Post/Author/DateTime	Post
CraggleRock 03-29-07, 12:38 PM	This was inspired, in part, by the discussion taking place in a_psh's Questioning D&D fundamentals, pt. 1 which, if you're interested in theoretical discussion on the D&D game mechanics, comes as a highly recommended read. You may also consider looking at A rant: D&D going nowhere; not as highly recommended as there are points in a substantially long thread where it goes off topic, but you might find it interesting to see where a_psh's other threads were "forged". ;) The aim in this thread is to add a bit of "granularity" to Skill checks and give the players more choice than rolling a single dice when attempting something. It tries to do this via some mechanics that are mostly familiar to the D&D or d20 roleplayers rather than tacking on a completely new system. The following is a "work in progress" and I welcome assistance in refining the rules. And so, I would like to offer for your consideration: Risk Saves, Wounds and Scars 1. Introduction Risk Saves are intended to allow the player to opt for a greater risk in order to better ensure that what they intend to achieve actually happens: in order to reach a destination quicker, they may risk killing their horse; in order to make an impossible jump over a pit, they may risk a broken leg; in order to open a superbly constructed lock, they may risk breaking their thieves tools. It could be thought of quantified Action Points by voluntarily putting something else on the line. As well as risking immediate "fallout" from the Risk Save, the players may also risk gaining a Wound or a Scar. Wounds may come into play when removing a small amount of chance of failure and may end up limiting your character in future. Scars are something of a double-edged sword. There is a chance of them coming into play when the odds of success without a Risk Save were slim, and they can be used in future to help better your characters chances. However, if your opponents know about your scars, they may be able to use them against you. 2. Knowing the Stakes When you come to make a Skill Check roll, you may have the option of increasing the result of the roll if there is something you are willing to risk. Either the players or the DM may specify some risks, but they must be appropriate to the task at hand: so you could risk a twisted ankle jumping a pit, but you couldn't risk the same when studying an enemy wizards spell book. Before you select what risks you might bring into the equation, you need to know what the chances of your success would be. The DM appraises the DC for what you intend to achieve, factors in any environmental modifiers (the floor is muddy, the ceiling is low, etc.) and gives you the odds as follows, depending on what you would need to roll on the d20 for success. Impossible Even rolling a natural 20 would not achieve success Terrible Success would require a roll of either 19 or 20 Poor Success would only require a roll of 13 or better Fair Success would require a roll of 8 or better Good Success would require a roll of 3 or better Excellent Success would occur on a roll of 1, but that 1 would be necessary to achieve success. Certainty Success would still occur on a "theoretical" roll of zero. If you dislike the idea of another table to memorize, some of the above can be generalized as follows: needing about 10 is Fair odds, around 15 is Poor, and around 5 is Good. Once you know your odds, you can select how much you're willing to risk to try and ensure success. 3. Improving Your Chances, Risking Your Ass... ets Now that you have an idea of what's needed to succeed, you can make "wagers" in the form of intentionally imposed Risk Saves, and the DM may require you to impose further Risk Saves. A Risk Save can not be something that would otherwise prevent you from achieving your goal, so if you aim to climb a rope, the risk wagered cannot be "I fall and break my leg". However, if your aim is to "scramble up this rope and grab the item from the top", you could risk falling and breaking a leg, as such could occur after you've grabbed the item. In this case, your DM might also require you to impose a Risk Save where the item may also be broken in a fall or by being dropped. Each Risk Save you are willing to or made to roll afterward will grant you a bonus to the roll on your Skill Check. These bonuses are as follows: - +1 to your Skill Check roll for each short term (around 1 hour in game time) penalty of -2 on stat based checks, or a similar penalty that could be removed with relative ease in the right circumstances. Examples include: risking a -2 to DEX checks for a twisted ankle; -2 to WIS checks for becoming wearied; -2 to CHA checks through becoming sweaty , but can be removed by taking a bath. +2 to your Skill Check roll for each long term (around 1 day in game time) penalty of -2 on stat based checks or a penalty that would require substantial resources to remove. Examples include -2 to WIS for minor bouts insanity; -2 to STR for having broken an arm. +1 to your Skill Check roll per 100GP value of items you may lose, up to a maximum of +10 for an item worth over 1000GPs. Each 100GP must be whole to contribute to the bonus, so that anything costing between 101GP and 199GP still only nets a +1 bonus: the item need be worth 200GP to gain the +2 bonus. Anything worth less than 100GP does not achieve a bonus. Items of similar or identical types