Re: HW combat, xw3 vs 1w/vs 20

From: Steven White <fringe_worthy_at_...>
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 05:48:28 -0800

"charles mialaret" <charles.mialare-_at_...> wrote: original article:http://www.egroups.com/group/hw-rules/?start=470
> I'm not sure i saw this point solved completely.
>
> Steven White wrote:
> > And I don't disagree about the 2w person getting squashed like a
bug.
> > It's just that the 20 fellow (Even less skilled) seems to get
squashed
> > slower than the 2w fellow.
>
> I think your point is valid from a purely mathematical point of view.
> However, if your RQ players had encountered the mother of monsters or
> another such elder secret, would you have bothered to launch the
damage
> dices?

I'm thinking of a situation where you have a giant versus a massive,but not very skilled war party. And the intent is the giant will only waste _half_ the warparty before getting run over. Having the war party's at 2w, and making the giant buff by giving him 10w3 combat might _seem_ reasonable. I was just suggesting that mathematically, the game master might not like the result. He might prefer giving the giant: 5w5 giant size, 5w combat, ^8 small tree club, ^8 thick hide, Instead of just 10w3 combat. The giant will still tentpeg followers left and right, but with enough of them, he'll go down... eventually. Maybe.

Now, if you expect your heroes to figure how how to give themselves 20 points of bonuses, and pump their mere 2w skill to 2w2, then giving your giant a 10w3 skill is fine.

That and I wanted to mention weirdness in the system, being a math junky. And hero points can let you change the results, if you've collected enough, and are willing to spend them like water. But mathematically, I'd still prefer being 20 vs 10w3 then 2w vs 10w3. As well I seem to recall some of the difficulty charts go to insane level of difficulty (10w5 and higher)  

Steven White