>> He wasn't a 'hero', he was a follower. This is modeled quite well by HW.
>> That would be the point of him being an anonymous archer.
>
>Who did he follow--quick, name the "hero"? Do so without looking it up,
>since any "hero" great enough to slaughter Richard Coeur de Leon would
>HAVE to be as famous as he!
The point of having followers is that they give you an advantage. Thus even a middlingly heroic bod, with the addition of help from his followers, still has a chance of taking out an individualy superior hero.
HW offers several ways for a character to successfuly take on someone with better ability scores. Using followers is one of them. Clever plot point management is another. Happening to roll a crit when your opponent rolls a fumble is yet another. Rigging the contest so that your ability is more appropriate than that of your opponent, and thus getting a favourable appropriateness modifier, is stacked on top of those. Use all of these together against a surprised or poorly prepared hero and you've got an excelent chance of offing him even if you are at a couple of Ws disadvantage.
I'm not saying you'll necesserily love the way these options are handled in HW, and you're absolutely right to want to wait and see how they are implemented in the final draft, but the system does offer many ways for a less skilled character to have a crack at the heavy hitters.
Trotsky :
> No, he wouldn't. Remember, you only become 'invulnerable' when you've
>got three masteries advantage over someone - a huge difference in skill
>levels.
Absolutely true if you are just rolling against base abilities, but if you've got plot points and the hero hasn't, then the difference required before you have zero chance becomes four masteries. Use a few of the other tactics mentioned above and you could probably get it up to five masteries difference and still have a slim chance of doing some damage.
Simon Hibbs
Powered by hypermail