Andrew Janssen wrote: > Ok, so I went and looked at the Website, & I think I understand how fps > work: > > 1: One die will not be -1 > 2: One die will be +1 > 3: One die will be +1, one die will not be -1 > 4: Two dice will be +1 > 5: Two dice will be +1, one die will not be -1 > 6: Three dice will be +1 > 7: Three dice will be +1, one die will not be -1 > 8: All four dice will be +1, or +4 (best possible roll) > > It also appears from the IH rules page that successes and failures are > actually figured on a -7 to +7 scale, rather than -4 to +4: > > Result Success value Effects > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > +7 Mythic success cool... > +6,+5 Extraordinary success special/permanent effects possible > +4,+3 Superior success +2 increase possible > +2,+1 Complete success +1 to one or two determinants > 0 Marginal result none, or balanced modifiers > -1,-2 Complete failure -1 to one or two determinants > -3,-4 Severe failure -2 increase possible > -5,-6 Miserable failure special/permanent effects possible > < -7 Catastrophic failure cool... > > So, Jeff, it looks like you're right about a limit of 4 fps per action > being too low. It appears that the limit per action should be 8 fps, > since there's no apparent point in spending more than that anyway. There are cases involving extra actions and epic actions where spending more than 8 points might be appropriate. Personally I would prefer to see more actions of epic difficulty attempted. > In > turn, that suggests that a per turn limit of either 8 or 16 would be > reasonable. I still don't see a positive reason for a per turn limit. -- Jefferson http://www.picotech.net/~jeff_wilson63/rpg/Exq_Main.html ---------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, send mail to celandra-off@phoenyx.net.
