> I don't mind the mastery inflation. It gives a longer playing
> field. And if the field was NARROWER (eg masteries were harder to
> get, powerups would be more significant).
Not having seen them, I would tend to agree with this; I had the feeling that even a moderate sized group of PC's, employing their specialty ability, would probably hit about a hundred AP fairly easily. OTOH, it does challenge the top end a bit; if leaders of multiple masteries show up with significant frequency, the battallionsmashing activities of superheroes might be dramatically curtailed. That said, if they were in turn inflated to beyond w4, the problem would go away; but then would the default resistance table have to be rewritten? What impact does mastery inflation have on the performance of rituals and HQ's, I mean does the impied increase of frequency of multiple mastery priests have a significant impact on the metaphysical landscape?
Incidentally, I like the mastery notation convention. Learning to read a couple of symbols is pretty easy IMO, plus the runes are thematically appropriate and act as an aid memoire I think. Maybe the person who wanted to use skull 'n bones for masteries should use cutlasses or swords or something for edge. I wonder, for those people having trouble with the notation, do they think playing up the symbolic quality would help? I don't mind the writing of multiple mastery symbols, or edge symbols, but IIRC the brain only counts up to 4 automatically/visually and I'm concerned that it might lead to more actual 1-2-3 counting and hence handling time if masteries get beyond that with any frequency. Might not be an issue though.
> ministrone. Player characters, even weaker ones, are far more
> flexible than GM characters can ever be (which is the way it SHOULD
> be).
It's not a fair fight, man, they gang up on you ;)
Powered by hypermail