|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Mar 21, 2020 13:30:50 GMT
Poll is here - civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/vote.pl?id=E_806aad8e04b3ee09&akey=1e9be4f38e994765I know this is a different system than some will be used to, so let me know if you need clarification on how to vote. Poll we be closed next friday at 11 pm GM and results will be implemented for the next turn. I've added "no opinion" - note that this leaves that option out of your vote entirely, it's not the same as giving it a low rank! The poll options are ordered randomly to try and stop any bias there on my part.
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Mar 21, 2020 13:42:29 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Mar 21, 2020 13:55:58 GMT
The abilities degrading option was left off by mistake. I will rerun the poll if anyone really wanted that option but if not I'm inclined to let it stand rather than making people vote again.
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Mar 21, 2020 14:14:35 GMT
I'm assuming that the 3rd Option option also includes
Skill Check Result=1 +.25 Skill Check Result= 5 or 6 -.25
as does the it would be replacing ?
Otherwise, skill rises over 6 through skill checks will be impossible.
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Mar 21, 2020 14:15:56 GMT
I'm assuming that the 3rd Option Abilities improve by 0.25 if your SCR is less than or equal to (7-your current ability) option also includes Skill Check Result=1 +.25 Skill Check Result= 5 or 6 -.25 as does the Skill Level less than (7-SCR) +.25 it is replacing ? Otherwise, skill rises over 6 through skill checks will be impossible. Oops, sorry, yes it does.
|
|
|
Post by Loic Galopin on Mar 21, 2020 14:23:36 GMT
I voted. Early and often, as they say ;-)
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Mar 21, 2020 14:37:54 GMT
The abilities degrading option was left off by mistake. I will rerun the poll if anyone really wanted that option but if not I'm inclined to let it stand rather than making people vote again. As has been pointed out, effectively it's just the "Abilities improve by 0.25 on a roll of "6" option anyway.
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Mar 21, 2020 16:42:50 GMT
I voted. Early and often, as they say ;-) me too
|
|
|
Post by Yves Eau on Mar 21, 2020 19:24:03 GMT
Is this a "once in a generation" opportunity? Considering the turnover rate amongst Jason's characters, that should qualify him for several votes.
|
|
debreos
Junior Member
Surviving
Posts: 54
|
Post by debreos on Mar 21, 2020 20:11:13 GMT
On the option where after a failure +1 is awarded for successive rolls - is that a SINGLE +1 or a CUMULATIVE +1? In the first case, after 2 failures in succession you would still only have +1. In the second case, you would have +2.
I assume that it is cumulative, otherwise skills above 7 for base 1-6 would be impossible - but I thought I had better check.
Regards, David Waring
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Mar 21, 2020 20:27:17 GMT
On the option where after a failure +1 is awarded for successive rolls - is that a SINGLE +1 or a CUMULATIVE +1? In the first case, after 2 failures in succession you would still only have +1. In the second case, you would have +2. I assume that it is cumulative, otherwise skills above 7 for base 1-6 would be impossible - but I thought I had better check. Regards, David Waring
I'm assuming cumulative for the reasons you state!
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Mar 21, 2020 22:41:40 GMT
On the option where after a failure +1 is awarded for successive rolls - is that a SINGLE +1 or a CUMULATIVE +1?In the first case, after 2 failures in succession you would still only have +1.In the second case, you would have +2.[ I assume that it is cumulative, otherwise skills above 7 for base 1-6 would be impossible - but I thought I had better check. Regards, David Waring YES, it is cummulative, of course (as otherwise, you're right, there would be a level cap). I hoped it was clear enough, but it's easy to understand one's own writings, so, sorry if I was unclear.
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Mar 24, 2020 13:30:44 GMT
IMPORTANT:
The poll is currently tied and reliant on a completion method to decide.
It would be far preferable if that wasn't the case.
If you haven't voted, please do so. If you know another player who needs prodding, please prod them!
|
|
|
Post by Yves Eau on Mar 24, 2020 20:22:21 GMT
Be careful what you wish for! It's even closer, now.
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Mar 24, 2020 21:08:57 GMT
Heh, hopefully we will get a clear result by Friday.
|
|