can be evaluated as a if they were a single item. Examples include risking breaking your masterwork lock picks when rushing a lock, or having to feed your horse two potions of Cure Light Wounds to have it survive being pushed hard, +1 to your Skill Check roll per each 2 Hit Dice of damage willing to be suffered. These HD are of the highest magnitude rolled for a characters level gain, so someone with at least one level of Barbarian would risk 2d12 of damage, while someone with only levels in Wizard would risk 2d4. +10 for Last Ditch attempts, where almost everything is placed on line. This is generally where you achieve your goal and then enter some state of "helplessness": you can reach the palace in time, but you collapse from exhaustion for the rest of the day; you leap the chasm but shatter both legs and are unable to walk. +20 for Dying Breath moments. Failure on this Risk Save roll will mean death, so is probably best reserved for times when death seems almost inevitable in any route, but you need to achieve something spectacular with your very last moments. Between the players and the DM you decide which of these modifiers can be applied. As stated earlier, you can't risk a broken leg to get +2 to your Decipher Script check, except in some extremely unlikely circumstances. Similarly, Last Ditches and Dying Breaths are only likely to occur in the most extreme of circumstances. A DM should not arbitrarily impose a Risk Save unless something "spectacular" is being attempted: if the player is simply attempting to climb a rope and does not wish for any self imposed Risk Save, the DM should not impose one for "falling and breaking something". If the player decided that they wished to climb the rope faster than usually would be allowed, the DM could opt to apply a Risk Save in place of the usually -10 penalty with no bonuses to the Skill check. There are situations where the DM may apply "pre-set" Risk Saves in place of some of the current systems: such as having a Disable Device check have the Risk Save of "setting off the trap" instead of it being triggered when missing the DC by more than 5. Unlike usual Risk Saves, these only apply on failure of the original Skill Check. The method of adopting this rule is in need of discussion between the GM with the players. 4. Paying Your Dues Once all the appropriate Risk Saves have been decided, it is time to roll the Skill Check. Risk Saves don't modify whether you fail or succeed, but your chances of success or failure. Regardless of whether you achieve your goal or not, you now need to make all your appropriate Risk Saves to see whether your Risks have occurred. Risk Saves are performed with the same Skill as used for your Skill Check and the target DC is the same as the DC of your intended task before the Risk modifiers were included. However, being classed as Saving Rolls instead of Skill Checks means that the rule of "natural 1 always fails, natural 20 always succeeds" apply to these rolls, so even if the original Skill Check was rated at Impossible (which may have been why you opted for greater risks), there is still a chance you may avoid the fallout from your Risk Saves. Rolling natural 1's on your Risk Saves also have further fallout in the form of Scars and Wounds. If, on a natural 1, you fail the DC check by 10 or more, then you have gained a Scar. If, on a natural 1, you fail the DC check by 9 or less, or if a natural 1 would otherwise have been a success, you have suffered a Wound. Scars have potential benefits that Wounds do not, and so you are only likely to receive Scars when improving risky situations. If you are simply improving your chances situation where success was already close to a given, the likelihood of Wounds are greater. See the next sections on Scars and on Wounds for more detailed information. After the success or failure of your Skill Check, roll each of your Risk Saves. Any where you fail the Save, that Risk has come to pass. Any where you make the Save, you manage to avoid that risk, via either skill, intervention, or just dumb luck. 5. Scars Sometimes, when risking something important, you end up bearing the scars. Scars in this sense aren't always physical. They may not even be mental. Scars could be a black mark on your reputation with the town folk, having the king believe you to be a fool... or it could indeed be a physical scar, or an aversion you have developed. Scars can be useful to you as a player, by helping you make Saving Throws, but they can also be a sign to your enemies that you have a weak spot for them to exploit. Scars occur when you roll a natural 1 on a Risk Save and you fail the DC check by 10 or more. When this situation occurs, you then must select an appropriate Scar that your character will now carry. Again, this must be agreed between the player and the GM as to being appropriate to the situation and the failed Risk Save: getting a burn on your face when a fire trap goes off in your face is a suitable Scar; developing a hatred for custard is not suitable as a Scar when leaping a pit trap (unless it was a pit filled with custard). The Scars that a character can gain may be as esoteric or as specific as the player and the DM likes, as long as they remain appropriate. When selecting a Scar, it pays to bear in mind that the more encompassing a Scar is, the more likely a situation will arise where a Scar can be used. Also bear in mind