> The game has since been defined at a different level numerically,
but
> the basic system works very well if only masters have mastery.
>
> Just define abilities of 12-14 as being those of promising,
competent
> people, and scale the opposition accordingly. (Remember, no matter
> what the ability, there are plenty of times no self-respecting
> individual needs to roll. This scale doesn't mean that a farmer can
> plow his land only 60% of the time!) This is not in fact a low
level
> campaign (as the current rules suggest), it's merely a heroic
> campaign where fewer people have a mastery.
>
>
> David Dunham <mailto:dunham_at_p...>
> Glorantha/HW/RQ page: <http://www.pensee.com/dunham/glorantha.html>
> Imagination is more important than knowledge. -- Albert Einstein
The problem I have with reducing the scale like is a lack of
spectrum.
Two games where large changes in ability occur over short changes in
characteristics are Hero where each +5 of an attribute are a doubling
of the value or (god forbid) DC Heroes where each +1 was a doubling...
Reducing the frequency or number of masteries reduces this continum
an
and makes simple increases in skill *too* powerful or at least too
great a change over the short term.
Jeff