[projectaon] Re: Outstanding Errata Sprint (Week 6)
- From: David Davis <feline1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 09:17:36 +0100
Indeed, whilst there's no denying the 'hidden loyalty bonuses' perplexed
me as a child until they were explicitly declared in a Newsletter, it's
also the case that I began to find the Healing/Curing and Hunting and Bow
bonuses to be simply too much, and I'd sail through everything and find
the books too easy, until I hit some hellish super-combat like the Chaos
Master... I yearned the good old days of Flight from the Dark, where Meals
mattered and every EP counted.
So I don't think it's unreasonable that Deliverance and the GM Bow bonus
are deliberate rebalancing.
--
http://www.feline1.co.uk
On Fri 24/06/11 1:39 AM , Chris Neilson crusty.chris@xxxxxxxxx sent:
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
>
>
~~~~~~
Manage your subscription at
Other related posts:
