Alex Wrote:
> I've had niggles here. There's definitely an "oops" factor when your
> clan ring member character with best abilities in the 10W2 characters
> suddenly notices he's missing some "key" ability, and finds himself
> raising it from 14.
I think this happens alot in the RW, especially at my place of work. people start new jobs but spend the first year just trying to keep up. Some higher management jobs have a very steep learning curves.
Darran.
>
> Stacy Stroud:
> > Obviously, not everyone will need those "brakes," as this discussion has
> > shown. And if future books follow the BA tradition of changing w3 from
> > "notably superhuman" to "guy any given clansman might know and admire,"
the
> > brakes should be needed even less, since the range of "normal humans" is
> > widened.
>
> One might argue that this simply moves the "problem" around, since
> surely we'd agree that w4 is capital-H "heroic".
>
>
> > Heck, technically even Orlanth *could* be given abilities and take
> > part in contests using the game system, while still utterly outclassing
> > even max-boosted Harreks, though I probably wouldn't bother doing such a
> > thing unless serious high-level futzing with the Godplane were a major
> > element of a specific campaign.
>
> Well, notionally at least, Orlanth has an ability or six in the 10W10
> range...
>
>
> [Mage:tA]
> > Of course, that system balances its steep advancement curve with
> > a coarse-grained scale in which there are usually only five ability
"steps"
> > between "inept" and "world-class." Then again, HW isn't that much
better
> > if you look at masteries rather than individual TN increases as the
> > "ability steps," as it seems most of us have been doing.)
>
> And the Issaries squad are doing, it often seems. Heck, isn't 5 or 10
> TN difference enough to differentiate people, every now and then?
>
>
> > I'd love to have
> > seen the pre-pub "rare mastery" version that David Dunham so loves.
>
> Well, you're not missing much. If I tell you that the version of
> "Hunt for the Black Spear" run at Convulsion IV had the clan lawspeaker
> with best abilities in the 16 range, then you'll get the general idea.
> (That'd be more like 16W2 these days, one infers.)
>
>
>
> > I'm even reassured by this very debate that my original fear -- that
> > characters would advance too slowly to get from starting level to
> > "heroic" level over the course of a reasonable campaign -- is groundless
> > and may even be the exact opposite of the real problem.
>
> All depends what you consider a "reasonable campaign"; some people
> are worried the characters will be unplayably good after 5 years;
> others are concerned it might not be possible build a Harrek in college
> semester. Fortunately the "throttle" here is easy to adjust (though
> some explicit advice in the rulebook on this would kill no-one, either).
>
>
> > What I'm wondering now is what to do
> > if you're starting a game at higher-than-standard power
> > level? Specifically, what about those 13 and 17 abilities? Do they
stay
> > at those values? Rise slightly to reflect the characters' increased
> > power?
>
> I've had niggles here. There's definitely an "oops" factor when your
> clan ring member character with best abilities in the 10W2 characters
> suddenly notices he's missing some "key" ability, and finds himself
> raising it from 14. Less likely to happen if you raise them the hard
> way, I suppose, but no by any means impossible.
>
>
> > 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.
>
> Yep, you're right. That's definitely in the "not going to happen"
> category. This was a niggle I had about John H's in-game-world-terms
> excellent and 100% credible character (whose name I forget: the clan
> champion lately link to here). I also though it was mildly hilarious
> that his half dozen different fighting styles and weapons were one
> ability, and his half dozen different mythology scores were all separate
> abilities -- but that a different thread entirely!
>
>
> > I suppose I'm just falling prey to the same rules artifact I cited above
> > -- expecting characters to advance at the same rate out-of-game as they
do
> > in-game. Instead, it seems that unplayed characters (PCs before or
after
> > game play, and all NPCs) advance faster in breadth but slower in depth
than
> > their played brethren, judging by their abilities.
>
> I think you're right on both counts: this is true, and this is entirely
> a rules artifact.
>
> Cheers,
> Alex.
>
>
> To Post a message, send it to: hw-rules_at_...
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: hw-rules-unsubscribe_at_...
> To Complain constructively please email me at steve_at_....
>
>
>
>
Powered by hypermail