Re: Re: Greg's Deflation

From: Mikael Raaterova <ginijji_at_...>
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 00:33:01 +0200


Phil Hibbs:
> >Unless, of course, you've found a bit of rules I've
>>missed, that says something else. So what is this
>>"original" that's been deflated?
>
>I could be misunderstanding this thread

It seems that indeed you are, judging from the below.

>, but this may possibly stem from
>the fact that in Robin's '98 draft, target numbers were the other way
>round, and the default highest starting ability level was, IIRC, 2/18,
>meaning "TN:2 AP:18", the equivalent of 18 in the current terminology.

This is merely nomenclature; 2/18 was the same rating as 18 is today. This has no effects on anything.

>Character
>generation was just aimed at a lower level, the equivalent of a low powered
>game in the current rules.

This is completely false.

That starting target numbers were lower has nothing to do with the power level of the game, since all other numbers were accordingly scaled lower. The draft versions of HW were not "low powered" compared to the published HW; that published HW uses bigger numbers for everything means nothing for the actual power level.

If anything, the draft versions were of a higher power level since the characters were ostensibly more powerful than standard. A PC weaponthane was more powerful than a standard weaponthane. Which is not the case in published HW where a PC warrior is just as skilled as any other warrior (Basic competence 1w).

Also, the base level of published HW has been raised, but the ceiling (i.e. divine status at xw4) has not. Meaning that the span between starting warriors and Harrek has shrunk.

-- 
-
Mikael Raaterova        [.sig omitted on legal advice]

Powered by hypermail