forums.cubicle7.co.uk
archive

Falenthal wrote:I like it when rules are written so that I don't have to look at the books during the game session AND they are so clear that the role-playing isn't interrupted by interpretations of said rules. In this, the new ones are better. If they achieve the same results with less effort, then for me they're better.

I'm with Falenthal. I like that the newer way is more "behind the scenes" and easier to learn. Once a group "gets" it, it can fade into the background easier, I think. Also, while the first way is pretty cool, I think different groups (in fact, even different players) can end up with different views of what they view as "out of the ordinary" or "exceptional". Both are highly subjective, so you're bound to get more variance between people, based on their own definitions or expectations.

Just to clarify, by cumulative, I meant:
•To get the first point, succeed at a roll or better, meaning what qualifies for the second or third point, below.
•To get the second point, get a great success or succeed and invoke a trait or better, meaning what qualifies for third point, below.
•To get the third point, get an extraordinary success and succeed and invoke a trait.

And the default assumption being: you only get one more point for a given roll, and you can't get the second unless earlier in the game (a prior roll) you got the first... and likewise, can't get the third without having gotten the second. No extraordinary success netting three points in one fell swoop.

One note, Dedicemancometh (and I understand this wasn't the reason for your post), in the section you just quoted, the second point should say

get a great success or succeed OR invoke a trait

instead of

get a great success or succeed AND invoke a trait

Majestic wrote:One note, Dedicemancometh (and I understand this wasn't the reason for your post), in the section you just quoted, the second point should say

get a great success or succeed OR invoke a trait

instead of

get a great success or succeed AND invoke a trait

I don't believe that's correct. "And" is correct.

Elfcrusher wrote:

Majestic wrote:One note, Dedicemancometh (and I understand this wasn't the reason for your post), in the section you just quoted, the second point should say

get a great success or succeed OR invoke a trait

instead of

get a great success or succeed AND invoke a trait

I don't believe that's correct. "And" is correct.

That is what the "clarification" pdf states:

If no circles have been checked yet, the Loremaster should
feel free to award the Advancement point upon any
successful roll.
If one circle has been checked already, then the Loremaster
should grant an Advancement point only if the action
accomplished something out of the ordinary: the player
obtained a great or an extraordinary success, OR the
player can reinforce his skill roll with the invocation of
a pertinent Trait (the Trait must be deemed significant to
the action).
If two circles have been checked, then the Loremaster
should give 1 Advancement point only if something
exceptional was accomplished: the player obtained a great
or an extraordinary success, AND the player can reinforce
his skill roll with the invocation of a pertinent Trait.

Yeah the "or" in front of success is the important one that starts the clause. A second "or" would make the rule nonsensical.

I think you guys might be thinking of the third Advancement Point, Elf and zed. As helghast quoted (from the Clarification document):

If one circle has been checked already, then the Loremaster
should grant an Advancement point only if the action
accomplished something out of the ordinary: the player
obtained a great or an extraordinary success, OR the
player can reinforce his skill roll with the invocation of
a pertinent Trait (the Trait must be deemed significant to
the action).

Majestic wrote:One note, Dedicemancometh (and I understand this wasn't the reason for your post), in the section you just quoted, the second point should say

get a great success or succeed OR invoke a trait

instead of

get a great success or succeed AND invoke a trait

Well, if we turn the "or"s into line breaks for a list, here's what we get with your breakdown:

Get A:

• great success
• succeed
• invoke a trait

which I have a hard time understanding what the second one means. Whereas

Get A:

• great success
• succeed and invoke a trait

seems to work better.

Maybe I'm not understanding what you're saying?

Oh, good grief. The revised rule is thus:

First Advancement Point: Any success.
Second Advancement Point: (A Great or Extraordinary Success) OR (a normal success and a trait invocation)
Third Advancement Point: (A Great or Extraordinary Success) AND (a trait invocation)

zedturtle wrote:Maybe I'm not understanding what you're saying?

I think I we're saying the same thing, and I think what was throwing me off was the two uses of "Or" in there (in the original).

The way Stormcrow wrote it (above) is exactly it. Nice and concise and non-confusing.