>
>>Everyone knows that a horse can run faster than a person. The game does
>>nothing to define the relative speeds of a horse and person, but in the
>>story your human may learn to run as fast as a horse. He will have a human
>>bonus to his Run ability.
>
>I think this is a mistake - if two characters have the same rating in 'Run'
>then a running contest between them should be about a fifty-fifty chance,
>even if one of them is a horse. Anything else adds unnecessary complexity
>to the game.
Either something was missing in the explanation, or else it makes any form of 'competition' next to pointless. No-one can know anything about any of their abilities in comparison to anything else until the Narrator pre-determines the outcome. Ability ratings become meaningless. If people have a 'Run' ability, they will KNOW how fast they can run, they will likely know how fast an average horse can run, and whether they can beat it. Why not actually TELL the player what the character will already KNOW? Or, more accurately, why not save time and inconsistent answers by telling them before they all queue up to ask the Narrator the same question? Applying situational modifiers is one thing, but having them be the standard situation for normal competitions is silly.
Oh, and while it might be possible for some narrators to judge the relative speeds of horse and man, what about High Llamas? Rubble Runners? What about all the weird stuff with running abilities that doesn't exist to make real-world judgements from?
Wulf
Powered by hypermail