On 11Jun2024 2029, Timothy Collinson - timothy.collinson at port.ac.uk
(via tml list) wrote:

> This isn't far off what Mongoose offers.  It's pretty hard to foul up
> the two rolls and I like that one feeds the other.  As we don't usually
> Jump more than once, or maybe twice, in a session and it only takes a
> few moments, we've tended to make a Thing of the two rolls however
> 'easy' they are.  It's kind of like a ritual and marks the transition to
> something new.
> (IIRC when we did a bunch of Jumps at the end of TTA to get to
> Jesedipere for the showdown, we may have amalgamated them into one.  I'd
> have to look up whether I made a note of what we did.)

In the game I was running using GURPS I was requiring three rolls
(mainly to give the pilot something to do), with each one
assisting/penalising the next and fumbles on each one having different
effects. It was interesting for a little while, but on long trips it
became tedious.

>>     So I'm leaning towards one roll against the worst of Astrogation
>>     or Ship's Engineering, with a (minor but meaningful) penalty if
>>     it's one person having to do both, and relevant penalties for dumb
>>     stuff, etc. If the roll is failed slighty, jump is delayed for
>>     recalculations (only important if the ship's in a hurry to leave).
>>     Major failures mean a roll on a misjump table (probably with the
>>     margin of failure as a 'bonus') for results ranging from more
>>     variable time to multi-parsec misjumps. No ship destruction or
>>     'lost forever' - those should only be by referee choice. Details
>>     of the checks and tables would depend on the system used.
>
>     I like this approach very much. Allows (some) individual
>     player-characters to have a sense of making unique contributions
>     while keeping the focus of play on narrative.
>
>
> Yes, definitely, agreed.

The intention is mainly to cut down rolling that doesn't really add
anything, especially when there's no actual decision-making attached and
it's unlikely that the outcome is changed by said rolling. If one roll
(plus a few more on a major failure) can achieve effectively the same
outcome as a whole bunch, the latter is just time wasting, I think.

--
Rupert Boleyn <xxxxxx@gmail.com>