It was exaggerated for effect, but the point is, you're going to have some level of this occurring no matter what the "guidance" says. I don't want to get into detailed commentary until I see the real rules, but one thing that is abundantly clear at this point is that HW is simply trading number-based powergaming/min-maxing for word-based powergaming/wordsmithing. I foresee "Mad-Lib" style templates becoming common; add an adjective here, a noun there (and to really cram those skills in, try some gerunds, too). "Cramming" and mass usage of generally-accepted, overly-generalized skills will be problematic. The other problem will be "unskilled" GMs who will allow overly general traits like "determined" to be used for just about anything..."I'm determined to resist this poison", "I'm determined to break through the master-swordsman's defenses", "I'm determined to overthrow the Lunar Empire", etc.
So, what remains to be seen is whether the word-based issues are less or more of a problem than the number-based ones. The skills templates/packages have a lot of potential...but of course, those could just as easily have been created for a number-based system like RQ.
> I won't comment on Brian Tickler's post, except to say that I agree with
> the sentiment, if not the specific example, which I assume was exaggerated for
> effect, and presumably wouldn't be allowed under the HW rules :-)
>
> Forward the glorious Red Army!
> Trotsky
I assumed there were "barriers" in place that would prevent such blatant misuse, but, still, as long as you have such a "grey", vague, rules-lite approach, you cannot avoid this problem.
Powered by hypermail