> I still maintain it's always under the fairly direct
>>supervision of the hero -- you don't use a follower to stay behind
>>and hold the pass, or even to deliver a critically important message.
>
> Why not? The whole purpose of followers is to extend the hero's
> abilities, so why should you not use the follower for those abilities.
> A healer could have his warrior follower stand guard while he carried
> news of the attack, or a warrior could send a Fleetfooted follower to
> deliver the message while HE stood guard. Both seem eminently sensible
> to me. Why should a group of two or more people be forced to fail
> simply because they cannot be in two places at once? They CAN.
We don't necessarily disagree here -- I don't object to your two examples, because they don't necessarily give the follower any initiative, or scope for important decisions.
The important thing about followers, IMO, is that they are subordinate. I've played in games where players run two characters, and from my experiences, this is not as smooth as the subsidiary followers of Hero Wars.
-- David Dunham <mailto:dunham_at_...> Glorantha/HW/RQ page: <http://www.pensee.com/dunham/glorantha.html> Imagination is more important than knowledge. -- Albert Einstein
Powered by hypermail