From: David Cake (davidc@cs.uwa.edu.au)
Date: Mon 23 Aug 1993 - 06:06:33 EEST
> Let's say the GM is running a game with Expert (75%) level characters.
> You can opt to run a Hunter with primary skills around 75%. If you opt
> to run a character with more than one professional background, say
> Hunter and Foot Warrior, he (or she) would aquire all the Hunter and
> Foot Warrior primary skills at 60% (i.e Hunter and Foot Warrior at the
> Average level), but in the few cases that skills overlapped (i.e.
> Weapon skills, possibly First Aid or Stealth skills, etc.) the skill
> would go up one level. In other words the character would have any
> primary skills shared by the two professions at 75%. This eliminates
> a lot of the calculation otherwise required, with very little loss in
> accuracy.
If I read this correctly, I think that I like it a lot less than the current
system. The problem is that it assumes that people with more than one
professional background are equally proficient at all of them. This takes away
a lot of the flexibility from the system. I like, for example, characters with
a minimal fighting ability, but master craft abilities, or minimal abilities at
second professions in other ways.
Basically, this is a nice way of calculating characters with more than
one primary profession, a profession in which they are fully competent. However,
the current choosing multiple templates should quite definately be left in
place, for people who want the maximum flexability. There is no reason to
remove the previous options for character creation, just add a new system for
people who find the old one too fiddly. By all means add the new mechanism,
but don't remove the old one. I feel strongly on this - for me, if the above
system was the only one, it would definately be a step backwards.
>
>
> Oliver
>
> P.S. Sorry about the duplicate posting, my mailer misfired.
>
David Cake
0,,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:28:54 EEST