> okay I think this is important becuase
> it is at the hub of a lot of grief.
> Most of it is carried over from a
> simulationist way of looking at games.
> I'm not picking on Graham, but his
> post is the clearest to respond to.
When in play, we (i.e. you, Ian, as our most recent and most frequent narrator) have not remembered this. It is too much overload - we want to think story not rules.
Now what I am not arguing is that the ratings need to be constant/consistent from session to session. They have to change to meet the needs of the story and to give players the feeling that they have overcome real challenges (or at least, it was only a real challenge that got them in the end). The wolf you met 3 episodes ago might have had Run 10W then but today he only has 1W (or vice versa). So he is having a bad hair day!
Where AR (Anaxial's Roster) scores is having lists of thingies to throw at the characters as challenges. It uses a convention that certain skills are used in certain ways so that all entries are directly comparable. My opinion is that some (many?) of the numbers presented in AR are too low and that this is/was an artefact of our (and Issaries) lack of experience with a logarithmic and scalable system such as Hero Wars.
If your story specifically requires that you have a wolf then treat AR's numbers as those for an untested young adult and modify as required. If your story just requires some kind of challenge, then just find something with stats that already meet requirements.
regards,
Charles
PS Ian, if it's not too late already, enjoy your holidays. And don't worry, I am not picking on you personally, just the clearest to respond to ;-)
PPS Amazing! This is only the second time that I remember an argument in this group that involves frequent players on opposite sides...
Powered by hypermail