> > OK, to get back to my other, more moderate example: in this circumstance,
> > would the game-world narrative justify _any_ increase in Wealth for
> > 1HP? (As opposed to for 2HP, which he can do for any reason, however
> > slight, or indeed for none.)
>
> "This circumstance" being raiding 4 cattle? Sure. Since the narrative says
> that he successfully did something during play that could increase his
> wealth (at least in Orlanthi or other Cattle-based societies), then he can
> claim that his increase is related to game play and thus be at the "Related"
> cost.
And my point is, how is the narrator best to be assisted in making the determination as to _what_, reasonably, could increase your wealth. If you wealth is 10W3, 4 cows is not a "narratively significant amount". If it's 5, it certainly is (and then some).
Even if you're going to rule out the "cementing" approach entirely (which personally I'm reluctant to do, for the aforementioned types of "Champions syndrome" reason (yes, the 20 year old cutting edge rule...)), then having some sort of rough and ready game world correspondance is useful just for making the above call.
Powered by hypermail