Forums: Index > Watercooler > Same Game Test

I thought perhaps this could help stimulate discussion until everything is up and running, although I suppose it could also go on the SGT's talk page. Anyway, a few questions/concerns of mine to kick-start this.

Okay, so Same Game Test, hereafter SGT.

  1. This is a bit of a personal gripe, perhaps brought on by an ignorance of the theory's history. That is, maybe some of the more vague tests should be explored a little further. The obvious culprit for me is the hall of runes. I mean, a clever character may come up with something only partially dependent on their class skills to bypass this obstacle (the old bag of flour, etc.). If this is just a test of whether or not the class' saves measure up, then I think that should be more explicit. If I'm missing the point (not out of the question), feel free to guide me in the right direction, but I've always been a little suspect of some of the more abstract tests.
  2. Combat scenarios. What I had been trying when I SGT a class is having random starting distances in an open room of relatively random size. It would nice, perhaps, if there could be several pre-mapped rooms, each with their own distinct opportunities (or not), to use for combat. On the other hand, if it's a straight up 50/50, perhaps something more like the Coliseum is appropriate. The point is, how the combat starts (closet monster) and what options the characters have (flying, other movement forms, concealment/cover, etc.) is important in determining whether the class can win a given scenario, and the current incarnation is rather vague.
  3. Can we create a SGT for first level? Level 20? I figure levels one and twenty are the hardest, as they probably have the biggest power gaps (e.g. fighter might actually win at level one, wizards might lose, whereas at twenty we have an far greater probability for loss against a likely win). If such were the case, then a class could be judged across its levels, perhaps allowing for a more thorough exploration of its abilities, as well as it's appropriateness for new players and games (lower levels) and it's continued usefulness as the game progresses.
  4. Maybe some background rules should be established? Like how many flaws you can take (or if they should be in effect at all) or what the rules are on expendable magic items like potions and scrolls, etc.
  5. I know a lot of people here are familiar with Tome rules. My question is, when we same game test, which of these new rules, if any, are applicable? Iterative attacks, for example. When people mix homebrew rules and the rules as written, some ugly things can happen. Perhaps there should be some benchmark governing any potential overlaps, or how classes fare could be noted by what rules were used (e.g. SRD fighter, not so hot; SRD fighter with Tome-style iterative attacks, marginally better, and then on to Tome fighter with SRD feats, Tome Fighter with Tome Combat feats, and so forth).

And lastly, why is the forum footer being a little bitch? Jota 17:09, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Because this belongs as a message in the Water Cooler :P I moved it to the right place Surgo 18:39, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
We'll also neet an SGT for 4e, which would likely be similar and different to the 3.5e one. Should I start looking into it? -- SamAutosig Sam Kay   talk    contribs    email   20:39, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Ad blocker interference detected!

Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.