that a broadly defined Scar may also be used against your character with greater ease. 5.2. Utilising Scars - "Taking a d10" In some cases, scars can be beneficial to a player. If a character has a Scar by having "lived through the pain", then they are more likely to withstand pain better in future. If a character has a "burned face", then they are better able to Intimidate others. If a character is "thought a buffoon by the King", then they may not need to worry as much over severe repercussions from making a faux pas at court. In a situation where a player is making a Skill Check or a Saving Throw where a Scar can be agreed as applicable through consensus with the DM, the player can "Take a d10". When Taking a d10, instead of rolling a d20 for the check or the save, the player rolls a d10 and adds 10 to the result. Taking a d10 can also be used for Risk Saves and their originating Skill Checks, provided they can conceivably be applied. Taking a d10 for a Scar can only be used once in any situation or encounter. 5.3. Utilising Scars - Being Hit Where It Hurts There is a downside to Scars, and that is that, if your enemies know about them, they can use them to hit you where it hurts. Essentially, this is the same mechanic as Taking a d10, except this time your opponents can use it against you. As with utilising your own Scars, utilising an opponents Scars requires a situation where it can apply. So: the orcs may Take a d10 for a Feint by waving a torch at an opponent with "burned face" as a Scar; if a player is "thought a buffoon by the King", then a rival might Take a d10 when Bluffing the King into believing the player is plotting against them. In order for opponents to use your Scars against you, they must first know of their existence. In some cases, this will obvious ("has a burned face" is difficult to hide without some effort), but other times it will less so ("being thought a buffoon by the King" isn't going to be known by someone who has just arrived at court, unless the situation is the frequent subject of gossip). As with Taking a d10 to use your own Scars, it can only be done once per Scar against an opponent per encounter. 6. Wounds Wounds occur when you roll a natural 1 on a Risk Save, but fail the DC by less than 10, or if the only reason for the failure is due to the roll of a natural 1. This is to dissuade players from pushing too many favourable situations into certainties, as Wounds, unlike Scars, do not have an "upside". When suffered, Wounds are selected by your DM. Again, they can be as esoteric and wide ranging as Scars, but should be more "crippling". While a Scar gained when jumping a pit of custard might be "I really hate custard", a Wound for the same should be more along the lines of "A chronic fear of custard". Wounds are similar to Scars in that your opponents can utilise them against you and Take a d10. As with Scars, a Wound must be known of in order to be used against an opponent. A Wound may also only be used against you once per encounter or situation. 6.1. Wounds - "Dropping to d10" Wounds may also hinder your Saving Throws and Skill Checks. If a Wound can be applied to the check or situation at hand, then the DM may require you to "Drop to d10": instead of rolling a d20 for your check, you roll a d10. Unlike with "Taking a d10", there is no additional bonus to the roll: the result of the d10 is added to your ranks and modifiers and taken as your check. The DM can only require you to Drop to d10 once for each Wound per encounter. 7. Keeping Scars and Wounds Separate Wounds and Scars need to be distinguished between, as sometimes a Wound might be similar in "flavour" to a Scar. For instance, "A burned face" could be taken as a Scar, or it could be imposed as a Wound, but the mechanics apply differently in some cases. While both this Wound and Scar could both be used by an opponent in the same way (Taking a d10 with Feint using a torch), there would be differences when it came to persuading the tavern maid to let you dandle her on your knee. With a Wound of "a burned face", the DM would be able to apply the Drop to d10 rule against your check to charm the barmaid. With a Scar of "a burned face", the player suffers no penalty. However, if the player decides to use this encounters use of the Scar, he might weave a tale of sorrow about how he came to be scarred in an attempt to appeal to the barmaid's pity, and Take a d10 on his check instead. 8. Some Worked Examples (With some thanks to Arrowhen and Archtyrant Terevoth for this first situation: ) Bob wishes for his Ranger (Aragorn --Bob's as unimaginative with names as his parents may have been) to reach the castle with an important message from the battlefield before it's too late. He asks his DM for an assessment of Aragorn's chances. Looking over his notes, the DM decides that, after accommodating for the treacherous terrain, the DC of this task is a DC 18 Ride check. Aragorn has been lax with his Riding skill and only has his base DEX bonus of +3. This means that to achieve Aragorn's goal, Bob needs to roll 15 or better, so the DM informs Bob that Aragorn's odds are Poor. Bob doesn't like the sound of that, and so he's willing to take some risks to improve his chances. He decides that he's going to be really very sweaty when he gets to the castle, and so there's a chance that he's going to suffer in any Charisma based encounters until he takes a bath. He