Haha, well very true! My game is not exactly small. Still, I'm happy to hear you are giving it a look, and I'll be extra happy if it proves useful to you in any way at all. Of course, I'd love to hear if you enjoy the game (if you do give it a shot and not just read through it). As to your explanation, yes, that was much more clear! Thank you for that. Sounds like I did get the general idea then. Sounds like a cool game though, so I look forward to how this all turns out in the end.
Viewing post in Ideas for a gamebook-oriented rule system
Oh, 58 pages is small enough, just not possible to figure out at a glance. I left you a comment (and a rating). Other considerations aside, I notice your game does rely on opposed checks after all. And it turns out my rules had a fatal flaw as described earlier. Going to pivot again and try for a rock-paper-scissors system pitting each of the three attributes against a certain other. That should make combat interesting enough: what to do when your favored stat is well-matched by the opponent's?
I hear ya. I appreciate the comment and rating, even if the game wasn't to your taste. I'll be responding to your comment there as well (for the benefit of future folks). Anyway, I was perhaps unclear last night, but yes, my game does rely on opposed checks, but only some of the time. Either way, it sounds like you still got something out of reading so I suppose that's good enough lol. Wishing you the best with your own game of course :)