>
>Do you mean that you use direct
>
> Sword & Shield
> Brawling
>
>etc...
>
>skills instead of a general cc with style definitions? That certainly is
>one way to go.
>
>In fact, even if we have an überskill of CC at 3 HP/level it doesn't
>mean a characer couldn't have, say
>
>Staff fighting 17 without a CC skill.
>
>Gives more variety, I think.
In character writeups, but less variety in play. Everyone always uses the same weapons session after session.
> CC is a useful skill for a warrior, but an
>Issaries Goldentongue, for instance, will do well enough with just a
>staff skill.
CC isn't good enough that warriors won't stick with cheaper skills as well. Sword is useful directly in about 70% of the situations that CC would be, making it an enormous bargain at 1/3rd the price. Plus, in the remaining few situations, all that happens is you have an improv penalty, possibly not that large a one most of the time. So having Sword Fighting or similar is probably long term a MUCH better strategy, given you end with a higher actual level (its so much cheaper), which likely counteracts your penalty most of the time.
So CC simply becomes too expensive to bother with, unless there is some artificial reasons to force everyone to buy it.
I dislike rules that have the end result of making the most sensible long term strategy also the least interesting choice in play. Making CC a broad skill seems to me to have the effect.
Cheers David
Powered by hypermail