>I like it, if for no other reason than that it will likely reduce the impact
>of what I se as one of the most troublesome rules in D20: Take 20.
>
>With this rule, anyone who wants can succeed at easy or even moderate
>difficulty tasks without having to have any real skill, just by taking some
>extra time. Thus, there is little reason to take any significant non-combat
>skills: in a pinch, a Fighter with Rank 1 (Rank 0, if the skill may be used
>untrained) can replace the character who specialized in the same skill. And
>it's not like, "Gee, can I ever do as well as he would?" It's, "Ho-hum, we
>have time, so I'll just Take 20 and succeed." Meanwhile, there's no
>equivalent of Take 20 for combat: "Yeah, I know I have a +0 Attack Modifier.
>So I'll take 20, and slice him open!" A good GM will watch over Take 20 VERY
>carefully, and introduce all sorts of complications for Heroes who abuse it
>(AND scrupulously enforce the "20 times the standard time" rule, rather than
>just saying "two minutes"); but BOY, is it prone to abuse!
>
>But with your system, the difference between a skilled and unskilled
>character becomes more apparent. Why do I believe this? Because challenging
>tasks will have more "Difficulty Points" than you can roll in a single
>success. So the time involved in Take 10 and Take 20 will get amplified. It
>will become impractical to Take 20 over several rolls: the skilled character
>could probably achieve 10 or more successes while the unskilled character is
>busy with 1.
>
>Martin L. Shoemaker
But, how does it work in real life? Does it work at all? Thus the
request for playtesting.
Alan
--
Mythusmage.com, <http://www.mythusmage.com> at its new location!
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ICQ: 103299329
