> > Once again, David and the SFC provide us with opinions based
> > on years of actual playtest data.
>
> Are you planning on agreeing with _everything_ David says now, due
> to his antique campaign? That'd be a first... ;-)
That'd be the Orlanthi Way: "Our ancestors have always rolled d20. We're not going to switch to d12, even if it is better and faster."
> This line of argument can easily be overused. And given I've seen
> it half a dozen times in the couple of week I've resumed reading
> this list, I'd say that time was long since passed.
Surely I haven't used it that much recently... Still, I think it's a legitimate counterargument against "this part of the rules is broken," since you'd expect that if it were broken, we might have noticed it by now.
Especially since it's not an antique campaign. It's actually a bunch of campaigns, ranging from antique to post-modern. We've had a bunch of characters, many of whom had the supposed problem abilities.
(Yes, campaigns vary, and the absence of a problem for us doesn't mean that *no* group will ever have a problem.)
David Dunham <mailto:dunham_at_...>
Glorantha/HW/RQ page: <http://www.pensee.com/dunham/glorantha.html>
Imagination is more important than knowledge. -- Albert Einstein
Powered by hypermail