notes a +1 to add to his Ride check. That's not margin of success enough for Bob, so he chooses to risk his horse's life (+2 to the check for the 200GP value of his horse), risks a broken leg for riding recklessly (+2 for risking a long term -2 on Dexterity checks), and will feed his horse his two potions of Cure Light Wounds if it starts to flag (+1 for a total of 100GP being consumed). All that gives nets a +6 bonus in total, which Bob realises should have shifted the chances from somewhere in Poor to somewhere in Fair, maybe even to Good. He now makes his check and rolls a 10. With his Ride skill of 3, his roll of 10, and his Risk bonuses of 6, he gets 19, making it to the castle in time with the message. But now Bob needs to check what he's risked. The original DC of the Ride check was 18, so this is the difficulty check of his Risk Saves using his Ride skill, of which Bob must make four: one for whether he is exceptionally sweaty on arriving, one for his horse's life, one to see if he breaks his leg in a tumble, and one to see if he needed to use his potions. Bob rolls and gets a 1, a 17, a 6, and an 8. This means: he not only arrived incredibly sweaty and has to take -2 on Charisma based skills until he washes, he also has incurred a Scar, because his natural 1 plus 3 misses the DC 18 by more than 10. Bob and the DM agree that Aragorn gains the Scar of "considered uncouth in court". The 17, plus his 3 in Ride means that his horse arrives at the castle without being ready to drop dead of exhaustion. The 6 means that at some point in his journey, Aragorn was flung from his horse and broke his leg, but pulled himself back into the saddle and continued on. He now suffers a -2 Dexterity check penalty until he can get the benefit of a nights rest. The 8 means that he also used up both of his healing potions: maybe he used one for himself after the broken leg incident, but gave the other to the horse, which is the only reason it didn't collapse. The exact details of what happened is narrated by the players and the DM, now that they have the factors of those events. Aragorn delivers his message--the front lines need reinforcements--but the King is not keen to commit more men. Aragorn is invited to partake or a bath and join the court for supper... At the meal, the now clean Aragorn decides to push the matter of reinforcements with the King. The situation proceeds in one of two ways:- Bob decides not to be gentle about matters and wants to Intimidate the King into sending more men. Thanks to his Scar, the court already consider him to be uncouth, so Bob suggests it is not that unreasonable that they might believe he would resort to violence if it came to it, and he Takes a d10 on his Intimidate roll. The DM however rules that, if that is the case, he risks pushing the King too far and being arrested, and will have to make a Risk Save at the same DC as his Intimidation check, except he can't Take a d10 on this Save (unless he has some other Scar to utilise... "a brush with the law" perhaps?) Bob decides to opt for a more subtle approach to his persuasion and tries to convince the King to send more troops through conversation throughout the dinner. He asks for the odds of success from the DM and learns that they are Fair. He decides that this is important enough that he is willing to take a few more risks: he is willing to become an outcast at the dinner for speaking out of turn (+1 to his Skill check for another short term Charisma check penalty), and he'll also risk the chance that he might have to "make a gift" of his Elixir of Truth to the King to turn him to his argument (giving a +5 to his check) which he knows the King would find useful to root out spies in his midst. Because he is already considered uncouth by the court, thanks to his Scar, he opts to Take a d10 on his first Risk Save against becoming a social outcast. After the dinner, the Kings advisor Wormwood tries to persuade the King that Aragorn is not to be trusted. Because he was there when Aragorn arrived sweaty from his journey, Wormwood knows of Aragorn's "Scar" and can utilise this to Take a d10 in his Bluff check to convince the King.
Arrowhen 03-29-07, 01:47 PM	Interesting stuff. Regarding Wounds and Scars. Have you given any thought to what process a character would have to go through in order to "buy off" a Wound or a Scar? And what about converting Wounds to Scars? Using your "burned face" example, a character might incur a burned face as a Wound, but eventually come to realize that it's useful for intimidating people.
CraggleRock 03-29-07, 02:21 PM	Interesting stuff. Regarding Wounds and Scars. Have you given any thought to what process a character would have to go through in order to "buy off" a Wound or a Scar? And what about converting Wounds to Scars? Using your "burned face" example, a character might incur a burned face as a Wound, but eventually come to realize that it's useful for intimidating people. Nice idea. I had mused a little on "buying off" Wounds and Scars, but this is basically a recounting of everything that was running through my head last night and so a few details, such as that, haven't quite crystalised yet. To keep the flavour of the mechanics, perhaps critical successes from natural 20's could in some way be used. Perhaps a natural 20 on a Risk Save could enable you to "buy off" a Scar or "trade in" a Wound? I'll have a think on that one.
