Having grown up with Marvel Super Heroes, that never bothered me too
much (although in that system, you didn't just convert back into numbers
all the time). For me it is things like Super v Great but the Great is
on a new scale. Anyways, I don't think we're wildly disagreeing here. ^_^
>
> >
> > 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...
>
I was a big proponent of "benchmark" for HQ1. Put one in, announce stuff
will be published with that in mind, and then people's whose groups
varied due to the way HQ worked could adjust from that. I still wouldn't
be against it in principle, although I'd strip the numbers down. I
really, really don't need the fine grain of 7w2 vs 5w2 in an NPC,
personally. Tell me W2ish, and I'm happy. But that's me.
>
>
> __._,_
>
>
Powered by hypermail