> Well, I personally would not go there - I think its not the correct
> transaction to record.
Could you expand on this somewhat enigmatic remark?
> What I would fear
> from this is increasing imbalance - you'll add a point here for this
> and a point here for that and before you know it your Heortling
> heroes living a mud hut are as wealthy as Moonson in HW terms.
This is hardly a problem with game-world-scaled wealth mechanics, which is what Julian and I are arguing for. This is a more pressing consequences of the "raising wealth like any another ability" approach (i.e., the existing HW rules, pretty much), where a linear "expenditure" (that is, 1 HP) gets you 'escalating' returns. (i.e, "+N HPs" means, not so much "+X cows" as "=Y% cows".)
> In short, ANY mechanical system will talk away7 an element of GM
> judgement which I think is crucial.
Well, the point is always to bear in mind the maxim that "mechanics make a good tool, but a poor master". Where the narrator has a perfectly servicable intuition, I'm definitely _not_ suggesting she overrule it withg any new (or existing!) game mechanic on "but on page [x] it says that...". Rather I'ma ttempting to cater for the "Hrm, now what do I do?" type of moment: "What the heck should I use as a TN for buying _that_?" "What the heck amount of game world wealth does _that_ rating really correspond to?" etc, etc. Any "official" rules based on a Julian-like system would, I trust, make that understanding explicit...
Powered by hypermail