Khementari 03-29-07, 05:26 PM	An interesting post. Is there any need for this kind of complexity?
Nor'Morgwae 03-29-07, 06:22 PM	It's an interesting concept. Right off I would recommend revisiting the terminology. The term 'wound' is so prevalent in the system already (as in the cure or inflict line of spells and in the wound/vitality system) that you might want to find a new word for it. It's the same with 'take d10' and 'take 10', they are close enough that it seems prone to causing confusion. A few ideas instead of Wound: Fault, Frailty, Weakness I personally like Frailty. Okay, now to the real meat, the rules. Like I said, I like the concept. However, I'm concerned about a couple of aspects. GP to bonus ratio First is the bonus derived directly from the value of the object up to 1000 gp. That is a lot at low levels, but once you hit mid to high levels 1k isn't much to drop on an important roll, especially when weighed against a one-time use magic item. It might be better to scale the reward. This is just a suggestion, but bonus^2 x 100gp. +1 costs 100 +5 costs 2,500 +10 costs 10,000 The pattern could continue making for epic level bonuses in very high level games. For example, if Roy risks breaking his ancestral longsword (+5 magic sword) to hit the lich Xykon gets a +14 bonus on the roll, but I don't think anyone’s going to say he didn't earn it. This makes the sacrifice meaningful later in the game (10k is almost never pocket change). Of course, if it is handled this way then you wouldn't be able to use multiple items for a single risk, otherwise everyone would drop 10 100gp items for the +10 bonus. Though you could count the total sacrificed for the total bonus instead of counting each item separately. This also makes the cost high enough that you don't have to worry about people adding gold and jewels to silly items (gem encrusted thief’s tools?) just to be able to call it in as a bonus. Ability to bonus ratio A -2 to an ability score only nets a -1 to rolls with that ability. An even trade is not a risk. I would advise upping it to -4 to a score for each +1 bonus gained. Getting 'Wounds' I have to say, I think it's really unlikely that, as written, anyone is going to gain a wound. You have to start off with at least a 50% chance or better on the roll and that's a very acceptable risk for most people, especially when weighed against what a wound can do to them. I also noticed you say that if you roll a 1 on the risk save and a 1 would have been a success you get a wound. Um, if a 1 would be a success on the original check DC, why are they taking a risk? It sounds like you take wounds for taking unnecessary risks. While unnecessary risks shouldn’t be encouraged I think this is a bit much. They are already risking, injury, ability penalties and/or item loss. Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of Wounds, there just needs to be a better way of suffering them. Most people will get scars, which should be the harder of the two to get since they are actually partially beneficial. Maybe changing Wounds to "When you fail a Risk save by 10" or more. So you have to be trying something very dangerous and fail badly. Scars Conventional 3.5 wisdom says that higher rolls should be better than low rolls and failing by less should be better than failing by more. As it stands the Scar rules are the exact opposite. A 1 can be more useful than a 2 (giving you the ability to 'take d10' which is unlikely to be outweighed by the weakness) and missing by a lot (more than 10 gives you a scar) is better than missing by a little (less than 10 gives you a Wound). Perhaps this could be changed to "When taking a risk, after rolling your attack/skill check but before the DM has announced success or failure, you may take a scar to add an additional +5 to the roll result." That way scars are more meaningful. Also, I gather that scars are supposed to be a least partially bad things. Allowing an enemy to 'take d10' is not that bad. Giving enemies bonuses is not as psychologically bad as giving players penalties. I would recommend following the guidelines for flaws. In general a flaw should be twice as bad as a feat is good. I think the same should apply to scars. The disadvantage should be at least twice as bad as the advantage is good. A few examples: An ability risk becomes permanent: Penalty: The broken leg never heals properly, you never quite recover from the exertion or your mind just can't reconcile what has happened (permanent -4 to one ability score). Benefit: You have learned to compensate for your injury, you may choose class ability or skill that used the reduced score and transfer it to another score you and your DM agree upon. (A monk might use Int instead of wis for defense or a Rogue learns to climb using Dex instead of Strength) Loose a feat: (this one is pretty broad, maybe too much so) Penalty: Your new sword just never feels the same in your hands as your old blade (loose weapon focus) your men have lost their respect for you and turn their backs on you (loose leadership). Benefit: Weapon Focus: You become accustomed to using weapons that feel strange to other warriors. You suffer only a -2 penalty when fighting with an improvised weapon or a weapon with which you are non-proficient. Leadership: Those who have remained by you are all the more loyal for the ordeal. +2 to effective wizard or druid level for familiar/companions abilities or gain Aura of Courage as per the paladin ability (does not include fear immunity). Phobia: Penalty: When confronted by the object of your fear you must make a will save (DC 10+Creatures Combined CR or the challenges DC) of become panicked. Immunity to fear does not protect you from this fear effect. Benefit: Your fear has also made you an expert in the source of your fear. You gain a +1 bonus to spot, listen, sense motive and damage rolls made against the target of your fear. Well, that’s probably enough for now. I know I tend to sound a bit critical but I do genuinely like the idea and just want to help make it even better than it already is.
