>>> Go vote. :)
>>> http://mouse.van.ml.org/pollBooth.pl?qid=xpstformula
>>>
>>Great, a total of four votes... three of which favor
>>the concise option. :) My personal opinion: Who
>>cares about the table? Close to the table is fine,
>>but concise is better.
>
>Up to 12 votes now, 66% in favor of the 'concise'
>option. No one cares about a formula just like the
>table. :)
>
>I voted very close personally, since we don't want to
>throw things off too much...but I'm not adamant about
>being exact. However, I would have no hesitation
>about using a formula exactly like the table.
I voted concise, but really, I should imagine it
wouldn't be too difficult to create a concise formula
that is very close to the tables.
They are based on the AD&D tables, but instead of being
d20, they are d100. The AD&D tables had very definite
formula, though they varied for each class.
Personally, I changed the saving throw tables from
d100 to d30 (just added 10 to the AD&D L1 saving throws
and followed the formula through to level 30).
And then added a 'saving throw modifier' argument to
the mag_savingthrow() function :)
Just out of curiosity (another poll item, George? :)
how many people out there actually stay with the
default of 30 levels?
Angelfire for your free web-based e-mail. http://www.angelfire.com
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ: |
| http://democracy.queensu.ca/~fletcher/Circle/list-faq.html |
+------------------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/15/00 PST