Personally, I think the broad categories idea is mostly overkill. There are a very small number of things where it is a real problem, mostly Tough.
At 2:14 PM -0700 14/6/01, Greg Stafford wrote:
> >Aren't we already capable of assuming that this doesn't give you a
>>high default in "poncing around with rapiers", "sumo", and other
>>unrelated techniques?
>Judging from other discussions on the list it seems that many people DO
>think that Close Combat as a single (not broad) skill DOES include karate,
>rapier with swordbreaker, broadsword and shiled and sharpshooting.
>
And we already have a perfectly good mechanism, in Combat styles, for dealing with this. Close Combat may not cover all these things, but Close Combat [karate, rapier and swordbreaker, broadsword and shield] comes pretty close (sharpshooting is Ranged, obviously). This system is pretty fine.
At 2:14 PM -0700 14/6/01, Greg Stafford wrote:
>MOST IMPORTANTLY though, the broad category is applicable to things like
>Strong or Smart, which have multiple applications as a modifier.
Skills that are used often, but only as a modifier (ie used to generate an augment), are not a big worry. Its so drastically inefficient to spend HPs on building them up rather than putting extra points into the real abilities, that its in practical terms not a problem. Sure, those abilities get used a lot - but not in an efficient way.
It might be a problem if such abilities where also often usable as a direct ability, but they aren't really. A simple solution is to force people to use them as augments, rather than abilities, if they are not precise enough. So if someone wants to use Smart as Debate, they can use it to augment their default Debate. So have a rule encouraging Narrators to do so if they feel an ability is too broad, and no problem. A good rule of thumb is 'does possessing this ability to a very high level, *almost always* mean you are good at the ability you are attempting?'. We all know people that are in some way very smart, but very bad at debate for some reason, even though augment helps. So its reasonable to say you can use Smart to augment debate, but not in place of it - if you feel so inclined. Of course, if your playing style allows it, allow any improvisation you like, but you can easily get around the broad abilities problem by just not allowing every improvisation.
The best reason to discourage people using abilities like Smart to augment routinely is NOT game balance, but because the Augment rules are cumbersome and slow the game down. A much better change to the HW rules would be to completely change the augment rules to a much simpler mechanic (subtract Augment resistance from the ability, roll a simple test under that to augment, is a fine such rule).
I like the idea of being able to have bonuses in additional specialisations under a broad skill like an affinity. In the long run, it probably doesn't matter that much unless you DO make Close Combat a broad skill. The issue is actually that 'Combat with weapon of your choice' is very common relative to 'armed combat in general', so even though your single weapon bonus is much more restricted, its very efficient. Don't make Close Combat a broad skill, and no problem. Broad skills like Affinities, where Swordhelp is obviously useful in far less situations than Combat (swordhelp, flung lightning, unbreakable shield), are no problem - they could also just get Enhance Sword as an ability.
As to stuff like Hunting vs the whole Hunter keyword, it just doesn't matter than much. Reign such skills in with improv penalties or don't allow them in the first place. But it really doesn't matter. Because if you don't hunt much in your game, its irrelevant, and if you do have a
The opposite problem is actually a much bigger deal in HW, in my experience. Its quite common for keywords to assign several very similar abilities. This leads to a problem, whereby those who happen to have received a skill that does much the same thing as all of them together very quickly overcome any penalty improv penalties might give them.
Buserian Scholars with Identify Celestial Phenomenoma, Mythology of Buserian, Stellar Myths, Scan the Sky, and Tell Time from Stars are the most extreme example. Because, on the very few times that one of these abilities comes up in play, if the far less trained Irrippi Ontor scholar (who only has Identify Celestial Phenomena) actually says 'so, what does that celestial phenomena mean', they are probably going to get a pretty small improv penalty on that ability - and not having to spread the HPs dealing with the essential knowledge of things stellar between a handful of abilities means that single ability will probably be much higher, even accounting for augments (which only get you a 1/5 return at best).
Where giving people many abilities dealing with something might seem to make them better at that area (and it does, very marginally, initially - about an extra +1 for a reasonably reliable default augment), in the long run it makes them much worse, because you only get to use one in a contest, and augments are so inefficient.
Broad skills along the lines of Strength are not a problem - they are mostly useful for augments, just stop people using them in place of real abilities and they are fine. IE use strength to lift stuff (which doesn't happen much), but don't let people use it as a combat skill, even at a penalty.
Broad skills along the lines of Hunting are not a big problem, either. Its really a matter of each individual game how much you need to break them down - if Hunting is just a single roll every few sessions, it really doesn't matter if its a single ability. If your game deals with hunting every session, you probably won't give out a single Hunting skill either.
The only ones I really thing ARE an issue are the ones that are broad skills (or at least more expensive) already - magical skills that let you do several really quite disparate things with a single ability.
Oh, and one more thing - the use of extremely broad abilities in NPCs is one very cool thing as a Narrator. Being able to just say 'yeah, Lunar Hoplite 18' is great. It gives you absolute freedom as a Narrator to flip back and forward whatever level of NPC detail you want on a case by case basis, which is awesome.
Sorry for rambling nature of this missive - its late here. Cheers David
Powered by hypermail