This seems to be as good an example as any of a point that does seem to be one of the key forms of disagreement here.
Would you agree that a Gloranthan, who knew how to make magical woad, would know that it could only be made on the High Holy Day, could be stored in a pot, would go off within a few days, and so on?
This seems to me to be a completely different thing to, say, the way in RQ that you would only get a tick to improve a skill if you used it.
One is a pure game mechanic, the other a description of the world in the games mechanics chapter of the rule book.
One of the biggest flaws of RQ, from a publishers point of view, was always that statistics took up so much more space than virtually any other system.
Without more detail in Thunder Rebels, are we in danger of ending up with a case where any published scenario has to take just as much space explaining the interpretation of the rules it is assuming?
Richard
Powered by hypermail