various: visuals, examples, rolls
Gameplay: - changed "Boost" section to "Roll", including necessary detail Page: - background gradient fades more gradually - extended character sheet example - added an "important" aside format some more minor changes not listed here
This commit is contained in:
@@ -229,3 +229,24 @@ health
|
||||
- some principled way to prevent acquiring this must exist, or at least a clear special case
|
||||
- the word "health", given its wide use in other contexts, may imply death at zero
|
||||
- perhaps it's time to bring back "vigor"?
|
||||
|
||||
2025-04-27
|
||||
|
||||
over-flexible repetition of checks
|
||||
- players can try a check once to see if they can succeed without the boost, then if not, try it again
|
||||
- this is only applicable to some checks, but it is a problem
|
||||
- sometimes the character would be able to determine to difficulty in these cases, but not always
|
||||
|
||||
when rating things, eg. modifiers
|
||||
- three scales to consider:
|
||||
- as proportion of this character's total pool
|
||||
- for comparing to other characters of the same type
|
||||
- for comparing on a universal scale.
|
||||
- all 3 of these have to be factored in, with the third one being the most vital as its what checks are compared with
|
||||
|
||||
positive/negative modifiers, features
|
||||
- it is very rare that a modifier needs both, where they are not equal
|
||||
- besides which, whether some rating is positive or negative is context-dependant
|
||||
- thus, perhaps modifiers should just use a single number to determine how strongly the term applies as a description
|
||||
- ! main problem with this is that it makes it harder to reward players for taking negative modifiers, though the current method to do that is not accurate
|
||||
- by this schema, modifiers become more "features", since they are simply words used to describe the character, instead of directly defining its strengths and weaknesses
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user