Roderick Robertson wrote:
> Narrator characters do not always, necessarily, or even often,
> follow the rules that Player Heroes do. Otherwise all of Harrek's
> followers would be 2w4 themselves (or 2w5, if Jeff's conversation
> with Greg is an indication of things to come).
Point taken. I'd prefer to see such supporters not listed as 'followers', though, beacause at least to me a 'follower' is a supporter using a certain set of rules. -8/-12, or whatever a group has decided on. Homebrewn rules are one thing, published ones should strive to remain consistent. What if Erenala became an important NPC, and the development of Arra's stats were to become noteworthy?
Of course what JeffK said about HW2 might mean BA's just getting a head start with implementing new follower rules. That I have no problem with.
> The Followers rules are *meant* to be for faceless followers who
> are simply spear carriers for the heroes. You know, "Warrior #1",
> "Warrior #2, "Healer". The -8/-12 rule is designed to make it
> easy to track their progress, much like the +/-2 rule for
> Adversaries and Allies. If you *want* to make a follower with
> more than 2 skills, and with other than -8/-12, and track her
> progress with Hero Points (or Follower Points), go ahead, but
> the idea behind the rules was to let "natural progression" be
> invisible to the players/narrator.
Somehow I doubt I'd ever let characters have followers quite as faceless as that. They are only in supporting roles, hence the limited ability list, but if a character has two personal bodyguards, I'm sure as hell goint to make him roleplay situations where their personalities come into play. Make that relationship score count for something.
I don't think using follower rules for NPC:s is a bad idea - e.g. when a reacurring opponent returns after a year's absence, you only need to update the leader's stats, the rest of his band will follow along, allowing you to easily set the opposition to easier / harder / same as previously without too much hassle. Right? Invisible natural progression.
Jeff Kyer wrote:
> Also, I suspect that in 2nd Ed, there's going to be a bit more
> flexiblity in followers/henchmen/allies/spearcarries/whatever...
> Which was one of the things wanted by various folks on the HW list.
Not exactly difficult to guess this was coming. Good.
> It'd be nice to have a sidekick rather than a mook.
It'd be nice to have the *option* to have a sidekick rather than a mook! ;)
-B
Powered by hypermail