Well, for one thing, you've turned a Group Extended contest into a simple 1-1 Extended contest...
Split the "Follower group" into subgroups (say, about as many as the Player characters) and augment with the subgroups. You end up with something more in line with what the Players are doing, and a similar (though probably lower) augment bonus. Figure that the Villain probably has Relationships with the four-five "Follower Leaders" than all 20 faceless followers. So your split might be 1 Main Villain, his "sidekick", and four groups of 5 followers each. In the Engiziland game I'm giving followers a community bonus for numbers inside their group, so that's four groups of "Faceless Followers 19" (17 + 2 communty bonus). So a +2 augment or +19 AP from each group, split 'em as you will.
BTW, the PC's followers aren't "Community Property" - they'd augment their own PC, not the PC of the contest. (or at least, not without a glance at the Follower Reluctance table) "I'm *your* bodyguard, I'll protect you, but I ain't doing diddly for him unless you order me to, it's not in my contract."
Of course, I wonder about the "we all augment one guy" mindset (yes, I *know* about the SWAT team idea, I wrote it...) To me, the idea of putting my hero in a purely "support" role sems like less fun. And if it happens all the time ("It's a fight, everyone support Jane's hero!" "It's a Magical contest, everyone support Rory's character!" "It's political negotiations, everyone support Mark's character!" etc, etc, ad nauseum) just seems like its reducing the interactions I have (okay, there *are* times that it Just Makes Sense(tm), like in Political Negotiations, but in a fight I'd expect to be in there rolling my own dice.)
RR
C'est par mon ordre et pour le bien de l'Etat que le porteur du pr�sent a
fait ce qu'il a fait.
- Richelieu
Powered by hypermail