Re: Re: Mass combat and collective ratings.

From: Alex Ferguson <abf_at_...>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 00:39:22 +0100 (BST)

Brian Laxson:
> > > Okay... here is a question. You have spearmen with a skill of 17. Do you
> > 10 or 100?
> > >
> > > The "pure" rules in the book give you 17 AP for 10 and 17 AP for 100.
> >
> > No, that's not right. (Or at least, unless I misunderstand or
> > misremember them!) They give you 170 AP, and 1700 AP, respectively.
> > (Isn't that 'em, lads?) Also in line with the rules for followers.
> >
> Ah.... cheez... 1700 AP. Well that is one way to do it.

Yes, hereafter known for convenience as the HW way. ;-)

> However, without adjusting the skill factors I could expect Agnar at 6w2 sword
and shield to
> run up to those 1700 AP and soak it up into transfers onto himself.

You mean if there were 170 fighters, all of that skill? As I noted, I was ignoring the TN issue for now... At the least Agnar is going to get more multiple attackers maluses than he can shake a fist at. Plus in this case, it's almost certain that the collective TN rating of the group would be _higher_ than that of any one fighter. (Alas, a way to do this in general that's not terminally broken is not 100% clear.) (In a nutshell, if one TN 17 guy aids another TN 17 guy, it ought rationally to be more of a benefit than an ability 17 guy aiding someone whose ability is 14W3, or whatever.)

> The alternative rules effecitevly allow you to choose whether each
> group will act like a follower (adding AP) or as an ally (augmenting
> your skill).

The game-world distinction being...? This smacks somewhat of the Game Mechanic Attack -- why would it be that they can only affect one or the other, and what's the distinct rationale for what's happening in each case?


Powered by hypermail