<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Andrewmv:
I like the T4 system too. I've never had a novice take more than a couple of minutes to totally master it, and thats not something you can say for MT. Its just so intuitive, Whats my target? How many dice am I rolling? is the total equal of less than the target? Add in the Its Harder Than I Thought rule and its a joy to use.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I'm afraid I just don't see it. To my mind there's no way that (1) adding 2 numbers, (2) checking a table to see how many dice to roll, (3) comparing that number with one of the numbers from step 1 and, if greater, adding 2 to it, (4) rolling and adding up the number of dice determined in step 3, (4a) if necessary, dividing the value of one of the dice rolled in step 4 in half before adding it to the others, and (5) comparing the value in step 4/4a to the value from step 1; is simpler or more intuitive than (1) rolling and adding 2D, (2) adding 2 numbers to the value from step 1, and (3) comparing the value from step 2 to a difficulty chart.
Assuming that both charts will sooner or later be memorized, we're left with a 4 (occasionally 5) step process vs. a 2 step process. Admittedly, there are extra steps involving exceptional successes and failures, hasty vs cautious, and all that, but those are part of both systems (and besides, I don't really remember the exceptional success/failure rules for T4 -- success is all 1's, but what's failure? 3 or more 6's?. At least in MT the rule is consistent at both ends: difficulty +/- 2).