[UA] Dicey Incompetence

[Royal Minister of Stuff]

That's pretty much my point.  Just 'cause Runequest
didn't say you shouldn't roll for every little thing
doesn't mean there weren't people who played it that
way.  Again, I'm not defending Runequest or condemning
UA.  I know why the rules are there and when I don't
like 'em, I change 'em.

God forbid there's ever such a thing as standardized
Roleplaying.

--- Kevin Elmore <kelmore at rocketmail.com> wrote:
> > I just didn't want a bunch of characters running
> around
> > in UA who were
> > really good at multiple things.  Besides, being
> able to
> > perform a task with
> > 55% accuracy under tremendous pressure is actually
> pretty
> > good, IMHO.

I would tend to agree with this.

I still think it would have been simpler to use
attributes as some sort of skill base and build up
from there.  That's the way I do it anyway.  That way
I don't have to remember as much when running games.

> 
> And that's the important distinction right there.
> 
> Too many times I have been in a game where the GM
> (and
> sadly I've been guilty of this in periods of mental
> constipation) makes the player roll for a skill for
> no
> reason at all.
> 
--snip--
> 
> That's one good thing that D&D 3E did by
> implementing the
> "Take 20" rule.  Pretty much, if a normal person can
> accomplish the task given enough time, then why
> bother
> rolling?

Yep. That's pretty much common practice any more.   It
only took D&D 20 years to upgrade to it, which, if you
think about it, isn't bad.

=====
-- Rp Bowman, Royal Minister of Stuff
The Electronic Nation of Yokeltania:
http://www.geocities.com/yokeltania/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

_______________________________________________
UA mailing list
UA at lists.uchicago.edu
http://lists.uchicago.edu/mailman/listinfo/ua