Re: Re: New players to a campaign

From: Jane Williams <janewilliams20_at_...>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 20:01:11 +0000 (GMT)


Me:
> > But then I've always done character creation,
> under any system, as
> > "describe a character who'll fit in/contrast
> nicely with the one's we've
> > got. Fine, now we'll write down some numbers to
> describe them."

Rob:
> to be fair Jane, i'd do that with you but not with
> some of the
> people I have gamed with. I don't know if I would
> trust myself!!

Isn't he sweet? :)

> Just as long
> > as we have consistency, why *shouldn't* the new PC
> be a Patron a mastery
> > higher than the other PCs, ...

> I don't think this is workable for most groups. If
> it works in your game fine,

The last time I did that, at player request, wasn't HQ (where it would have worked much better), it was a RQ variant (and non-Gloranthan). Most PC had top skills around 70% max. We "adopted" an NPC who'd been shifting from adversary to patron, and then had a life-change. An ex-vampire, several hundred years old, with most skills around the 200% level. It worked *wonderfully*. She thought combat was beneath her, but was very protective towards the other PC she'd fallen in love with. Tended to stay in the background (the player was a quiet sort), then come out and rescue them from whatever silly thing they'd got themselves into this time. She didn't dominate, she didn't get left out, but naturally a lot of that was matching PC power to the player, and knowing what she'd do with it.

And I'm still running my 14-year-old RQ Pentan character, who's nearly an initiate, along with two other PCs who're nearly Rune level. If anyone dominates, it's her :)

I think what I'm saying is that skill levels are irrelevant in making a "party" hang together and "work". Think of the Lord of the Rings - did Sam have the same skill levels as Gandalf?

> but the rules do mention this sort of
> thing - people
> wanting more exerienced characters and all that.

Fine. So give them more experienced characters.

> Also look at some fiction genre's. Just because a
> character is
> advanced in years it doesn't mean he has mondo skill
> levels IMO.

Oh, no! Or they can have great skill levels, but also huge "flaws" that counteract them. Or go the other way and have minimal normal skills, but a personality trait or something like "agile" at massive levels to augment with. Just as long as the result fits, and is fun for everyone, and players and GM agree. You can always adjust the numbers later if you feel you haven't got them quite right.



Jane Williams                                   

ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

Powered by hypermail