Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Edgar Ironpelt" data-source="post: 9405493" data-attributes="member: 32075">As a GM, it isn't my character, but it is my wain. Maybe fixing the wain it is an easy repair within the ability of someone with a Mental score of 15 but no special wainwright skill or fixing-things talent. Maybe it isn't. It's my call as GM, either to how the brokenness of the wain maps to whatever crunchy repair rules are in play or a pure GM ruling if there the system in use lacks crunch on this point.And maybe he was the despair of his wainwright mother, and went into wizardry because he was hopeless at mundane wainwright work.My usual style is that a character has the default Everyman level of ability in anything not noted as his being unusually good at (or unusually clueless about), possibly modified by stated general character background so that he might have Everynoble or Everyfarmlad levels of ability in various things.Now there is such a thing as "Develop In Play." I'm willing to accommodate that if the player's style runs strongly in that direction, but I also normally expect players to be advocates for their PCs, so I'm going to attach strings to that accommodation. It would be a game well out of my wheelhouse, with players more as co-GMs running PCs who are more like player-run NPCs, for me to not attach those strings. So one way or another, someone has to say, on occasion, "Actually, this PC is bad at wainwright work and will only attempt it out of desperation and/or a grossly inflated idea of his (lack of) skill."I'm also pretty insistent on consistency. PC: My mother was a wainwright. Me: Last session, you said your mother was a mason.PC: That was last session. This session she's a wainwright. Me: Nope!Finally, I see it as a virtue to have good mapping between the prose character conception/description and and the game-stat version of the character on the character sheet. I hates it when the two disagree. Yes I do, my precious. Hates it!</blockquote>

Verification