>It does leave us with a problem with respect to
>keyword level. There is a distinct danger of
>making [supporting cast] too powerful with this
>writeup.
Given that the power levels of supporting cast are pre-set, for the most part, I do not see any real problem. I am more than able to cope with any potential attempts to abuse the rule and suspect that most other narrators out there are as well. Very few players elect to give their starting heroes more than a pair of supporting cast, in my experience... also true of special items. I am all for the heroes and their supporting cast having more abilities, and the myths bear this out. I still recall Kallyr's list of supporting cast from the earliest drafts of what is now "Sartar Rising": she had something like *twelve*, and most were more detailed than the typical Keyword + Ability.
Wulf Corbett wrote:
>I used this idea too... but I gave it up. First
>because it's too powerful, secondly because it's
>too complex.
I don't consider it to be either. 25 words is neglible, really. Did you try ten words for Followers or Dependents, 25 for Allies, Patrons and Foes? That would address the majority fear that the player-heroes would become too powerful. I am not fond of the one-sided and single-paged hero sheet, personally, and prefer that my players have space aplenty to lay down all the funky detail they desire. Here is a 25-word write-up, as an example:
"Loyal to his master, Leikan stands at Heordan's
right hand, fulfilling his duties as swordthane
and initiate of Humakt with quiet diligence and
earnest pride."
That would give this Follower the following abilities: Heortling cultural keyword, Warrior occupational keyword, Humakt magical keyword, Loyal (Heordan), Quiet, Diligent, Earnest and Proud. Presumably the Warrior keyword would be at 17, and all the others would be at 13, as per page 33 of HERO WARS. These are hardly so powerful as to disrupt play balance. I do not see a problem here, as now I (and any players called upon) have a better guide by which to portray Leikan.
>Items are just removable abilities...
I disagree. They are also plot hooks which can be used to great effect over the course of a campaign. Items can be stolen, broken or accidentally lost, and the recovery or reforging of such an important possession can provide fuel for any number of character-driven episodes if properly milked. Little did a certain short, jovial, chubby fellow descended from a line of furry-footed burrowers realize that the simple gold band he found while spelunking would be such a problem for him... and his beloved nephew. Get the idea? :)
>Written up, I might allow a couple of abilities,
>but not 25 words' worth!
>As some have said, just naming an item, with no
>defined powers, can be the best part of the idea.
One writes up an item to gain some control over how the narrator will use it in the story. A cool but ambiguous reference is quite different and represents the player ceding control over that item to the narrator.
Peter Larsen wrote:
>Let the player count a name as one word... rather
>than saying "She is followed by her guards, Gunner
>and Snorri," they can be "Gunner the Scornful and
>Cooper-Snorri" without the player feeling that they
>have to sacrifice functionality for color.
A very nice suggestion, and one worthy of consideration. Of course, if you permit supporting cast the 25-word write-up I suggest, the players need not worry too much about one word here or there. :)
>It's much cooler to "flee the scorn of Gudren of the
>Six Herds" than have "Gurdun hates his guts."
Exactly my point.
Tim Ellis wrote:
>I'd say 20, since you can choose a 100 word write up or
>a 10 *thing* list. 20 words sounds about right for a 2
>*thing* follower...
See my comments to Wulf above, and keep in mind that my suggestion was intended only for use with the narrative method. In that context, your distinction is meaningless. While HERO WARS may allow use of the list method (ten is too few abilities anyway, IMO), I personally do not. The narrative method is all I allow my players. Thank you for your comments, though, as they do give me food for thought.
-- Michael Richard Schwartz | Language is my playground, mschwartz_at_... | and words, its slides and Ann Arbor, Michigan USA | swingsets. -- yours truly
Powered by hypermail