I was thinking for +1 per uncemented and +2 per cemented permanent wealth. Of course it will depend on availability of wealth and on willingless of characters to spend it. My characters would probably quite happily lose ten points of permanent wealth each on a major heroquest (they seem to like being heroic). +5 per cow is +5 per 1.5 permanent wealth. That would give 3 heroes sacrificing 5 points permanent wealth +45 or so. 4 heroes sacrificing 10 points would be over a hundred in bonuses. Too generous IMO. Of course it depends how you cap it (e.g., no more than 1 permanent wealth per hero might work).
>As for the idea of 'different communities supporting different parts of
>the quest' yes, it has been bandied about both at Convulsions and on the
>various lists. It might solve some problems, but it also creates new
>ones. E.g. I can't see a 'generic' ritual being devoted to a specific
>usage in the quest, they would have to be tailored to fit the relevant
>stations. As Wulf says:
>
>>Well, I had imagined it more like the Humakti supporting your fight
>>against the Trolls, while the wife, the mother-in-law and their
>>entire family support you against the Tilntae.
>
>And that implies that the details of the quest are very well known.
I think that any complex support arrangements would have to be roleplayed out group by group (and hence risk invoking objections if you have low relationships).
You would need details to support a specific aspect (e.g., Humakti praying for sword skill).
>In the one actual HQ run by my Narrator, we did the Arming first, seguing
>directly into a shorter ritual representing the starting events of the
>myth we were emulating. We only got the time, place and community
>modifiers once, but the Narrator was apparently generous with the item
>bonuses, because we had a pretty hefty total at the end. (I suspect he
>also fudged the community participation to something more reasonable than
>the table provides.) It was only used for crossing over though, we had a
>hard time imagining how parts of the effect could be channeled into
>different uses. I think that _would_ require separate rituals performed
>by separate groups. And in this particular case we were reenacting an
>obscure myth that hadn't been used as a quest within living memory.
The quest I'm running is similar. The heroes used their leftover bonuses for +2 carry-over, +4 APs, +3 close combat, +2 Tracking. As they didn't know the details of the myth they had to guess from the fragments they had about what might be useful (I was generous on close combat).
I didn't fudge community participation. As it happened they had to rely on what was offered (extraordinary support from the local Vingans and hero family and friends) and general clan approval/support.
Thom
Powered by hypermail