Date: Sat, 13 Jan 1996 19:32:18 -0500 From: Fredrik SellevoldTo: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Infections (was Re: At Rapier's Point)
>I had to stop and think about this one, and I asked myself why would a 1st >level character be any less resistant than a 20th level character. This >should be based on Co, strickly on Co, and if a level vs level comes about >the roll should be made against the same level. > >The real level should be the type of infection or disease. Maybe make the >common cold a 50th level attack :) > >The filthiness and hygiene could be pluses and minuses. (oh, I feel a >table being made somewhere). > > >Matt B
To the Rescue! Stop, don't do it, save yourself the trouble, the system allready exists! I have stopped using the characters lvls in RR vs poison/disease, but I still use the attack lvls of poisons/diseases as normal. I picked this formula up from RMCVI:
RR is sucsessful if: Co + Drug Resistance skill + 50 - Attack lvl > 100
The attack levels use the standard skill bonus progression (i.e. +5 for the first ten ranks etc) Of course, you might come up with a much better system.
Another place in the companion there is suggested to use an equal formula for Spell RR rolls. It also reccomends adding a Resist magic skill (or three). I haven't used this yet, but why not? Think about it, why should a 10.lvl fighter be more resistant to magic than a 1.lvl fighter?
Fredrik Sellevold