Quote:
Originally Posted by jeff_wilson
|
I assumed some parity in my previous example, but the concept still holds. There can be any adjustment to an appropriate skill(s) (Thrown Weapon Knife comes to mind) that could cause this situation to turn out very differently.
The gist of the idea is that it matters no one bit what that mook's status, rank, wealth, cultural familiarity or sewing skill was.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icelander
The broader principle is that points are highly context sensitive and eyeballing relative power in a given situation is usually more, not less, accurate.
|
THIS! Relative Power (In the Indy case, the bullet vs the dodge) is the relative ability to affect probability. If the mook had mucho Dodge, and only a default in sword, this could have easily ended differently.
How mucho is mucho?
It depends on Indy's Pistol Skill.
How likely is it to end differently?
It would depend on Indy's Dodge, and Unarmed Combat skills and maybe the other equipment he might have been carrying.
This is the
relative nature that we're talking about.
Although I like to think that Im a little more mathematically rigorous than eyeballing, even I accept that the probabilities that I come up with can NEVER account for all the things that a group of PCs might or might not do!
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Johnston2
If he hadn't had some psychological disadvantage that kept him from just closing and stabbing, Indy would have been dead.
|
Again, if Indy has Unarmed Combat skill high relative to the Mooks Dodge and a strength that allows Damage High Relative to the Mooks DR then the situation resolves the same, it just takes longer :)
The point is that power is, as Icelander put it,
relative.
Nymdok