Re: Re: Skill improvement & meaning of masteries

From: Benedict Adamson <badamson_at_...>
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2002 09:45:11 +0000


Stacy Stroud wrote:
...
> Wulf and Graham and others in their camp want extraordinary
> abilities to require extraordinary experiences, not just more of the
> same. I can definitely get behind that.

All experiences played as episodes are (should) be extraordinary. Otherwise they are not worth playing as episodes.

...
> The thing I find most unbelievable about the BA leader-types is not
> their highest values, but the fact that they apparently have whole keywords
> at multiple-mastery levels... No PC played from starting power level is *ever*
> going to get every ability in a keyword up to multiple masteries; indeed, a
> great many of the default cultural and occupational abilities will likely
> never change from their starting values. I know HW isn't simulationist and
> all, but it bugs me that a PC who eventually achieves a clan or tribal
> leadership position will probably look nothing like the sample characters
> given.

...

I think this is a serious flaw in BA. I hope subsequent publications do not repeat it. Aside from the simulationist argument, I think it is dramatically poor, since (as I have mentioned before) the resulting leaders almost always have some ability to pull out of the bag if a PC tries a clever use of one of their secondary abilities. The only way of taking on leader with the given abilities is to forget about developing a broad and interesting character and pour all your HPs into improving one ability (Close COmbat, say) and always using that. That makes for very dull contests.

Powered by hypermail