Re: Rolling the Dice (Was: Re: T'orites and armor)

[Andrew Luers <orc_food@yahoo.com>]

   Looks like I step in it.  The last point I will
bring up is to say is unlike Find Traps, Immobilze
clearly states 2D6. I an sorry but I think the skill
at a base of 400 proves information on where to hit or
not. The prayer at rank X should be able to see
missing kineys or bone plates under the skin.

  Andrew L.


--- "Steven E. Ames" <steve@virtual-voodoo.com> wrote:
> 
> There are some skills that the GM rolls and not the
> player. Find Traps
> is one of these. The GM makes the roll because
> otherwise the player is
> granted too much information. In a succeed/fail
> scenario a player can
> roll the dice... but if there are more options? How
> about:
> 
> For example, lets assume that There _ARE_ traps. The
> player rolls his
> 'find traps' skill and succeed. Obviously the player
> finds the traps
> right? But what if he fails? Obviously he doesn't
> find them but he also
> knows that he failed his check and will just either
> try it again or ask
> someone else to also check for traps. If the GM
> rolls the dice and
> simply says 'you didn't find any traps' the player
> isn't sure which way
> it went. The player isn't sure if there aren't any
> traps or he just
> didn't find any. This is in keeping with reality.
> You can never be 100%
> certain, you can only be sure of what you saw. A
> failed roll might turn
> up something that looks like a trap but a successful
> roll would have
> dismissed it as not a real trap.
> 
> That said... greg wasn't suggesting telling the
> player how many dice to
> roll or using the rather lame successive dice thing.
> He was saying that
> they don't know how many dice to roll until they
> try.
> 
> Example: the player goes for the immobilize. He
> rolls 2d6 and annonces a
> successful immobilize. The GM says, sorry he doesn't
> go down. The player
> at that point knows he has to roll more dice.
> 
> The same thing could apply to the above detect traps
> example. It would
> seem that there are always two ways to do it:
> 
> 1. the player rolls and the GM can say that even a
> success is a failure
> because they didn't roll enough dice. The player
> knows that either it
> can't be done or its going to require more dice.
> 
> 2. the GM rolls the number of dice the player
> requests and then
> announces success or failure and lets the player
> decide what happened.
> 
> I'm more for #1 ... even in the detect traps
> scenario. Even if there are
> no traps the GM might decide that it would take a
> 3d6 check to determine
> that fact because the room is filled with smoke. So
> when the player
> rolls 2d6 and is successful the GM can always say:
> "you detect no
> traps". A good player should recognize that some
> situations require more
> dice and not go with the minimum roll.
> 
> Blah. Had my wheaties this morning :) (pay no
> attention to the inherent
> self contradictions in this message... they aren't
> there... your getting
> sleepy... Terrence and Phillip rule...)
> 
> -Steve
> 
> > no, the player made an incorrect assumption and
> > jumped the gun.  Wait to find out how many dice
> > it'll be, then roll.
> >
> > Wright
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Andrew Luers" <orc_food@yahoo.com>
> > To: "Greg Mowczko" <mooch@cioe.com>
> > Cc: <gmlist@cioe.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2000 11:25 PM
> > Subject: Re: T'orites and armor
> >
> >
> > >
> > >   Greg .. You don't tell the player how many die
> they
> > > need to roll!!! What do the poor persons do,
> roll one
> > > at a time to see how many they get? I have been
> know
> > > to do that in the past but almost never for
> skills.
> > >
> > >   Now to you srewing the person with the case
> cost 400
> > > skill. The skill clearly states 2d6 for unarmed
> > > tergets.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- Greg Mowczko <mooch@cioe.com> wrote:
> > > > As a GM I've had people try to immobilize
> someone
> > > > who wasn't normal and ran
> > > > it as following:
> > > >
> > > > Player: Is he wearing armor?
> > > > Me: None you can see
> > > > Player: I immobilize him ( 2d6 roll ) Made it.
> > > > Me: Results, he is still standing
> > > > Player: What I made my check
> > > > Me: Correction you would have made your check
> if it
> > > > took 2d6 but that was
> > > > a 3d6 check since you didn't know he is
> missing the
> > > > kidney you tried
> > > > to hit ( or something like that )
> > > > Player: F*ck
> > > > Me: Does a 24 hit? How about a 25 and an 18?
> Take 26
> > > > points
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I'm for extra dice to the check with
> possibilities
> > > > of the player not knowing
> > > > they need to roll more dice to succede until
> they
> > > > try. Just like detect traps
> > > > is supposed to be done by the GM. You don't
> know if
> > > > you failed or not you just
> > > > know you didn't find a thing ( or you waste
> time
> > > > unarming a piece of hair that
> > > > go stuck in the lock that you thought was a
> trap )
> > > > Greg
> > > >
> > > > > From steve@virtual-voodoo.com  Tue Mar  7
> 14:10:32
> > > > 2000
> > > > > From: "Steven E. Ames"
> <steve@virtual-voodoo.com>
> > > > > To: "John  Hogg" <johnhogg@laf.cioe.com>
> > > > > Cc: "John  Hogg" <johnhogg@laf.cioe.com>,
> > > > <gmlist@cioe.com>
> > > > > Subject: Re: T'orites and armor
> > > > > Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 14:10:01 -0500
> > > > >
> > > > > Clothing and Robes are different. Clothing
> does
> > > > not provide any DV.
> > > > > Standard everyday attire or business
> clothing
> > > > gives you 0 CDV. Hence you
> > > > > can immobilize most people with no extra
> effort.
> > > > So... you don't have to
> > > > > be naked to get zero CDV... you just can't
> be
> > > > wearing anything armored
> > > > > or padded. Normal clothing also does not
> affect
> > > > your movement rate (GM
> > > > > adjudication for those tight leather pants
> you
> > > > like to wear).
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm still pondering your extra difficulty
> check...
> > > > are you suggesting
> > > > > something along the way of an extra die per
> CDV?
> > > > So 3d6 for robes, 6d6
> > > > > for plate?
> > > > >
> > > > > -Steve
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "John Hogg" <johnhogg@laf.cioe.com>
> > > > > To: "Steven E. Ames"
> <steve@virtual-voodoo.com>
> > > > > Cc: "John Hogg" <johnhogg@laf.cioe.com>;
> > > > <gmlist@cioe.com>
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2000 1:53 PM
> > > > > Subject: Re: T'orites and armor
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> 
=== message truncated ===