> > However your basic point is a sound one: Never add two abilities,
> > always augment one with another.
>
> Yep. Except when it's too damn tedious to do so, ie non-dramatic and/or
> repetitive cases. Also, where HW TN rules don't _work_ very well, ie Wealth,
> Gains from Quest Challenging, ...
The problem is with the (poor, innocent) TNs, though, but with the (big, nasty) augment rules.
> > This is a skill that can clearly be used to augment your close
> > combat, and probably for a hefty augment at that.
>
> The basic principle of this rule works, except that it might lead to pretty
> unwieldy character sheets.
>
> Going on logically from here, a solution for Quest Challenges might be to
> attempt a Permanent Augmentation of your Ability from the one you've gained ?
> Maybe attempting a Permanent +8 skill gain against a resistance of 20W with a
TN
> of 10W2 ?
But it doesn't make any sense in "log scale" terms. If you have [Ability] at 10, and "gain" 10 from a HQ challenge, you should (one supposes) have doubled your ability in game world terms. If you have [Ability] at 10W5, and you "gain" 10 from a HQ challenge, you've gained little, or more precisely, nothing to several decimal places. But this proposed rule would give both a +2 -- sillily.
You might say "ah, but this is because HQs are Special, and are By Cunning Design biased towards Big Numbers". I dispute this, because firstly, there are other situations where one wishes to "add" ability scores, so a more general mechanic would be useful, and secondly, because this is even more specifically broken particularised to HQs. If you can get a decent fixed bonus for questing for a power, regardless of how good you already are at ythat ability, it provides a perverse incentive to "cherry pick" easy quests: give me "easy" quests that reliably give me a +2 to my CC, cumulatively, and soon I _will_ have a CC of 10W5. (I'm speaking here in the person of the evil powergaming Alex that DWRT wouldn't let near the delicate fragile flower of the HW rules, rather than the person that actually plays with 'em.)
> I think that just adding TN/5 would be less fiddly in many cases.
It's definitely less fiddly, so I'd prefer it to the augment idea. (But you give me the devil's alternative...).
> > On the other hand, I see simulationist rules as being more like a
> > water tank, it holds so much, you drain it and that is it until you
> > re-fill it, you can figure exactly how much water is in it. I think
> > most people would rather have a well than a water tank, although of
> > course there are exceptions. If the whole point of the game is that
> > the heroes are outlawed and cut off, then tracking each of their
> > possesions with care could be appropriate.
>
> I think that water tanks and wells are ideally interchangeable. I think that,
as
> elsewhere in HW, there should be two compatible Wealth rules for people's
> various gaming needs, and really, we do *need* a better rule for adding
> Abilities than what is suggested in HW1
Agree on both...
> one that would provide similar results
> to Augmenting, but for non-dramatic or repetitive use, or for a few boring
> things (like Money) that one occasionally needs to simulate/narrate.
No, I think we need one that specifically gives _different_ results from augmenting, for the reasons above.
Powered by hypermail