Re: One System to Rule Them All

From: Chris Lemens <chrislemens_at_...>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 16:51:01 -0700 (PDT)

Trotsky:
> Because the rating implies that that's the guy's combat ability.
> Having superior equipment enhances that under most, (but not, as Rory
> points out, all), circumstances. Option B *appears* to mean that we
> have to add an extra calculation in to remind us that, for a given
> amount of experience/hero points a Seshnegi is better than a
> Heortling. And, indeed, if the knight becomes wealthier, and buys
> better armour, his combat rating increases for reasons unrelated to
> the usual method of raising ratings (its his Wealth that's been
> raised, after all).

I thought that the combat "ability" was a sum of everything about the person (other than equipment bonuses) that was most relevant to combat. Let me put it this way. If I was a Loskalmi knight and got me a shiny new hero point, I might cement my increase in my combat ability by getting that fancy new helm. If I was a Heortling, I might get some bright woad and practice with my javelin. What's wrong with that? (See below for one problem.)

> Now, I stress the word 'appears', because I don't think that is what
> you mean. But what is the other option? That a Seshnegi knight of
> given experience/hero points is actually weaker than a starting
> Heortling warrior, and his armour merely compensates for that
> weakness?

You selected the one piece of kit that favors the Seshnegi. Put them on the same footing: The Seshnegi gets no armor, no sword, no mount. The Heortling gets no woad, no javelin, no shield, no sword. (Admmittedly, the Heortling frequently goes iinto battle stark nekkid, but set that aside.) They are both up to their waists in water, so no terrain favoritism either. Now how do you feel? (Seriously. I'm pretty undecided.)

David:
> Also, maybe I don't understand, but I was under the impression that
> "sword fighting 5w" represented skill with a sword, regardless of
> whether the character was caught bathing by the stream or was wearing
> magical iron plate, and that there was no particular assumption
> concerning armor built into the skill.

I think Robin is suggesting that the rating assumes that the character is optimally fitted out. Since that will be the case most of the time, it means you do less math.

> If the skill already includes the equipment bonus, then why (for example) would a praxian player
> want to "upgrade" to metal armor and weapons since his skill would stay the same and the new
> equipment wouldn't affect his likelihood of winning the fight? Or if the hypothetical praxian got
> some cool new metal armor, should the procedure be to raise his skill at sword fighting to reflect this?

Sounds like yes. Which raises the question: What if you have Sword Fighting 10W and Spear Fighting 20W2? Wouldn't the in-story even of getting armor help both? Does that mean you have to spend double the hero points? (We could solve part of the problem by saying that each culture-occupation combination gets its own fighting keyword, but then the problem is what if someone learns another culture's fighting style that uses the same sort of equipment?)

Seeing problems on both sides,
Chris