One of the most common complaints I get from players is that everything is just so darn difficult. I tend to agree with them... my experience is that about half of the time a botched run is due to a failed roll on something that shouldnt have been particularly difficult, but was (the other half being the result of poor planning).

Looking at the times listed for cracking open a maglock case and rewiring the circuitry, I can see how that would be rather difficult. A base time of 1 minute is really, really short, considering how much effort and knowhow would be required to accomplish the task. I can see how being pressed for time would allow for quite a few mistakes... but what if you *arent* pressed for time? What if circumstances allow you to be extra careful and take your time to make sure you dont screw up?

I know that in many cases being able to take your time doesnt really apply. But certainly, for pretty much all of the b/r skills, electronics, some computer tests, biotech, and demolitions, being able to take extra time can be quite helpful.

I've thought of two ways to represent this, though im not sure which one I like better (or if i should use some unholy combination of the two... or perhaps neither)

1) Each time the character is willing to double the base time for a task, that character gets a -1 modifier to the target number. This is based partially on the "taking aim" rule, wherein taking twice as long to aim a shot as would normally be required provides a -1 to the TN. In regards to an electronics test, taking 2 minutes would give a -1, taking 4 minutes would provide a -2. The TN modifier would max out at -4.

2) If the character is not under duress and is willing to take *as much time as is necessary* the character can choose to take an automatic success equal to the number of dice he or she would have normally been able to roll to complete the task. "As much time as is necessary" would be defined by the GM based on circumstances, taking into consideration the expectations of the player... but would generally be at least ten times the normal base time. As another option under this already optional rule, the character would be able to take multiple successes at a lower TN. So, for example, someone who had an int of 6 could take the time to really go over someone's aura, he or she could take a single, automatic 6, 2 automatic 5's or 3 automatic 4's.

Thoughts? Anyone else try anything like this? Does this actually make certain tasks too easy?

Never tried it, but I like the idea in theory. I'd have to see it in action, though.

I think at least part one is great. I know I've discussed something similar at least once before, but seeing it stated simply and clearly like that will finally allow me to add it to my Official List of House Rules.

-4TN will be enough in my games, so I won't introduce part 2. If the TN is so high that -4TN doesn't make it an easy success, it should probably be risky anyway. This depends heavily on the individual task, but I think the variation present makes it counter-productive to make an actual rule for it.

I don't think actions are that hard to acomplish in SR, but, if you think they are, then number 1 sounds nice. I'm not sure abour number 2, but it might work.

Imho, the real objective of a game system should be perdictablity (within a certain range). Can my character pick the lock, sneak past the guards, or whatever? The problem with SR (and most binomial systems in general) is that you cannot predict what the results will be (and that the 'same' modifier produces different increases in difficulty). Is shooting some one who has partial cover (+4) in bad light (+2) twice as hard as just shooting them if they had partial cover? If I am rolling 6 dice, am I likely to hit them? What if I use a point of karma? Can you tell me the odds without using your calculator? If not, maybe I should duck for cover instead...

The other problem is that in an attempt to 'make things challenging for PCs' (who are usually very good at what they do) the SR system makes several things 'impossible' for much more normal people.

A similar house rule: just lower the TN already and increase the base time. Then allow success to reduce time as normal...

Just remembered one of the reasons why System 1 won't work as well as it's supposed to: If it's just doubling the base time, then dropping the TN from 6 to 5 makes sense in every way. With a reasonably high skill, you are not only doubling your chances of success, you are also keeping your actual modified time average the same. The doubling of time has to be absolute, and successes must not be capable of reducing it.

I don't think a game system has to give predictable answers as long as it is reasonable. IRL, you cannot say whether hitting someone in "partial cover" in "bad lighting" is twice as hard as just shooting them if they had "partial cover". If I was better at math and more intelligent all around, I wouldn't give my players any of the modifiers beforehand and would force them to use their common sense and possible knowledge (and active) skills to figure out such things.

Of course you could argue that no RPG system could ever be reasonable enough for that.

I am more talking about the sense you get IRL, about wheter you can do something or not. As a sameple when hunting for birds you 'know' at about what distance you can bring dow nthe target.

