Thoughts on Penalties

As it stands, penalties in Omnia affect a character's Ability by reducing the number of randomizers used in a test. (Example: A City Guard 3 with a Condition of Sleep Deprivation −1 would roll two binary dice instead of three to notice the thief.) In a previous draft of the rules, penalties were negative randomizers that could potentially cancel an Ability's positive randomizers. (Example: The City Guard 3 with a Condition of Sleep Deprivation −1 would roll three positive binary dice and one negative binary die to notice the thief. If the negative die result is 1, it cancels out a single positive die result of 1.) This requires much more dice-rolling to determine whether a penalty has any effect whatsoever. Another method has just occurred to me, though. Suppose instead of reducing Ability randomizers or incurring negative randomizers, a penalty simply raises the Difficulty. (Example: The City Guard 3 with a Condition of Sleep Deprivation I needs to notice the thief, which is ordinarily a Difficulty of II. The City Guard would roll three binary dice versus the modified Difficulty of III.) This would make penalties much more punishing and feel less tangible. Gaining or losing randomizers as bonuses or penalties respectively makes the process more concrete. Conversely, raising and lowering the Difficulty depending on the bonuses and penalties affecting the character makes it seem more abstract. I think I shall continue using penalties for randomizer reduction.

Roman Numeral Difficulties

This is just a test to see how Difficulty ratings look with Roman numerals by modifying an excerpt from this article.

• Jane Doe tests her Ability as a Pole Vaulter 4 versus a Difficulty of II and scores a 3.
• Jeremiah Doe, Brawler 4, throws a punch and scores a 1.
• Jedediah Doe, Veteran Infantryman 3, defends with a 2.
• "I'll use my Ability as a Cat Burglar 5 to deactivate the alarm. The Difficulty is III? I scored a 4."
• "Test your Botanist 4 Ability. The Difficulty is III. You scored a 3? The plant is clearly extra-terrestrial in origin."
• "The Difficulty is IV? I'll use my Ability as an Armorsmith 4. I scored a 2 and I'll spend 2 points of Luck to see if I can bring it to a 4."

Obviously, this wouldn't be distinguishable verbally, but it would add clarity in print, especially in adventures. Theoretically.

Limited Game Notation

Instead of being concerned with how to notate Abilities and other aspects that are defined by quantities of randomizers, perhaps I should only be concerned with how to notate Difficulty (and possibly other fixed value aspects). Roman numerals would be a reasonable choice for Difficulty. Difficulty 3 becomes Difficulty III. Difficulty 4 becomes Difficulty IV. In a way, it makes it seem more imposing, more of a challenge. Abilities remain as unadorned numerals. Results remain as italicized numerals. And Difficulty ratings thereby stand out more, as they should. I think it might work.

Similar, but Not the Same

What do you do when all of the player characters in a group essentially have the same Ability, such as a group of Pirates, or Knights, or Ghost Hunters? In many role-playing games, such designations would be occupations and the individuals would be differentiated by long lists of skills. In Omnia, Abilities are already collections of skills and areas of knowledge, so player characters are differentiated by a) adjectives added to the Ability they have common and b) their other Abilities. In the first case, the adjective could modify the Ability by describing a significant trait, specialization, style, outlook, or cultural perspective. In the second case, a character's other Abilities could influence a character's approach to the primary Ability or contribute to success in fulfilling the objectives of the primary Ability.

I may need to provide examples in the future.