Right, so, the player can generally make a vague object or ability into anything they like, even right during play. Yup, that is actually encouraged by the rules ("ambiguous references" in the box on page 21). So the player might want their thunderstone to be a magical ranged attack, or an augment on a sling attack, or to make thunder noises, or whatever. But generally you make an object do one thing, so be careful before nailing it down. A magic sword is even more vague, so could really be anything.
Of course, this could be open to abuse, but basically the starting score equalises abailities (see the section about "pompous magic" for more comments on that).
We are feeling very uncomfortable about this,
> as it leads to much confusion when trying to use them.
> I know that thunderstones certainly existed in RQ3,
> but their power would presumably differ somewhat in
> HQ. The sword's features are a complete unknown.
Right, so this is supposed to be a feature, not a bug ;-)
>
> In fact, there seems a general tendency in the
> character generation phase to give new PC's magical
> items and powers, which was certainly not the case in
> RQ. There you usually started out pretty raw, and had
> to acquire them as you went. Is this difference
> because it is now universally assumed that all PC's
> are experienced?
Actually, if you look at the ability to succeed against a default resistance, the starting heroes aren't too tough. Probably a bit better than Runequest heroes who could often only cut up their own food by GM largesse, but hardly that tough. 5W (before equipment and augments) seems to be the average score for low level professionals, based on Barbarian Adventures. Your hero will only be that good in one or two skills, which probably makes them a bit narrower at the top end, but they'll have broader skills, giving them more low end potential.
Where this can be hard to reconcile is with glorious write ups. It
is easy to say "Archie is known as the hero of the battle of Blood
Hill, where he siezed Arkat's spear and was awarded Heort's
armring." However, really, he is more at the level of a new grad
from university (or less out of genre, a newly minted
journeyman).....lots of potential, some decent skills, but really no
hot shot yet.
>
> If so, OK, but I'll miss the stage of guiding one's
> tender new PC. If most scenarios people are now
> writing (and I haven't seen many, so I don't know)
> assume 10-15 years prior experience, I think that it
> may cut off a range of minor experiences that could
> still be fun for players, but are now too trivial for
> their characters.
The great thing about the skill spread, is that there are always things you are weak at. Without the degree of channelling of skills seen in RQ, this can be at things like combat very easily. So you can still get a huge thrill mixed with comic relief as your entertainer has to hold off a single wolf, or when your warrior has to conduct an important negotiation.
For what it is worth, the starting key word skill of 17 will score some sort of victory over the default resistance of 14 roughly 51.5% of the time. So it is hardly an overwhelming starting skill.
--Bryan
Powered by hypermail