Ian wrote
>David Dunham has posted about the
>problems with 'Tough' a number of times, and 'Smart' is the
>equivalent in the mental field. I'm all for increasing point cost of
>these.
The possible problem is that Tough is used directly, often without improvisational modifier. Smart is pretty much never used without a modifier (except to augment). Oddly however, Tough hasn't appeared much in our more recent characters (it was very popular with the first batch). And I've seen a character or two with Smart or Clever or something, and it's never used in play.
I'm all for leaving the point cost of these the same, and reducing the point cost of affinities.
So has anyone actually witnessed problems with broad abilities, or is this all theoretical? (Oops, I see Thom asks the same question. Clearly many Narrators have not had problems.)
Alex replies
>David Dunham:
> > This result makes sense, however. Close Combat is clearly useful, and
> > players will want it to go up frequently. If it's really expensive,
> > they will have to devote all their Hero Points to it. If it's less
> > expensive, they will have a few Hero Points left over to "waste" on
> > more fun stuff.
>
>That just doesn't stand up. I'll cite a well-known rules luminary by
>the name of D. Dunham that people do not increase an ability by more
>than one step per session. Hence one would be going some to spend
>_all_ one's point on CC, if one is getting anything like the "average"
>amount.
I'm not sure I understand the last sentence's grammar.
Close Combat is something that many players will want to go up every session. Yes, it's most efficient to raise it by one step. If that takes (say) 3 HP and you only get 4 HP per session, then you won't have points left to do much else. If it takes (the correct) 1 HP, then you have HP to spend on more abilities (one step each).
>Secondly, the marginal effect will surely be for people to buy up
>narrower combat-applicable abilities instead, not to doggedly persist
>in buying CC regardless.
If those exist -- they certainly don't for existing characters, and since I don't see anything essentially broken* with Hero Wars, I'd hate to see an incompatible 2nd edition.
Besides, I *like* Close Combat. I *do* think that one skill suffices. We don't need the loving distinctions that RuneQuest makes between attacking and parrying with one-handed swords of different sizes. Hero Wars is not a simulation of physical combat.
Jeff
>I'd point out that I'm seeing a difference between reading about Hero
>Wars and playing/running a game of Hero Wars. Things that sound nice
>on paper often just don't pan out that way in the reality of a
>campaign.
Exactly. That's what playtesting is all about. (And even things that might look bad on paper, like Smart, may not turn out to be bad in the reality of a campaign.)
David Dunham dunham_at_...
Glorantha/HW/RQ page: http://www.pensee.com/dunham/glorantha.html
Imagination is more important than knowledge. -- Albert Einstein
Powered by hypermail