Prev: FT Roleplaying (long) Next: Re: FT Rolepaying

Re: FT Roleplaying (long)

From: RMMDC@j...
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 1996 19:54:52 -0400
Subject: Re: FT Roleplaying (long)


The only thing that jumps out at me is the Gunner/Engineer/Scanner
Officers.  In each of these cases, there is always a + or a -.	There
is no result on the skills that will result in a normal

On these kind of things, I prefer most of the time to have the skill
roll result in no modifier, or a minor success.  The next most often
would be a minor failure, then major successes and failures come in
at the same odds for an average character.  Again, my opinion.

This just reflects my feelings about the efforts of your average 
crewman in these skill positions.  Even your average guy, when trying
to pull something off, may succeed at it, or he may not, but if he
fails, that doesn't necce
necessarily make things worse.	Thus the need for a spread of 
skill results that is "no effect", and a negative result being
less common than a slight positive result.

I don't have time right now to figure out how this would apply
to a 3d6 system, but that's my thoughts on the whole thing.

Beat Navy!

Out here.


Prev: FT Roleplaying (long) Next: Re: FT Rolepaying