In article <5.1.0.14.0.20021129132125.02240790_at_...>,
Graham Robinson <graham_at_...> writes
>
>>For comparison, tbe longest gaming campaign I have ever been in ran to
>>about 35 sessions, and the longest I've ever succeeded in running was
>>about 30. So being 'restricted' to 50 ain't going to worry me :-)
>
>Worries the heck out of me, but then I'm already well past 50 sessions. I'd
>advise anyone hoping for a long campaign to throw in a house rule of '1hp
>for each mastery in a skill'. That'll get you to 1W2 and being a mover and
>shaker pretty quick, but stop you reaching the point where only Orlanth and
>Rufelza themselves are a challenge. Wish I had placed that rule from the
>start. Instead, we opted for a voluntary 10W3 ceiling (unless you heroquest
>for better) which I don't like, but the players feel is fairer.
>
>It isn't the W3 and W4 characters that worry me, its the W6 and W7 that I
>could have in a couple of years time...
I expect it's already been mentioned and I've missed it, but make full
use of the rule that the costs double if the ability wasn't used - now,
I don't consider beating up on someone a mastery less than you a use, or
doing magic at the same level you were happily doing a mastery ago. I
also use something like the +1 HP per mastery rule, but on a case by
case basis (basically the end of the session is a "Can I put up X?"
"What's it at, and how did you use it?" "Y" "You can put it up for Z"
Sometimes they get things for cheaper than 1HP/point - relationships for
instance.
This causes the players to seek challenges (and, of course, still have
credible challenges to seek)
--
Kevin Blackburn Kevin_at_...