CraggleRock 03-30-07, 08:36 AM	It's an interesting concept. Right off I would recommend revisiting the terminology. The term 'wound' is so prevalent in the system already (as in the cure or inflict line of spells and in the wound/vitality system) that you might want to find a new word for it. It's the same with 'take d10' and 'take 10', they are close enough that it seems prone to causing confusion. A few ideas instead of Wound: Fault, Frailty, Weakness I personally like Frailty. Frailty: I'd been fumbling for that word the other day. I do like it. As for the "take d10", I had been looking for something that was familiar to people at the same time of presenting something new. I visualised that veteran players, seeing "take d10" might be able to deduce some of the mechanics before reading the rules, but perhaps it would be better termed something like "Boosting a 10"? GP to bonus ratio First is the bonus derived directly from the value of the object up to 1000 gp. That is a lot at low levels, but once you hit mid to high levels 1k isn't much to drop on an important roll, especially when weighed against a one-time use magic item. It might be better to scale the reward. This is just a suggestion, but bonus^2 x 100gp. +1 costs 100 +5 costs 2,500 +10 costs 10,000 The pattern could continue making for epic level bonuses in very high level games. For example, if Roy risks breaking his ancestral longsword (+5 magic sword) to hit the lich Xykon gets a +14 bonus on the roll, but I don't think anyone’s going to say he didn't earn it. This makes the sacrifice meaningful later in the game (10k is almost never pocket change). Of course, if it is handled this way then you wouldn't be able to use multiple items for a single risk, otherwise everyone would drop 10 100gp items for the +10 bonus. Though you could count the total sacrificed for the total bonus instead of counting each item separately. This also makes the cost high enough that you don't have to worry about people adding gold and jewels to silly items (gem encrusted thief’s tools?) just to be able to call it in as a bonus. I had been considering a rule that related to a bonus for each fraction of a Character Wealth by Level at risk, but an exponential progress might be a better way to go. And I see you are familiar with The Order of the Stick: see, now I can take your advice seriously! ;) Ability to bonus ratio A -2 to an ability score only nets a -1 to rolls with that ability. An even trade is not a risk. I would advise upping it to -4 to a score for each +1 bonus gained. I'll have to go back and clarify the ruling on that: it was intended to be a -2 penalty on the rolls with that ability, rather than the ability itself. Maybe there should be a penalty imposed on the base attribute instead: I'm still wavering a little on that point. Getting 'Wounds' [...] Scars [...] When I had come up with the idea, my intent was originally to encourage heroics and drama, but penalising those using the same rules to play already less than risky situations overly safe. Perhaps I've missed on that count (I haven't had chance to playtest these ideas yet). The "a natural 1 would otherwise be a success" part came partly from the fact that I do believe there would be some people who, having been given Excellent odds, would use the system to make sure something happened (some people take Charisma as a dump stat, so they might well be willing to dump a penalty into it to guarantee a dice roll). The other reason was that I had been thinking of a system where the DM rolled "perception" rolls before giving you your odds, where bad rolls meant you got the odds slightly above or below the actual chances. This was going to help simulate the fact that an inexperienced rider might not know how far a horse could be pushed, or a bookish wizard not knowing his own limits when it came to jumping a pit (full or custard or otherwise). I hadn't quite got this mechanic to a point that I liked the system enough to include it in the original post, but it might well appear in future. As to Scars: I see what you mean about the lack of "psychological effect" with the downside. The thing I was attempting to steer away from was requiring "yet another splat-book" full of a list of possible Scars that could be gathered. However, if I can work out a more mechanical method of producing them... Well, that’s probably enough for now. I know I tend to sound a bit critical but I do genuinely like the idea and just want to help make it even better than it already is. Your input has been extremely helpful and led me to consider some new angles. Please, don't ever feel you have to hold back at all :D