David Cake:
> A very large Barehanded Combat ability, with which to augment
> her Close Combat ability? OK, so its a little lame in actual
> execution for PCs (NPCs, of course, don't have to actually pay for
> it). Suffers somewhat from the current problems with augment - to get
> a guaranteed +1 requires a 5w or so (much less if you are willing to
> take a large risk, though).
Doubly penalised under the HW1 rules: augments aren't much bang for the buck (stand-alone augments especially), and "narrow augments" are even worse -- I could have easily chosen an augmenting ability that would work on all (or at least, "all") close combat...
For NPCs, as you say, no real problem. I just wrote it down (IIRC) as a base combat skill, and a large flat plus for fist-fighting. (Game mechanics, what game mechanics?)
> Sumo and shinty aside, I certainly do want the rules to
> recognise that in general a character who is competent with weapons
> is nearly as good barehanded, or with a weapon they grab in combat
> (presuming its relatively standard, not a gami or something).
Again, I have to say that this is a "simulationist" argument; that it incidentally happens to be wrong; and that it doesn't have a direct bearing on "broad vs narrow" skills, as it seems to bear entirely upon what size "imp-mods" should be, rather than the size of the thing you never have to "imp" at all. Which I'm happy to stipulate isn't something the rules should ever try to be prescriptive about -- no reason they can't be twiddled to the heart's contentment of particular groups.
> Though I do see your point.
And there was much rejoicing. ;-)
Powered by hypermail