> I don't think so. (also, do you really feel being competent with any
> weapon makes a character feel more intersting?)
"competent with any weapon" is misleading. They are a fighter, capable of fighting, even with a pointy thing they are not used to in detail. I don;lt think this is a case of "more interesting" byut "more plausible".
> The point I'm trying to defend is letting people have the choise.
> Printing optional approaches into the rulebook is a time honoured
> practise. HW is very flexible. Let's give people some choises.
It is unclear to me why such a choise should be necessary. I think, myself, that the "problems" are not problems.
> :) I agree that in RQ the differences vere too severe. But saying
that
> it takes just 1 HP to learn a mastery of rapier, when you have a
mastery
> of the battleaxe is also a bit ludicrous.
Can you explain why it is ludicrous? Over what period of game time are you seeing this occur?
> When you learn just sword & Shield, you aren't learning to be a
warrior
> (IMG), but to get by with the weapons.
Uh huh. I think you are learning to be a warrior, and the specific tools of ill omen are just props.
Powered by hypermail