[projectaon] Re: Book 13 Erratum
- From: John TFS <johntfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 22:06:05 +0000
Well, the simplest way to handle the situation, to my mind, would be to cut
some more items off of the list. Remove the Silver Helmet, Silver Bracers,
Kagonite Chainmail and the Korlinium Scabbard at Book 13. Then remove the
Dagger of Vashna and Helshezag at Book 17. Advise the Veteran players to add
10 to their base CS, subtract 1 from their base EP and conduct all further play
as a normal Grandmaster. I would add that Curing replace the bit about "steady
restoration of Endurance" with "restore 1 EP per section when not losing EP or
in Combat."
From: feline1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [projectaon] Re: Book 13 Erratum
Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 12:05:15 +0100
It should be remembered that successful completion of previous books is
MEANT to convey a “considerable advantage” upon the player. That’s verbatim out
of the game rules.
It’s also clear from Joe’s Monastery Mailbag answers that he realised that
“carrying all these goodies around” was beginning to get “unrealistic”.
So he put in balancing measures such the grand master stats pick to keen
things manageable.
The most obvious interpretation of the “can” wording is perfectly
commensurate with all the stuff I’ve read Joe say on game mechanics
From: John TFS
Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2012 11:51 AM
To: projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [projectaon] Re: Book 13 Erratum
> Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 16:42:19
+0100
> From: outspaced@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> To:
projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [projectaon] Re: Book 13
Erratum
>
> ...and what if I pick a 3 and a 4 in Book 13? Can I
have another go at
> re-picking the values in Book 14 hoping to get
better scores? Does that
> make "more sense"? ;-)
Well, no.
But hey, how about if we modify Book 4? New players can pick 10+RNT for
their CS but players who went through Books 2 and/or 3 need to drop their basic
CS by 5, since we're pretty sure they picked up the Sommerswerd and Silver
Helmet. After all, having Special Items is completely the same thing as
having the skill, right? :)
>
> --
> Simon
Osborne
> Project Aon
>
> On 11/05/2012 15:59, John TFS
wrote:
> > Well, I suppose we could change "can" for _*/MUST!/*_ And
yes, that
> > word should be bold, italicized, underlined and
capitalized for emphasis. :)
> >
> > Really the main thing I
object to in terms of the Veteran is that their
> > CS bonuses are
item-based instead of intrinsic. In both The Deathlord
> > of Ixia and
Wolf's Bane there are points where the character may be
> > forced to
engage in unarmed combat. If his CS is item based, he is at a
> > huge
disadvantage in those situations. The worst part to me is that
> > this
Item-based LW makes no sense. He's a Grandmaster, just like the
> >
Kai-order Grandmaster. A CS of 25+RNT is intrinsic to being a
> >
Grandmaster, as is an EP of 30 + RNT. The only difference and only
> >
"bonus" that should exist between a new LW Grandmaster and a Veteran LW
>
> Grandmaster is the stuff the Veteran happened to gather along the
way.
> >
> > > Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 11:38:15
+0100
> > > From: outspaced@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > To:
projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: [projectaon] Re: Book 13
Erratum
> > >
> > > On 11/05/2012 00:57, Jonathan Blake
wrote:
> > > > Is it just me or is there just too much going on
with this. It seems
> > > > like a simple change from "can" to
"should" does not give enough
> > > > information to help the
reader make an informed choice. It's beginning
> > > > to seem
like this would be best handled by an extended explanation in
> > >
> the Readers' Handbook?
> > >
> > > If I roll a 5
and a 5 for EP and CS in Book 1, I don't then re-roll my
> > > stats
at the start of Book 2 in the hope of picking better numbers
> > >
simply because "some of the opponents might be harder". And if I did and
>
> > picked a 9 and a 9, should I then re-pick the numbers at the start
of
> > > Book 3? Or now that I'm satisfied, is it time to stick with
what I've
> > > got? I can't see how the transition from Magnakai to
Grand Master is any
> > > different. To my mind, "should" is the
correct word here; and if players
> > > want to do otherwise, they
can, but such rules-meistering is not "by the
> > > book". (Compare
the fact that we haven't included any "dual-wielding"
> > > rules in
the RH because they are not in the original rules, irrespective
> >
> of how vocally and passionately some argue that 'carrying two
Weapons
> > > makes dual-wielding an implicit rule'.)
> >
>
> > > But I'm still feeling grumpy and crotchety right now.
:-p
> > >
> > > --
> > > Simon
Osborne
> > > Project Aon
>
> ~~~~~~
> Manage
your subscription at //www.freelists.org/list/projectaon
>
>
Other related posts:
