Don't *think* so? The NPCs with slightly fuller write-ups have their special skills noted as well, as significantly higher than the keyword.
> (and so, includes
> their 'game' experience as well)?
I was assuming as default that "game" and "saga" should lead to advancement at the same rate for the same actions. The Gloranthan character is doing the same things, he doesn't know whether he's being run by a PC at the time.
> You can argue that either way - maybe you pay double, because
> you had your chance to describe the backstory when you
> originally described the character.
A bit unfair. Unless you really want me as a player to postpone start of play until I've had the chance to write out every detail of every moment of my character's life before start of play. (Yes, I am perfectly capable of writing tens of thousands of words of backstory, I just prefer to do it after I've got to know the character a bit). Isn't it rather more fun to go "hey, wouldn't it be cool if this NPC we just met is an old schoolfriend? Look, I can fit it into my backstory here...."?
> If that same character had a keyword of 17w3 and a main
> ability of 7w4, he'd get 5x+8, or two whole masteries added
> to his main rating, for 7w6.
That's a good point. I was assuming that those "standard ratings" that put sample NPCS in the W3s were straight keywords. But if in fact those are the results they get to use after augments have been taken into account, their actual keywords would, as you say, be a great deal lower.
Which, I suddenly realise, leads to a very important question for a PC of mine. Storm Tribe p 106. Humakti Hundred-thane qualifications. "Close combat 10W2 and warband tactics 10W". Is that the straight skill requirement, or the "as used" result, after you add in augments and fancy weaponry?
Powered by hypermail