In message <822ecd830708141535r2bb5223bj41789770e56839cb_at_ehTUM4BKTQkc2t3DZOKgLLFtlThP-axXX6aspe6tdj_vTXG8yhBCLpeWaGtpqVeANRLnU_VFro62rIG1GSOsXQX3jT1BlMErvee8g0Yj3menvuk8LKXGI-s3ZZZzvp-ilbU1.yahoo.invalid> "Ian Borchardt" writes:
>I think there is an even simpler reason for having a list of epic
>character stats. Players, being people, are always interested in
>seeing how their characters compare to the "iron standard." Of course
>they are generally going to be worse off, but it's fun to say that if
>I only had another w3 in thumb-wrestling I'd give Harrek a run for his
>money...
>
>Although, in HQ it is admittedly harder to make a direct comparison
>than in Pendragon and BRP/RQ.
>
>As to the counter argument of changing the canon campaign: if the
>players can't change the campaign, can't leave their mark on it, then
>why are they playing in it at all? It is extremely unlikey that a
>group of players could seriously incovenience one of the epic
>characters (remember they didn't get where they were by being dumb and
>they have considerable resources to call upon, and failing that
>*running away to fight another day*). But if they do, they've
>_earned_ the change in the campaign.
It's fair to say that half a dozen PCs are extremely unlikely to
seriously inconvenience a superhero just by acting as PCs. The
way to do it is to get a community to act together. A regiment of
Lunar Guard Cavalry stands a good chance against Harrak. Getting
to command that regiment is the PC's problem.
Personally I have much more problem working out contest values of
communities than that of individuals
--
Donald Oddy
http://www.grove.demon.co.uk/