> Ought not going from 19W to 2WW (or however it works this week) to
> mean something a bit more than just 'another notch closer to rune
> lord'? Here's a somewhat different scale, that makes a lot more
> intuitive sense to me ... How does that grab you all?
Looks good to me, and *much* better than the proposal I (mis?)heard from Greg at Tentacle-Con ("Anyone with any skill is probably a Master of it, and anything which requires any skill to perform probably exerts one Mastery level of resistance" -- I loosely paraphrase his "carpenter and table" example).
The argument from game-sessions-taken (voiced by ?Alex in Germany) is, as the rules last stood, pretty insurmountable. If you need to play in 60 game sessions to get one skill from starting level to WWW level, there aren't going to be many honest WWW rune-level types around. Seems to go against the ethos, IMO. But what do I know?
In response to which, Eric wrote:
> The enormous assumption you are making here is that you are assuming that
> experience and character development in HW works like RQ. It doesn't.
> What if you could go to the hero plane, steal a spirit, and suddenly
> jump 20 points in a skill? Kinda gets rid of the small-grained problem.
> Incorrect assumptions lead to non-existant problems. You are trying
> to fit the partial set of rules you know into the RQ mold. It will
> not fit.
Well, excuuuuuuse us for taking at face value what Greg said about his own system when presented with this argument less than a month ago. ("It takes around 60 game sessions to get WWW in one skill? That sounds OK to me.")
> Why can't you assume that the rules will work?
I had never understood this to be the playtester's role. I thought it was our job to toughen the rules up and improve them, not to blandly assume they will work. But maybe I am wrong.
Cheers, Nick
Powered by hypermail