> There are a couple of things that keep bothering me. For instance,
> why 14? Why is the basic resistance for stuff 14? Why not 15, or 12
> or even better, 10? Could anyone give an educated guess?
Robin likes multiples of 7? I don't know - it makes the base resitance marginally tougher than the "starting" skill of 12 (what you get for starting a skill after character creation) or 13 (the lowest value you start with during creation) which means that begining characters still face a challenge>
>
> Neither I nor my players understand the logic that if you describe
> your character as Resistant to Magic (or whatever) his default
> resistance is still better. It is a minor problem, but still
> strange. I've solved this by letting my players augment the basic
> resistance with their ability.
That would work. Of course it always depends what number you assign to the resistance when you assign scores - a resistance of 13 is less than the default, but one of 5w1 is a lot better...
Also you can improve a skill of "resistant to magic", wheras you can't improve the default - maybe you could just treat any such skill as starting at 14 on the grounds that no skill should start below the default unless it is intended to be a handicap...
>
> Another thing that bothers me is the wealth rating. Now this is
> supposed to reflect a lot more than just money. It is also supposed
> to reflect how much resources you can claim from your family and
> clan. So where do you draw the line between wealth and Relationship
> Family/Clan? Isn't this the same thing in a clan based society?
Sort of. Say you are captured by an Enemy clan and wish to ransome yourself, You would use your Wealth rating to determine if you could raise the money, and if you took a reduction in wealth as a result - Your wealth could go down (meaning you have less spare cash to spend on luxuries) without your clanmates becoming less likely to ensure you don't starve in the winter. If you can't raise the necessary wealth on your own then you could try augmenting your wealth score with your "Relationship Family/Clan" to borrow money from them. Alternatively you could try and use your "Relationship" directly to see if they send out a warband to try and rescue you, or capture a prisoner of their own to exchange without reducing your wealth. If you keep calling on your Family/Clan to rescue you, and don't contribute to them in return your relationship score may go down, and then they will be less likely to help you in future. The fact that you have just returned from the Big Rubble with a mountain of Gold Wheels (high wealth) won't encourage them to help you if you have allowed your relationship to dwindle
"Ha, that Frank, he has all this money and never does anything to help his family, and now he claims that bandits are raiding his cattle - Let him spend some of that gold on hiring guards then, why should we help him, only to be turned away from his hall come dark season?"
>
> Wouldn't it be easier to use the relationship as a measure of
> how 'rich' you are? And if your to much of a burden to your clan,
> your relationship will suffer (as in the wealth rules). Being a
> steady source of wealth for your clan on the other hand, would no
> doubt make you a very popular guy.
This is where augmenting one score with the other would come in, and allows for more variety - The poor clansman with lots of loyal friends, the wealthy but unpopular miser, the wealthy man who can gain support by spending money "If you support me for a place on the Clan Ring, I'll give you one of the calves of my prize bull" or the sole survivor of a family wiped out by some foe, who knows where the family treasure is hidden...
Powered by hypermail