Does size really matter?

From: Wulf Corbett <wulfc_at_...>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 10:41:36 -0800


david dunham <davi-_at_...> wrote:
original article:http://www.egroups.com/group/hw-rules/?start=484

> It would depend on the context, of course, but if two characters were
> fighting, I would indeed let someone defend with their tiny. It would
> *not* make them easier to kill -- APs are relative advantage, and
> being small and nimble is an advantage.
Small and Nimble are two very different things though... not too many Mostali ballet dancers...
>
> This ability could also be used to avoid getting stuck in a cave, or
to hide.
>

I was thinking some more about this, and while I agree being small need NOT make you easier to kill (Mostali are little runts, but damned tough if you don't cook them just right), also agree it makes you harder to HIT... So, I'd like to throw this idea in, please feel free to throw it out again if you like...

Characters with Big, Tall, etc. should be easier to hit, those with Small, Tiny, etc. harder. Applying Tiny as an Ability would be like aquiring any other Edge, but I'm not too sure how to apply Big as a flaw, and generate negative Edge from it? To get an Edge, you declare what you're trying for, and roll vs. resistance, but you don't WANT the flaw to get a big Edge... Just HOW small you need to be to be Tiny is another question - are Dwarfs Tiny 1W, Tiny 17, or Tiny 6? Tough characters should be harder to damage and injure, but not to tire out. Therefore, instead of applying the Edge as normal, reducing the AP loss per exchange, apply the equivilant Bonus (same chart, lower numbers) to the wound level. Therefore, instead of the standard 7 AP = 1 Wound, Tough characters would need 8, 9 or more AP per Wound. They'd lose AP as normal, get tired, but not get so many Wounds. Again, Weak or Easily Hurt would mean Wounds at 6 or lower AP, but again I'm not sure how to apply this...

Wulf

Powered by hypermail