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.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.
Understanding Advancement Points and Traits
Re: Understanding Advancement Points and Traits
Tale of Years for a second, lower-level group (in the same campaign).
-
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Fri May 02, 2014 10:58 pm
Re: Understanding Advancement Points and Traits
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.
•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.
Re: Understanding Advancement Points and Traits
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
get a great success or succeed OR invoke a trait
instead of
get a great success or succeed AND invoke a trait
Tale of Years for a second, lower-level group (in the same campaign).
-
- Posts: 5160
- Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 5:20 pm
Re: Understanding Advancement Points and Traits
I don't believe that's correct. "And" is correct.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
The Munchkin Formerly Known as Elfcrusher
Journey Computer | Combat Simulator | Bestiary | Weapon Calculator
Journey Computer | Combat Simulator | Bestiary | Weapon Calculator
Re: Understanding Advancement Points and Traits
That is what the "clarification" pdf states:Elfcrusher wrote:I don't believe that's correct. "And" is correct.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
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.
Re: Understanding Advancement Points and Traits
Yeah the "or" in front of success is the important one that starts the clause. A second "or" would make the rule nonsensical.
Jacob Rodgers, occasional nitwit.
This space intentionally blank.
This space intentionally blank.
Re: Understanding Advancement Points and Traits
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).
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).
Tale of Years for a second, lower-level group (in the same campaign).
Re: Understanding Advancement Points and Traits
Well, if we turn the "or"s into line breaks for a list, here's what we get with your breakdown: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
Get A:
- great success
- succeed
- invoke a trait
Get A:
- great success
- succeed and invoke a trait
Maybe I'm not understanding what you're saying?
Jacob Rodgers, occasional nitwit.
This space intentionally blank.
This space intentionally blank.
Re: Understanding Advancement Points and Traits
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)
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)
Re: Understanding Advancement Points and Traits
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).zedturtle wrote:Maybe I'm not understanding what you're saying?
The way Stormcrow wrote it (above) is exactly it. Nice and concise and non-confusing.
Tale of Years for a second, lower-level group (in the same campaign).
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: StuartJ and 3 guests