Re: Greg's Deflation

From: Henrix <henrix_at_...>
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 14:46:26 +0200


On Sun, 10 Sep 2000, Mikael Raaterova wrote:
> Gloranthans are generalists. They can make most of the stuff they
> need for survival themselves. Under ordinary circumstances a farmer
> can make a usable plow or sew himself some clothes (unless that is a
> sex-differentiated competence). These competencies are probably at
> base chance, i.e. 6, in published HW.

Or rather that that you use your Farming skill with an improvisational modifier to make a plough (or ard for the Orlanthi).

> So (assuming that listed numbers are for non-ordinary situations)
> when you aren't unduly short of time or resources and the
> circumstances aren't particularly adverse you should get at least +10
> to your listed ratings. Meaning that a rating of 12 never fumbles
> under ordinary circumstances, making the roll pretty unnecessary
> since there is only a 5% risk of failure and 0% for fumble.

But this is not how we generally do things in HW. We rate how difficult things are by giving it a resistance value and if the skill used is not entirely appropriate you get a modifier. If it is a really simple test, it is just an ability test, with no resistance. We do not need an even simpler test, like ability +10, under normal circumstances.

The rating for an ability is how you use it under normal circumstances.

If the power level of the game upsets you, and you want the heroes to start out as more powerful, just let them start with higher ratings.

Or if the _numbers_ are _really_ important for you; lower all abilities by 10, and add 10 under ordinary circumstances. Clumsy, but no big deal.

> Conclusion: i'm perfectly happy to have "basic competence" at 12 or
> so. So should Greg.

Which means that as soon as a player hero spends one hero point to learn a new ability he gets a professional level! Is that really how you want it? Or do you want to fudge more, letting newly bought skills start at, what, 9? Why?

-- 
Henrix

Powered by hypermail