Since neither the GM nor the play may know too much about the actual subject of the rules, they have only the rules themselves to guide them about how the world works. If they don't have the math skill to run the numbers they will 'never know' wether they can do something or not. This means the the GM will not know how to assign difficulty numbers. I wnat to make a runnig jump between rooftops, the gap is 4 meters wide, I have althetics 4, should I even attempt this? (duhhh?)

The system I've liked best so far is used in Conspiracy X, in which skills usually range from 1 to 5. Anything with a difficulty '1 under' your skill level, you suceed at automatically (bar bad luck). This allows for a very fast game, since the players don't need to roll for a lot of 'simple' tasks. It also gives them a very good idea of what they can and can't do.

It's a good idea -- give it a test-run and let us know how it turns out.

-Siege

I don't know how it will work in SR, but it used in d20 Star Wars and works nicely. The rule is called taking 10, you spend 10 rounds and aotumatically add ten to your rank in the skill plus attribute bonuses and other bonuses, like for master crafted equipment, add it all together and those rather simple to mid level skills are taken care of with no roll. Only certain skills can use it though. They also have taking 20, basically the same as taking 10 but 20 or more rounds and again limited to very select skills.

That's got to be confusing for people who've played other d20 games where Taking 10 and Taking 20 mean completely different things...

I hear there are a lot of minor changes in the different game worlds that make that a small change. I don't know how it is different in other games, the only other d20 I have played is Modern and that was only once. I have heard all kinds of differences can really make jumping from one game to another harder then learning a new system totally, because all the small things in Star Wars can be completely different then d20 Modern, or Spy Master (not sure if that is the games name) and all the others out there.

This may be blasphemous to some GMs, but I like to toss out mechanics sometimes for the sake of game speed. If someone is trying to use a b/r skill, its not time critical and is properly equipped, I usually just have the character roll and anything that isnt a crit failure is of average success. Things like trying to shoot an unaware target at short range in the back of the head I use a similar system (like Donny Decker is jacked in and sitting in a chair while Steve Samurai is hiding behind boxes three feet away from him).

Ive also let characters pile multiple successes from seperate rolls during time critical situations. If a maglock is going to take 5 successes to bypass and someone is working on it while his buddies are providing a diversion/covering fire/putting on an entertaining one act play, two or three successes dosnt necessarily mean he failed, it just means he's only halfway through his task. IMHO, things like that shouldnt be an all or nothing affair... three out of five could mean that youve only exposed the circutry and have yet to cross the wires, or something similar.

Personally, Id just rather simplify something and get on with the fun part of the gameing rather than be bogged down because of some mechanic, or have one bad roll break the plot I crafted. Its not a method that works for all GMs, tho.

I sometimes, do it the same as world of darkness. That is.. If your skill matches the difficulty then (if you want and the GM lets you) you can automatically pass with one success.

Example: The for a mentioned maglock R6. If you had Electronics (securtiy systems) at 6 and it wasn't that important to the story then you could by pass it as if you had rolled 1 success (ie time taken 1 minute).

I got this after looking at the results of success from the perception table, and realised that your realy looking at 3 success's for it to be considered a passed test. Granted 1 is a technical pass but only barely. Then i started looking at other aspects of the game (combat mainly) and realised that it could transfer there as well (though for suspense i don't)

[EDIT]
As for option 2. I seriously don't like that one. Somethings should not possible via an auto success system. (bare with me before you start calling me a hypocritic) Techincall from the letter (hopefully first draft) of those rules someone with no skill in Electronics would eventally break a maglock 12!! no thanks. If you going to think about using that rule you need to think about some kind of limiter. Example the defaulting rule.

There should also be some modifiers listed in the rules for researching the lock in advance, or on the spot (ie through the matrix, or with some sort of database), and another for actually practicing (under which the first such lock you break even during the run makes later ones significantly easier typically the locks in a building will be mostly the same). Thats the way they do it in all the caper flick's.

Easy to make them up though. I would say maybe -1t# for reasearch, -1 more for having broken one recently, and maybe even -1 more for just identifying the lock manufacturere/general design with an electronics test (which has no chance of setting off an alarm as it is completely passive).

I like the -1t# for each doubling of the base time. Really low skill people still have a chance of botching, and will always loose the opposed test against a good lock even with t#2 (because it will get more sucesses than they can possibly get). I think that would work great.