Thank you, yes.
Also, there's a point of consistency.
Let's say you are starting character 7w attempting a task of 7w2; you have around 25% chance of success. You rope in 10 other supporting abilities known at 17 to help, and bump it up 7w2 and now have 50% chance of success. By some miricale, you rope in 10 other abilities (maybe the other PCs use theirs to augment you) and get up to 7w3, and now have ~75%.
Later in your career, you have a 7w3 ability, and a number of supporting abilities (maybe through raised keywords) at 17w2. You attempt a task of 7w4, the same one mastery higher as that task early in your career, and have a 25% chance of success. So you rope those same 10 abilities to help and your skill now increases to 7w6 - you jump past the 50%, past the 75%, and all the way up to 95%! For the same effort it took you to go up to 50%. And if you could rope in the extra 10 abilities you got before from the other players, you cannot fail.
This is what concerns me. Obviously, 10 abilities would be exceptional, but five is not. If you have keyword abilities in the multiple mastery range, the jump from "impossible" to "impossible to fail" doesn't seem very far at all. Playing a game at this level looks like it might well tend towards predtermined - you enter conflicts, and unless the GM is lucky to pick just the right number, you will succeed and might as well not roll, or you will fail and might as well not roll. I'm speaking of a trend - this won't occur on every conflict, but it seems like it will be a strong trend.
Without increasing keywords it wouldn't be quite as much of a problem, since it's the augment bonus from multiple ratings that cuase this potential problem.
Powered by hypermail