[projectaon] Re: Outstanding Errata Sprint (Week 6)
- From: Chris Neilson <crusty.chris@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 12:39:35 +1200
On Fri, 2011-06-24 at 00:42 +0100, David Davis wrote:
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Blake
>
> > The real question is whether or not Grand Weaponmastery has a bonus of
> > 3 or 5.
>
> OK. Well, for internal consistency in the fictional world of Magnamund, it
> *ought* to be +5.
>
> However it's not! It's +3! It's always been +3! In every edition of the
> Game Rules of every Grand Master and New Order book. There's no real
> arguing with that!
> I tend to suspect this is due to Dever dropping the ball and making a
> cut-and-paste on his wordprocessor, without remembering about the Mentora
> bonus.
I like to think that +5 to a 10-sided dice roll is too much of a bonus
and Dever was resetting things so they were more balanced. Remember that
one of the goals for the book was that you could complete it regardless
of Disciplines chosen. With a bonus of +5 (or higher) youre practically
guaranteed to succeed with no or very low risk. If the required rolls to
hit with a bow are bumped up by 5 then they become too hard without the
skill. So take the skill or never fire a bow. Ever.
> But I have no evidence for this at all,
> and contra (circumstantial) evidence is that Deliverance also drops the
> (extremely useful) +1EP per section.
>
Again this could be due to game balance reasons. I always felt compelled
to take Healing/Curing because of the relative lack of other ways to
heal.
> I can't see there's any real way to argue that Grand Weaponmastery's Bow
> bonus should be +5 without also arguing that Deliverance should also include
> +1EP per section.
> And I haven't seen anyone arguing that yet! (hah, am I tempting fate?! lol)
>
>
> The thing which made me suspect that the +3 in the Game Rules was definately
> a cut-and-paste error is because I kept finding +5 in actual numbered
> sections.
> I thought this was consistent throughout the books and it was the rules that
> were the exception.
> But meticulous grepping have shown this not to be the case. I was wrong in
> my cursory analysis.
>
> It is more plausible that these +5's are ad hoc. Reasons:
> 1. They are sometimes +4!
> 2. They are not stated as "Remember to add..."
> 3. In several instances they involve spells like 'Flameshaft' being used.
>
> Ad hoc bonuses for a particular discipline are a regular occurance
> throughout all the books.
> For instance I can remember Healing giving you a complete restoration of EPs
> on the sea voyage to Port Bax in Book 2,
> and Hunting regularly providing a CS bonus (or preventing CS loss) for the
> duration of a combat.
>
My vote is to lock in +3 and leave ad hoc bonuses as is.
>
> ~~~~~~
> Manage your subscription at //www.freelists.org/list/projectaon
>
>
~~~~~~
Manage your subscription at //www.freelists.org/list/projectaon
Other related posts:
