Quote from: RPGPundit;1058641Well, I could see a one-roll combat working for very very specific things. Like, for example, a duel between samurais.

That was the starting point that caused us to think a one-roll approach would be a good idea. It isn't a samurai game but the style of dueling in our source material is much more samurai-like (or at least very much inspired by Samurai movies and gunslinger duels). Basically we wanted a game that had that suspenseful build up as people are deciding to fight one another and assessing their foes before striking. But the more we tried to work with it, the less we liked it (everything had to revolve around that single roll-off working). It just felt like other parts of the combat system were being compromised in order to have this one-roll approach. It wasn't necessarily true one roll combat. But combat was potentially 1-3 roll offs between all involved, with each roll-off having the possibility of enormous consequences. What I may do is develop it on the side as we continue to develop the core system, and if it ends up being workable with everything else in the system by the end of the project, include it as an option in the appendix.

For me combat should be an enjoyable part of the game and not something to be done and over with as quick as possible.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1058640Well yes, but that was a mass-combat system. That's different than a personal combat system.

S'mon was talking about one roll to resolve an entire battle. Either one per side or one period. Like how Tunnels and Trolls handles group combat.

Quote from: Omega;1058739S'mon was talking about one roll to resolve an entire battle. Either one per side or one period. Like how Tunnels and Trolls handles group combat.

Maybe, but mass combat was not what the OP was about.