From: Andrew Martin <Al.Bri@x...>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 21:55:01 +1200
Subject: Re: WRG 1925-50
> Mikko Kurki-Suonio <maxxon@swob.dna.fi> wrote: Which is an awfully lot harder to fix than problems with DSII!
From: Andrew Martin <Al.Bri@x...>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 21:55:01 +1200
Subject: Re: WRG 1925-50
> Mikko Kurki-Suonio <maxxon@swob.dna.fi> wrote: Which is an awfully lot harder to fix than problems with DSII!
From: Mikko Kurki-Suonio <maxxon@s...>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 18:13:25 +0300 (EEST)
Subject: Re: WRG 1925-50
> On Fri, 11 Sep 1998, Alex Shvarts, Andrew & Brian Martin wrote: I think switching everything to 1d12 is trivial. Just double all the target numbers (thinking in "better than" terms), identify the borderline ones you don't like and adjust them to 1/12 or 11/12. Usually it's only worthwhile to adjust the automatics and the bare minimals. IMHO, 1/12 (roughly 8.33%) is low enough for the "not very likely, but might show up" chances. 1d30 is also possible if you want to go the Battlestorm way ;-) for greater precision. Why do you have to compare everything to DSII? The WRG set and DSII are completely different in their aims. Both are, IMHO, good games. They just portray different things, and it comes down to personal preference whether you like the things they portray or not. You can't really argue about personal preference, now can you?