I'd suggest some level of consistency might be an idea, but that's something for the players to sort out between themselves. If Fred can see Bob and Su grabbing augments, and he chooses not to do the same, that's up to him. And of course it's up to you how far you allow things to be "stretched" when it comes to augments being relevant.
> I also find that I
> may add a couple of augments to a Major NPC, but because we don't
> have full stats for them (and I don't want to start that discussion
> again) I tend to look at the base ability and lump another mastery
> or mastery and a half depending on who it is. Does anyone else
> follow a similar formula?
Remember that for most major NPCs, what we do have is keywords for them at non-17 levels. The stats are abbreviated rather than incomplete. If what your players regard as standard is (say) three magical augments, Brave, Strong/Fast/Agile, and a couple of personality things, then see where those fit into the keywords, assume the NPC has them at key-word levels, and apply augments the same way as your players do. OiD assumes that NPCs use their followers as AP batteries, but adds in augments from magic and major skills.
It can also be worth looking at whether the NPC has any relationships that should be triggered by the current contest: "hate PC", for instance? These probably aren't in the stats either, but can be deduced from other things that are: like someone once said, a "member of Iron Ring" ability probably equates well to a "hate Lunars" one.
You did say *major* NPC here, and I'm assuming you meant it. The guys who are interesting enough that you know what they feel strongly about, and the players know too.
> And the sample resistances I take to represent a raw un augmented
> ability. Is that the general consensus?
I'd like to know that myself - would rule-writers care to comment? I can see arguments either way.
Powered by hypermail