Static Target Number?

[esmale]

Given feedback and some playtesting with a different group, I have
some thoughts about streamlining a few items in Chimera Basic.

Chief among these is Target Numbers (TN). Right now, the difficulty of
an action can be reflected in one of two ways: by modifying the
required TN and by modifying the Action Roll itself. In practice, a
difficult action might be reflected by a negative AR or a positive TN
(i.e., AR -2 has the same effect as TN +2).

For consistency, I think it's easier to restrict modifications to the
Action Roll. To maintain the simplicity, thought, a static TN is
required.

Going back to a convention I used in my B/X campaign (http://
breeyark.org/ability-act), why not make every action succeed on a
static TN of 16? It's a good number--it's the reason class-based
Abilities are set at TN 16 anyway.

This means that easier actions get a positive AR modifier; harder
actions get a negative AR modifier. Whereas a Shoot roll against a
target beyond effective range used to be TN +2, now the same Shoot
roll is AR -2.

Thoughts?

-Erin

[deimos3428]

I think GoogleGroups ate my last post.

[deimos3428]

In my opinion the base TN should reflect the difficulty of the task,
and AR modifiers the ability of the one attempting said task. While
you might extend AR modifiers to enable a single base TN, personally I
would prefer to handle it via a set of base TNs. (But if you recall
D.R.A.G.O.N., you'd know this would be my response.) NB: This is just
an example, I haven't really experimented with the specific values so
take them with a grain of salt. Probably shouldn't be neatly linear.
Something like:

TN 0 = Natural Selection
TN 4 = Trivial
TN 8 = Easy
TN 12 = Normal
TN 16 = Hard
TN 20 = Very Hard
TN 24 = Impossible

The GM merely needs to determine the difficulty of the task, and then
compare any modifiers to the roll. This way the difficulty can be set
beforehand if one is writing an adventure. Of course, individual GMs
might change the base TN up or down due to extenuating circumstances.
Perhaps climbing a cliff face is a "Normal" task, but in a particular
campaign it's raining that day. The GM bumps it up to "Hard".

Then he considers each character's abilities and how they affect their
particular AR. To facilitate that last bit, one other thing I would
do is change the focus of character improvements: Instead of TN -1,
use AR +1. Etc. As you can see from the chart above, even
"Impossible" might be doable under the right circumstances.

So for the Shoot roll example you gave above, I'd make the TN one step
more difficult if it's a demonstrably harder distance. It's not a
function of character ability. (The TN steps are less granular, on
purpose...if it's less than TN +4 difference under the current system,
you really have to consider if the task has a monumental difference in
difficulty or if it'll all work out in the wash.) Of course, a
skilled archer making the harder attempt would still be AR +2, etc.

On Feb 5, 9:55 pm, esmale <erin.sm...@gmail.com> wrote:

[esmale]

On Feb 6, 11:10 am, deimos3428 <vicker...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> TN 0 = Natural Selection
> TN 4 = Trivial
> TN 8 = Easy
> TN 12 = Normal
> TN 16 = Hard
> TN 20 = Very Hard
> TN 24 = Impossible
>
> The GM merely needs to determine the difficulty of the task, and then
> compare any modifiers to the roll.  This way the difficulty can be set
> beforehand if one is writing an adventure.  Of course, individual GMs
> might change the base TN up or down due to extenuating circumstances.
> Perhaps climbing a cliff face is a "Normal" task, but in a particular
> campaign it's raining that day.  The GM bumps it up to "Hard".

I like the progression - essentially identical to Chimera 2.x ;)

Semantics are somewhat at play, so I don't mean to quibble. It sounds
like you're saying that the TN reflects the action itself; the AR
modifier reflects what the character brings to the table (i.e., how
his skills and equipment impact the attempt). I think that makes
sense, but since a positive TN has the same effect as a negative AR,
I'm just considering whether adjusting the action's TN is better
reflected as another AR modifier. Is it faster during play? Is it
easier for players to work with during the game?

Put another way:

Natural Selection = AR +16
Trivial = AR +12
Easy = AR +8
Normal = AR +4
Hard = AR +0
Very Hard = AR -4
Impossible = AR -8

The GM can assign a particular cliff face as "Normal" for climbing
purposes, meaning that attempts to climb are AR +4. Assuming a static
TN 16, the d20 result must be 12 or better.

> Then he considers each character's abilities and how they affect their
> particular AR.  To facilitate that last bit, one other thing I would
> do is change the focus of character improvements: Instead of TN -1,
> use AR +1. Etc.  As you can see from the chart above, even
> "Impossible" might be doable under the right circumstances.

Under this convention, character Abilities would *start* with the
following AR adjustments (subsequent improvements add to these
values):

Class Ability: AR +0
Non-class Ability: AR -2
Untrained: AR -4

Chimera uses the Athletics Ability to climb. Given the cliff above,
consider these characters:

* Nocan the Veteran with Athletics as a class Ability (AR +0), so he
has to roll a 12 or better
* Slimey the Burglar with Athletics as a non-class Ability (AR -2), so
he has to roll a 14 or better
* Gidney the Occultist with no Athletics Ability (AR -4), so he has to
roll a 16 or better

A good set of climbing gear might provide AR +1. Maybe Nocan later
improves his skill to Athletics +2 (total AR +3).

The approach you recommend is the cliff TN is 12. Nocan's +3 means he
has to roll 9 or better. The approach I'm considering is that the
cliff TN is 16; the AR +4 for being a normal cliff face is added to
Nocan's AR (i.e., now his total AR is +7). Again, he has to roll 9 or
better.

To-ma-to / To-mah-to? Which is easier to use during play?

Cheers,
-Erin

[deimos3428]

> To-ma-to / To-mah-to? Which is easier to use during play?
>

Oh yes...the math will work out very similarly if not identically. I
simply find breaking it up as suggested to be somewhat more intuitive.

[esmale]

Cool. I can include this in the next update in such a way that lets
the GM choose which method to use.

Side note - after some playtesting, I'm shifting the average static TN
to 12 (instead of 16). 16 worked well for this approach in D&D, when
character level was added as a modifier. 12 is more in keeping with
Chimera 2.x, so I'm coming a bit full-circle.

Cheers,
-Erin