish it. In this case you would have to decide that on a scale of 1-20 (or higher if the challenge merrits it, which I do not believe this challenge does) how difficult would it be for a given character to climb thsi ladder? Make an estimate taking into effect stress, rain, wind, the dark, injuries, and anything else. However, tehere should also be some form of bonus, say for a high P.P. or P.S. (both of which would be handy in climbing a rope ladder) or for skills that the character has, such as gymnastics, acrobatics, or climbing. In addition, take into account any help the character may have. for example, Grell's character might be standing at the bottom steadying the ladder, Lunar's character is helping my character climb, etc... Another possible method that a former GM of mine used to use was that he'd decide which attribute applied to the situation best, then told us to roll a number of d6's. If we rolled under or equal to that attribute, then we would pass, if we rolled over that attribute we would fail. All of these in addtion to the original percentile check could be used in this instance, whichever the GM prefers is fine, but please take into account taht it would really suck if in this case dice were to decide our fate and falling would equal certain death (unless the helicopter is over teh rooff in which case maybe we just fall onto the roof?). Personally, I think the helecopter should have a winch for such situations, lol. 2 people at a time? |
![]() |
|
| Grell | Aug 27 2009, 07:01 AM Post #41 |
![]()
DoG Founder
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Wow, I really couldn't have stated that better myself! Bear in mind, no one is asking for a D&D approach, just using a d20 in lieu of percentile for a situation more akin to a physical feat. This is why I suggested using a similar mechanic for what's used when someone challenges a characters sense of perception. In RUE, the situation is as follows: a character tries to sneak up on a sentry. The sneaking character would roll a d20 with a bonus of +1 for every 10% of skill he had in prowl (rounded down) while the sentry would roll a d20 plus his perception bonus; high roll wins. In this situation, it wouldn't have to be a roll off, but you could make it one (rolling for the effect of the wind, perhaps). If not a roll off, you'd just assign a difficulty. Given palladiums limitations in system, I'd keep the difficulty within a 1-30 range though. You could, as Beowulf suggested, also apply stat bonuses for the most related attribute (PS, PP, etc). Ultimately it's your call. This mechanic just lends itself more easily to a heightened chance of success for something that would be part of our job training. Also it requires less arbitrary assignment of numbers on your part. But again it is your call. Brodie has a 50% climb and if you think that that's appropriate for how you see the situation we're in then there's no room for further discussion. Though if you are set on sticking to percentiles perhaps you could assign a bonus to our base skills to reflect a climbing task that we'd likely be extensively trained for? Ultimately I'll respect and abide by whatever call you make as I'm sure we all will. This was just a suggestion and not reflective of any dissatisfaction on my part. |
![]() |
|
| dhorn | Aug 27 2009, 10:53 AM Post #42 |
![]()
Bio-Hazard
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I understand. Mostly I am curious about the mechanics of this alternate approach. Thanks for clarifying. Will give it some more thought. |
![]() |
|
| dhorn | Aug 31 2009, 08:41 PM Post #43 |
![]()
Bio-Hazard
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
For the sake of moving the game along, I decided to go with the rolls made. I would like to discuss the d20 approach more though. I like the idea of incorporating bonuses from PS or PP when attempting "physical feats". Seems logical to me. Those bonuses could be added to the % roll too. I'm leaning towards this approach. Example: 45% climb skill with a P.S. of 16 would give you 45+16=61% for the skill check. Penalties like Garek's leg wound could be factored in too. I would like to pick your brains on that. |
![]() |
|
| Grell | Sep 1 2009, 10:46 AM Post #44 |
![]()
DoG Founder
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You know, that's actually a pretty good idea. I may play test it in my games to see how it works, though maybe at a plus 5% per every 10 points as opposed to a 1:1 ratio. Good thinkin'! |
![]() |
|
| Beowulf | Sep 3 2009, 05:45 AM Post #45 |
![]()
Canadian Ninja
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Or a + #% for every point past a certain number, much as the rest of the bonuses work in Rifts (Rifts says any number over 16, but you could adjust it for something like physical feats). |
![]() |
|
| Grell | Sep 3 2009, 10:17 AM Post #46 |
![]()
DoG Founder
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You could, but a bonus for every 5% gives the average character a chance at bonuses in skill performance as well. Not everyone is stacked in strength, but a lot of people are still fairly good climbers (at least where rope ladders are concerned). |
![]() |
|
| VioWolf | Sep 4 2009, 11:03 AM Post #47 |
![]()
Faerie Snack
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
except me apparently
|
![]() |
|
| Lunarmage | Sep 4 2009, 01:12 PM Post #48 |
![]()
Priest
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well some time ago I posed the idea of a +2% per PP point over 16 (17 would be +2% 18 +4% etc) to Prowl. Never thought of the Skill Climbing, maybe a similar bonus to Climb. maybe a +2% per three points of PS over 16 or something similar. I don't see a point in offering bonuses to attributes less then exceptional, to keep within the game mechanics as already published. |
![]() |
|
| dhorn | Sep 18 2009, 06:24 PM Post #49 |
![]()
Bio-Hazard
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
We're trying out something very similar for an interrogation sequence in Lunar's NEMA game. We'll see how it works. |
![]() |
|
| dhorn | Sep 24 2009, 05:01 AM Post #50 |
![]()
Bio-Hazard
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Hey gang. I'm headed out of town for about a week and will be unable to post during that time. Please hang tight and I'll get something up when I get back. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · OOC Discussion · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
4:33 PM Jul 10
|






![]](http://i521.photobucket.com/albums/w339/fiendspec/pipend.jpg)







Have fun!
4:33 PM Jul 10