On Wednesday, December 06, 2000 10:16 AM, Roger Barnes
[SMTP:rogerd_at_...-net.co.uk] wrote:
>
> As an aside, at 3 pts per session in a five week game a charcter could
> gain half a mastery in close combat - this strikes me as excessive.
>
It would also be a *really* boring character, having spent all the HPs on one ability. <yawn>
On Wednesday, December 06, 2000 4:25 PM, Ian Cooper
[SMTP:ian_hammond_cooper_at_...] wrote:
> Because we have not been spending HP on improving abilities then it
> might seem that giving us extra points could increase the number of
> rolls we could alter the outcome on. However from my experience as a
> player so far I don't like spending Hero Points, but I keep getting
> into situations where my rolls are bad, yours are good and I am
> fading fast on my feet so I have to use one. At the moment I have
> nothing spare to spend on raising abilities (i.e. if I want
> to 'cement' those followers I picked up, I'm going to need to have
> some HP left).
That's quite right. I've used almost all of mine to get out of "fumble" trouble. Though I seem to recall using one just 'cos I didn;t want my character to fall in the swamp. How wasteful that seemed when I needed it at the end of the session to get out of trouble...
I think there's only a certain amount of using HPs to get out of trouble that can go on. Even Ian & me can only fumble so many times in an evening. In my experience of running the game, most HPs seem to be used for this rather than simply to "smash" the opposition, unless you're giving them out by the boat load. Or unless the player/character REALLY hates the opposition and wants to teach them a lesson. :)
Regards,
Bruce
Powered by hypermail