Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > The Fantasy Trip

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 05-13-2018, 02:14 PM   #17
Jim Kane
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Default Re: Movement Rule Tweak

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirk View Post
I agree, I would like to know if SJ did this on purpose, or what it rushed because of other factors?
Now that we put it out there, I hope maybe SJ will fill us in with the background thinking and reasoning.

Where is TY? I think he has mastered that IQ 14 Spell: SUMMON STEVE JACKSON (C): Allows a wizard to summon the TFT Game Designer, who will perform one service for him,... or maybe not, but will NOT grant a wish... or perhaps he will, it's a hard to say; make a reaction roll. A one-hex creature which has the ability to teleport into any thread on the forum and remains normally for 1d6-3 turns, then vanishes; often leaving his personal sigil scorched into the floor, appearing as to resemble the common :) glyph.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirk View Post
To me, risking the 50% chance of major damage/death just to then have half a chance of even blows or having to attack a defending character (and for about half the results the pole weapon user gets) is *not* enough of a balance.
Well what "feels" balanced will often be a personal perception, and some people will feel it may turn out to be enough. Need to play-test. I will say this: a half-a-chance to survive rushing a pole weapon is better than a fat-chance ;-)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirk View Post
For me, simply allowing an attacker to attack the point of the pole first, and if successful, void the pole user's attack. It works well and doesn't change fundamentals of the game, and yet still the advantage goes to the pole user, it just reduces the imbalance.
The Kali/JKD guys call this: "De-Fanging the Snake".

Perhaps - with play-testing - we might find these 2 concepts (adding Defend to Option IIc, and the "De-Fanging" Option) might work together to get us closer to a playable and satisfying solution.

The more we talk about things, the more I am convinced that the answers - whatever they turn out to be - will be found in expanding and detailing the PLAY RULES OPTIONS, and not so much in overhauling the DAMAGE RULES on a wholesale level.

JK

Last edited by Jim Kane; 05-13-2018 at 02:42 PM.
Jim Kane is offline   Reply With Quote
 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.