[UA] Re:[UA]

[Nick Wedig]

>>In UA, it's pretty easy to take the result of your failed roll and >use that to determine how long the task takes.  Success = immediate >(or nearly so) success.  Higher failures fulfill the task quicker >than lower ones, but not as quick as a successful roll.  Kinda like >initiative.
>
>Hm... I wonder if a failure roll might not act as a very rough gauge for how long it would take to perform a non-combat action?  Let's see here... one minute per percentage?  So if I try my "Computer Hack" skill at 30% and succeed, I get in the system fairly quickly.  If I roll a 45, it's going to take me 45 minutes to get in?
>
>Maybe... maybe not.  Discussion?

The scale depends on the task.  Computer hackign may only take a little time, but something along the lines of "Get paperwork through Bureaucracy" could take weeks or months (I only recently got paid for work performed at Christmas time).  

And shouldn't higher rolls be better, not worse, than lower ones?  That's how it works for initiative and other actions, right?  So having a (failed) roll of 89 should be better than a (failed) roll of 55, which would imply being done quicker, not slower as that would have it.

I'd have to leave it a fairly intuitive GM's call thing, i think.

Mr. teapot
failing all his rolls

____________________________________________________
FREE Disinformation E-book - http://www.disinfo.com

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