Thanks for taking the time to post a new comment or a reply to one! First scan these quick notes, if you please:
General
* Currently, previewing a post is optional; you're welcome to preview or post immediately.
* You should see plain text input by default; click "enable rich text" for fancy formatting tools. (Some people love that and some don't. Be aware that formatting tool performance may vary by browser.)
* With apologies to all, I have to use a simple "captcha" question for unregistered posters. Otherwise, the spam flow will dwarf the Nile.
Registration and login
* Registration is available! Sign up here. Chief benefits at present include the ability to edit your own comments and manage subscriptions (newsletter, threads, etc.).
* If you'd prefer to post as an unregistered visitor, that's welcome too. Just leave "Your name" as the default "Esteemed Visitor", or type in some other name. (But if you happen to type in a name used by a registered user – say, "tbone" – you'll get an error telling you so when you hit "post comment". And while your post text should still be there, waiting for a revised user name, there's a chance it could disappear.)
* If you're a registered user but haven't logged in and want to post a quick comment as Esteemed Visitor, that's fine; see above.
* If you're a registered user but haven't logged in, and enter your user name under "Your name" when posting, you'll get an error saying that's the name of a registered user. That's a good thing; it means strangers can't make posts under your user name! But as above, there's a chance of losing your post text. It's best to log in first here, and then start your posting.
Final
All the above is standard stuff for community web sites, but reminders are good; I hate post-related glitches, and hate to see people run into them on this site. On this or any site, it's a good practice to do a quick "Select All" and "Copy" on your post text before hitting "Preview comment" or "Post comment" – just in case.
For more on the whole topic of interaction with the site, please see User Interaction (opens in new window).
Is this your first visit? Consider subscribing to this site's RSS feed to get updates, or to the newsletter for the occasional mailbox surprise.
(Were you, by chance, searching for "diner games"?)
This site is full of original material for players of table-top role-playing games. Input and collaboration is welcomed! Please read more about the site here. Or just dive in to whatever looks interesting.
A couple of recommendations: GURPS players, check out what's at The GURPS Diner. The house special is GULLIVER, an easy rules expansion for creating and playing odd-sized creatures. To see the lunch, dinner, wine, and kids' menus all at once, peek at the site map. Take your time; the busboy will be along shortly to clear you a place.
This site – like wide swaths of the Web – may not display properly with Internet Explorer 6.0 or lower. For your own sake, please upgrade to 7.0 or higher! Or even better, to fully enjoy the Web, try Safari or Firefox.
Re: DECIDE: Drop Excess Combat Info from Defense Evaluation
Yes, that's addressed in the revision that's been up for a while, after it was pointed out by several people.
You're correct that neglecting to roll TH (because defense is already known to have succeeded) will remove the chance for a TH critical – though it doesn't remove the chance for a defense critical.
So as it's purely an option, you would never have to neglect the TH roll if you were concerned about TH crits.
Still, I'm frankly a little mystified by people's intense concern over TH criticals. What I suggested as an option (letting a PC defender check defense first, and then checking the NPC's TH roll only if defense failed) is a net neutral action: it removes the chance for a TH critical hit, but also for a TH critical miss. No net benefit or loss. (Is it really a bad thing to lessen the chance of a lowly Orc scoring a fatal critical blow and putting a hero-level PC into the dirt??)
Crits still remain in the form of defense crit success or failure, essentially offering similar potential results but with an emphasis on the PC's success or failure. (And there's still full room for the NPC's TH roll, and thus TH crit success or failure, to come into play should the defense fail. For better or worse, there's still a chance for that Orc to slay Conan with a lucky shot.) Yet I've yet to hear anyone lament the fact that under canon rules, the chance for defense criticals gets tossed out every time a defense roll is not required. Why the big concern that there always be a check for NPCs' TH crits, yet no concern that there always be a chance for defense crits? I don't get that.
That's getting off into another subject: the crit system, and what's good or bad about it. The key point here is: Yes, any time you could jettison some roll, but are concerned about its crit potential or any other side effect, then by all means, make the roll. That would be a game-wide consideration, not limited to this article's topic, or even limited to combat.
Thanks for the comment!