> IMO Rory's ratings are way to high.
Hold on - *I* didn't write those ratings, so they aren't "mine". I would say that they are poorly phrased - I'd eliminate the "Married" part of the description, frex. (Unless the hero has "Respects Marriage Vows even though he's not in Love with his wife" or some such).
If the idea is, can you seduce someone
> who is in love or is married, well just look at how very many people are
> not
> the child of who they think they are. People in love sleep with other
> people
> all the time.
Well, there's that "Willing partner - Automatic success" line. Just because you're married doesn't mean that you're *in love* with your spouse. And you could conceivably have two "Love X" abilities - Guenever loved both Arthur and Lancelot (keeping the story simple ). If it comes to a contest between two loves...
> If you are talking about selling your beloved to a slave merchant, well,
> you
> need a situational modifier there I think.
I don't know - just have a contest between your "Love X" and "Greedy" (or whatever your motivation for selling your loved one is). Why should this be any different than any other contest? Why should your Love get a modifier and not your Greedy?
> Finally, if the idea is that a Carpenter 17 is a bloody good carpenter
> compared with me, well then, that 17 is higher than I think we get used to
> playing HQ.
Well, I'd say that the rules specifically *don't* say that 17 is "bloody good" - compared to a "No Skill 6", yes, but not to the list of mastery-equivalents on page 19. The paradigm shifted between HW and HQ as far as what a skill rating meant. (And I know all about Dunham's contention that you can play the game in the no-mastery levels for a long time).
RR
He was born with the gift of laughter and the sense that the world was mad
R. Sabatini, Scaramouche
Powered by hypermail