Followers

From: t.s.baguley_at_...
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 17:09:31 +0100


> From: Benedict Adamson <badamson_at_...>
>Our group has now played a few HW sessions. One of my players made a
>couple of interesting observation about Followers.
>
>In a traditional RPG, the party of characters is partly bound
>together by the different abilities of each character: only as a team
>do they have all the abilities needed. A hero (HW character) with
>several followers, however, has less need for hero companions, since
>the followers can provide the abilities the hero lacks. In extreme
>examples, the other players in a session can be superfluous.

True, but this can be a strength if you have a small group of players.

>Followers can be very able; this further reduces the binding of
>characters into a party. For example, the player of our warrior hero
>chose interesting, non warrior, abilities as his best (5W) and second
>bast (2 X 1W) abilities, and so his warrior abilities are still at
>17. The player of our merchant hero has a couple of warrior
>bodyguards, and has spent a hero point on improving his best ability,
>so his body guards are now the best fighters in the party, with 18
>ratings.
>
>Are followers, as per the rules, too unbalancing?

I think the rules are OK as they stand.

Having body guards lending 18AP doesn't seem to bad if the headline close combat is low (e.g., 13 or so).

So far followers haven't unbalanced my game. I have two house restrictions: only allowing i) one occupation, magic or culture keyword, ii) initiate of as a magic keyword.

Thom

Powered by hypermail