> Ahem. Exquise me. OK, ObRules: what do we all reckon about what
> Greg [*genuflexion*] was saying about "broad abilities" at
> (AKA, "that'll the triple HPs for that one, squire".) I think it's
> addressing an area of real concern, and one that was certainly
> at in playtest games, but I wonder if it's going to start as many
> arguments as it stops? "Is that a wide-ish ordinary ability, or a
> narrow-ish broad ability?"
Probably about the same. I'm wary of making it too broad or differenntial. Currently, we have a relatively simple system. But if a character has a broad skill 'strong' or 'wide travelled' I impose a penalty for more specific usages of the 'parent' -- such as 'arm wrestling' or 'what IS in RuneGate'
But I do allow folks to buy up specicific combat techniques and don't make Close/Ranged combat cost more
We found, in play, that making Close or Ranged combat more expensive means that players will just spend points on them and not on the fun stuff like relationships, followers, Drink Copiously, swindle, What Is In Runegate Anyways, and Explain To The Wife.
It comes down to HP managment. And most players _will_ spend on combat or magic as a priority and then start raising other things.
Note to self: Must remember to make players roll for relationship when dragging followers off on heroquests.
"Before we can rebuild Alex, we must dstroy him!" Captain Alex and the Mysterions
Powered by hypermail