Re: FT3: Common to-hit system

In article <97927.21319.2786@thingy.apana.org.au>,
Ground Zero Games <jon@gzero.dungeon.com> wrote:
>>On Monday, October 27, 1997 3:33 AM, Brian Bell 
>>[SMTP:PDGA6560@compuserve.com] wrote:
>>>>
>>> 1) Common damage reduction:
>>
>>I'd plump for common die reduction - just use less D6 for the various 
>>factors, no sums please.
>>
>>> 2) Roll to hit then roll for damage.
>>
>>I'm against rolling twice, the whole appeal of the current system is
its 
>>simplicity
>>on a single roll.
>
>Agreed wholeheartedly - although a FEW systems use two rolls, I really
want
>to keep the single-roll resolution for most combat.
>>
>>>
>>> 3) FMA.
>>
>>This appeals as its actually very simple (no sums) and uses a single
roll. It 
>>works very well in games like Silent Death where the hit and damage
are on a 
>>single die type roll.
>
>I think I've mentioned before that a starship (or fighter) game using
the
>FMA mechanisms would be very interesting to do, and is somethiung that
is
>on one of the back burners in my mind, but it WOULDN'T be FT. We may do
>something along these lines someday, but to move to polyhedrals in FT
would
>change the game too fundamentally.
>
>Jon (GZG)
>>
>>sincerely
>>tim jones
>>--
>>The stars are matter, We're matter, But it doesn't matter.
>

I'm 100% with Tim here, jon, I rather throw dice once than get all
deterministic about hit calculations. Trust your luck, not your
calculator!
>