Character improvment in the various gaming systems

[cthulhudarren]

I fixed the quote tag, but I don't know if I got the attribution of the quotes correct. If not, please report the post again and give me the info I need to fix it - assuming, of course, that cthuludarren doesn't fix it. --Z

Nah, its all good. Thanks.

[tzor]

The same principle applies though. If a T-REx chomps down on your head... no matter how "advanced" of a human you are... You die.

I totally agree. The question is on the "if." Determining if a T-Rex chomps down on your head is the important part. Generally speaking, there is always a number of fudge factors in most role playing systems that attempt to model this question on a table top level. This is complicated by the notion that most games have a "level" system where people advance into "heroic" levels. We can abstract all of these things into a simple equation:

Target to hit = Attacker's Attributes + Attackers Heroic Factor - Defender's Attributes - Defender's Heroic Factor + Situational modifiers

D&D cheats in that the "Defender's Heroic Factor" is moved from the "To Hit" calculation and winds up in the Hit Point calculation. In practice it doesn't mean much. However, the question "Did the T-Rex chomp down on his head,' cannot be determined at the point of the determination of the "Did he Hit" roll, since a part of that answer was moved (for better or worse) to the damage control section of the process.

So the answer for a low level character might be "yes" and for a high level character it might be "no." One has to really ask ... did he die? That's kind of backwards, but that's the result of dividing the calculation into the "Hit point" section. Had it been moved (properly) into the hit determination section, the T-Rex would have clearly "missed."

Thus it is not really anything to do with "realism" but rather at what point does the dice yeild a result that you can physically describe.

[RadiantPhoenix]

I don't believe in robbing players of iterative attacks if they roll a one.

Uh... How does that relate to my thing? The player can totally keep rolling iterative attacks after a 1, and is, in fact, encouraged to do so, because if a subsequent attack roll isn't a 1, then the enemy no longer gains the edge.

[cthulhudarren]

I don't believe in robbing players of iterative attacks if they roll a one.

Uh... How does that relate to my thing? The player can totally keep rolling iterative attacks after a 1, and is, in fact, encouraged to do so, because if a subsequent attack roll isn't a 1, then the enemy no longer gains the edge.

I was agreeing with you.

[RadiantPhoenix]

I was agreeing with you.

Oh.