RE: Re: Immortals vs. 'Heroes'

From: donald_at_...
Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2005 23:12:46 GMT


In message <20050703213641.XDIS11226.aamta11-winn.ispmail.ntl.com_at_homemaster> "Jane Williams" writes:

>Mind you (diving off at a tangent), I've always found the rules for
>community support a bit dodgy, in that you can get very different
>results by dividing the groups up. If you have ordinary support from
>everyone in your tribe: +1. But if you go through that tribe clan by
>clan: +1 from each clan. Maybe this is why the Orlanthi never unify
>properly - they've read the rule-book, and they know they're better
>off acting in tiny groups!

That's was my thought on first reading the rules - increasing numbers are not the way to go. You could take it even further getting each individual in the clan to give you +1. I'm sure part of it is a game mechanic to prevent overwhelming numbers winning contests all the time.

However further thought made me realise it's not that inaccurate. When you have ten followers you learn who they are and what they can do, as the numbers grow to thirty or forty you struggle to remember all their names and by the time there are hundreds their effectiveness is reliant more on the individuals who lead different groups. So I'd work on the basis that you can only get support from a maximum of ten sources - at one extreme that's ten individuals, at the other it's ten tribes. In some cases it's going to be better to use one combination in others a different one.

You've also got the problem of disagreement within the group - even within a clan there will be some people who disagree with the decision to provide support and the larger the group the more disruptive that disagreement is likely to be.

-- 
Donald Oddy
http://www.grove.demon.co.uk/

Powered by hypermail