Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Morrus" data-source="post: 6297535" data-attributes="member: 1">Players can start picking up small upgrades after their first session, yep.&nbsp; That's intentional.&nbsp; It's much more granular than a level-based system.Heh.&nbsp; We had one.&nbsp; It was too complex.&nbsp; I think it's still in the N.E.W. document, actually, if you're interested. I have to disagree there. XP should reflect what the critter is going to do, and critters aren't&nbsp; likely to do things they aren't good at.&nbsp; And if they *do* start using&nbsp; non-optimal attributes, then that probably qualifies for an XP reduction not an increase - the creature isn't acting at its best potential.&nbsp; It would be an usual monster that utilized all of its attributes.&nbsp; Honestly, you could almost just hinge it off the one highest.&nbsp; Something is going to have an area of core competency - hitting things hard, being fast and hard to hit, using powerful magic, using psionics, using scientific or lore stuff (not yet in there).&nbsp; They won't be doing all those things at the same time, and certainy not the things they aren't good at.&nbsp; Giving an ogre XP for having 3 INT or something is really just free XP for something the ogre will never benefit from.&nbsp; Giving him XP for having high STR, though, and that makes sense.&nbsp; XP for an evil necromancer's STR makes no sense when he never engages in melee combat because he's a ... well, a necromancer with high MAGIC and INT and stuff and makes zombies.You're correct; any issues with incentive to advance traditions lies in the tradition design and the desirability of the abilities gained.&nbsp; That is absolutely something that could be looked more closely at.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Morrus, post: 6297535, member: 1"] Players can start picking up small upgrades after their first session, yep. That's intentional. It's much more granular than a level-based system. Heh. We had one. It was too complex. I think it's still in the N.E.W. document, actually, if you're interested. I have to disagree there. XP should reflect what the critter is going to do, and critters aren't likely to do things they aren't good at. And if they *do* start using non-optimal attributes, then that probably qualifies for an XP r[I]eduction[/I] not an increase - the creature isn't acting at its best potential. It would be an usual monster that utilized all of its attributes. Honestly, you could almost just hinge it off the one highest. Something is going to have an area of core competency - hitting things hard, being fast and hard to hit, using powerful magic, using psionics, using scientific or lore stuff (not yet in there). They won't be doing all those things at the same time, and certainy not the things they aren't good at. Giving an ogre XP for having 3 INT or something is really just free XP for something the ogre will never benefit from. Giving him XP for having high STR, though, and that makes sense. XP for an evil necromancer's STR makes no sense when he never engages in melee combat because he's a ... well, a necromancer with high MAGIC and INT and stuff and makes zombies. You're correct; any issues with incentive to advance traditions lies in the tradition design and the desirability of the abilities gained. That is absolutely something that could be looked more closely at. [/QUOTE]

Verification