[RULES] Rule of 16!

[Anaxim]

Well, the development is so:
He dropped himself from my life for a few months after he started on a tangent to accuse me of being an unfair GM who insists on starting fights over rules he wants to change.
No gaming is better than bad gaming, particularly when good gaming is to be had soon enough with other people.
So in short - I will probably work with the vanilla Rule of 16, or use Kuroshima's impressive table for more mage heavy settings, where high effective skill levels are common and crushing forces exist.

Thanks all for the help and input.

[Edges]

Originally Posted by jeff_wilson

Why would only the game master need the table? Shouldn't the players be able to read the rules as well?

"Need" =/= "be able to."

[Edges]

Originally Posted by LemmingLord

The idea that spell effects (especially MOST spell effects) must overcome one of GURPS contrived attributes or simply fail seems pretty weak to begin with. For all of the GURPS talk of researching spells like a science project, it is interesting that it treats humans so much different from objects.

I would favor in many genres a hard-and-fast effect (and often deadly) for spells... Glorify spellcasting. Don't assume you are an equal to a normal human. A mage in such a genre is changing the laws of physics AT A PERSON.. A spell cast should have a specific effect unless magically countered. For example, with flesh to stone, the effect might turn 10 pounds of flesh into stone and dealing 5points of damage to target per point of fatigue spent. It doesn't matter how healthy you are - if a mage hits a non-mage with a spell that target is going to be messed up.

On the other hand, there should be better rules in such a genre for wizard duels.. If a mage casts flesh to stone on another mage, that second mage shouuld be pouring magical energy back at him... as they vigh for contorl of physics in the area..

Now people with magical resistance... that's another thing you'd want to revisit.. If the laws of physics are less alterable around you because of this specific quality.. I'm thinking not only does the wizard have a penalty to cast the spell on you, but your magic resistance would subtract from the EFFECT... So in my flesh to stone example, a 10 fatigue 50 damage flesh to stone spell thrown at someone with MR 9 would take 5 points of damage.

I like these ideas. If you have the time to propose a worked system, I would be very interested in it. : )

[jeff_wilson]

Originally Posted by Edges

"Need" =/= "be able to."

How do they read the rules without a copy?

[Edges]

Originally Posted by jeff_wilson

How do they read the rules without a copy?

Either they don't and the game goes on because they don't need to read them for the game to go on. Or they say, "Hey GM, can I take a look at your copy."

When I played AD&D, the GM was the only person in the room with the to-hit tables and we played for years. None of the player even bothered to ask to look at them. They didn't know their opponent's AC anyway.

If I were to implement Kuroshima's rule in my GURPS campaign (which is what we're talking about), I am sure I would never find myself saying, "Uh-Oh, Jim didn't bring his copy of Kuroshima's matrix like everybody else. I guess he can't play."

[jeff_wilson]

Originally Posted by Edges

Either they don't and the game goes on because they don't need to read them for the game to go on. Or they say, "Hey GM, can I take a look at your copy."

When I played AD&D, the GM was the only person in the room with the to-hit tables and we played for years. None of the player even bothered to ask to look at them. They didn't know their opponent's AC anyway.

If I were to implement Kuroshima's rule in my GURPS campaign (which is what we're talking about), I am sure I would never find myself saying, "Uh-Oh, Jim didn't bring his copy of Kuroshima's matrix like everybody else. I guess he can't play."

I thought you were making a prescriptive statement. The players should have reasonable knowledge of how their characters' combat actions will be resolved. I don't see that keeping the opponent's AC from them would be a good idea either, at least given the limits of basic estimation at first and then more accurately as the fighting continues.

[Edges]

Originally Posted by jeff_wilson

I thought you were making a prescriptive statement. The players should have reasonable knowledge of how their characters' combat actions will be resolved. I don't see that keeping the opponent's AC from them would be a good idea either, at least given the limits of basic estimation at first and then more accurately as the fighting continues.

All I was saying was that in order to play a table-top role playing game with rules, the only person that really needs a copy of the rules is the GM. That's what I meant when I said:

Originally Posted by Edges

Like in AD&D, nobody needs the table except the DM/GM.

More copies is great, but not ultimately necessary.

As for AC, we're starting to get a bit off topic. I'll just say that one may have a general idea of an NPC's AC. But there is no conclusive test that a PC can do (considering that it could change from moment to moment and be effected by any number of factors).

Bringing it back on topic, it's generally even harder to judge someones resistance to something that the Rule of 16 would apply to than to guess AC. I suppose in GURPS, one could devise a Detect (Resistance Level) advantage, but that would hardly be the norm.

Either way, the player doesn't need to own or even see the table nor does the player need to know an opponent's AC or resistance level for the game to go on.