It seems to me the problem comes from thing that have fixed measures. Sword-fighting 10W3 is just scaled. We can argue about if it should be the average skill of a clan champion vs country champion vs super hero, but it isn't objectively measurable really. 10 miles an hour is 10W running *is* fixedly measurable. I don't think HQ does that well.
One of the appeals of HQ is that it scales so seamlessly, but that tempts people to want to put EVERYTHING on the single scale. Thus all "Fast" scores should be directly comparable. Fast for a horse and Fast for a boat and Fast for a starship are all the same and so should be scaled one against another.
I personally *don't* think this is the way to go, but I completely understand the appeal. Having to juggle sliding scales in your head isn't always fun. And if you do make it sliding scales (i.e. - Horse "Run Fast" isn't the same as People "Run Fast") then some kind of advice on how to judge resistances when two scales directly conflict should be given.
LC
On March 10, 2007 08:17 am, Trotsky wrote:
> There's certainly a limit, yes, and you'll never cover every eventuality
> anyway. I'd like to see somewhat more tables - or at least numbered
> examples - than we've got, but its probably more useful to provide solid
> advice to the GM on how to set resistances themselves without appearing
> arbitrary/inconsistent. And 'do whatever is the most good for the story'
> is, to me at least, pretty unhelpful advice. At the very least, it needs
> a lot more explication as to what that means, and ideally, it needs
> alternatives for those (like me) whose minds simply don't work that way.
Powered by hypermail