On 23 Sep 2010 17:28, "David Dunham" <david_at_a-sharp.com> wrote:
On 23 Sep 2010, at 08:11, Ryan wrote:
> Sometimes its hard to shake my simulationist and modeling...
Which isn't really the point, of course. Sure, your golden-tongued hero
could easily debate rings around the clan chief. But that's not the contest.
The chief is sitting in his throne, surrounded by his advisors. From the
point of view of the contest, it doesn't matter what his Witty Comeback
rating is, what matters is how easy it is for you to convince everyone to
take in the refugees.
And that's best modeled by story concerns. Is failure interesting? Is this the climax of the session, or just a setup?
On another day, on another issue, debating the chief will have a different resistance. Same chief, different context.
As for benchmarks, it's often more interesting to compare characters. Do they differ wildly in combat abilities? Do they have high ratings in personality traits (which suggests you should come up with scenarios which test the abilities they care about)?
> I do understand the utilization of the narrative model for selecting
resistances, however, I wil...
Everyone seems to forget that the book says: you (the GM) decide. The book
is full of good advice to help you pick a reasonable target number, but it
never says you look up the resistance from a chart.
David Dunham
Glorantha/HQ/RQ page: www.pensee.com/dunham/glorantha.html
Imagination is more important than knowledge. -- Albert Einstein
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Powered by hypermail