Re: Re: Character Generation

From: Gary Sturgess <gazza666_at_...>
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2006 18:13:17 +0900

On 12/23/06, Trotsky <TTrotsky_at_...> wrote:
> Jane:
> > No, because there's a lot more to it than adding up 20
> > points. The break-points from a +1 to a +2 augment and
> > from +2 to +3 have to be allowed for.
(snip)
> I realise this is besides the main thrust of the debate, but I thought
> I'd add that it would never even occur to me to do any of that while
> designing a HQ character.

(snip)

Differing styles, I guess. I've yet to ever play in a HQ game (it seems unlikely that that will change any time soon, although I am planning to run one); nevertheless I would almost certainly do as Jane suggests.

Because I'm a munchkin? Draw your own conclusions on that. But given that I'm using to making Champions characters, I'd certainly do the tiny amount of arithmetic Jane suggests here. I wouldn't call it munchkinism personally; I'd call it "character optimisation", which is indeed DISTINCT from the "story needs" of the character, but not OPPOSED to same.

That said I'm not convinced that it gives you much of a mechanical advantage anyway; I'd do it because I would enjoy it, rather than for a significant mechanical benefit - and I'd also help out any of the other players that were less mathematically inclined, if they wished it. (There's a core of 4 of us in my group, but we expand to as many as 9 in some games, and any of the 4 of us are EXPECTED to help out with this sort of thing in character generation, regardless of the game we're playing).

-- 
GAZZA