> I do dimly remember a game system where you started all skills at
> 100%, and suffered massive penalties when you used them in stress
> situations (or else was rolling against similar opposition), but this
> doesn't seem very satisfactory.
If nothing else, it's bad pyschology. Wouldn't you rather have a 30% skill, and get a +40% bonus, than have a 100% skill, and get a -30% penalty, as a matter of course?
Really all that necessary to "explain" the self-respecting hero rule "consistency" is more in the way of guidelines as to what sort of _positive_ sit-mods it might be appropriate to give away. After all, a +5 will mean you almost always succeed with an ability you "have", at any value, and a +10 will help lots with things you have a "default" in...
So give people a +10 for things "any idiot Heortling" (or whatever) could be expected to do, and a +5 for things "anyone who's supposed to be able to do [X]" should be able to do, and you have a situation consistent with the "any s-r hero" rule.
Powered by hypermail