It gets really silly when you start using imprecise adjectives to describe an ordered progression - is it Great > Smashing > Super or the other way around. I don't need to think to decide if 10 is greater or less than 12...
>
> If you have numbers, from what I have been told in HQ2, it breaks
apart
> because the numbers won't be in relation to whatever the "base
level
> is". (I suppose you could give relative numbers, of course.)
>
What happened to the idea of providing a "Benchmark"? If the numbers are provided to a benchmark based on (eg) the PC's having skills around 10W2, then if they actually have skills around 10W3 then I know to add a mastery to the targets, and if they only have skills around 15W then I need to subtract 15 (or thereabouts). At least I don't have to go away and calculate what the base numbers should be first, and I get the benefits of having the skills ranked numerically in the first place...
Powered by hypermail