Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5905262" data-attributes="member: 42582">I think that what [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] had in mind that the 15th level party is likely to be adventuring in Mordor, the Elemental Chaos, or some similarly inhospitable location, and that the 1st level PC will not last very long in such a place.<a href="http://www.indie-rpgs.com/articles/21/" target="_blank">Here</a> is an RPG design comment on Hawkeye:I can't think of a single coherent Narrativist game text in which balance as a term is invoked as a design or play feature, nor any particular instance of play I've been involved in which brought the issue up. But I'm pretty sure that it's a protagonism issue. "Balance" might be relevant as a measure of character screen time, or perhaps weight of screen time rather than absolute length. This is not solely the effectiveness-issue which confuses everyone. Comics fans will recognize that Hawkeye is just as significant as Thor, as a member of the Avengers, or even more so. In game terms, this is a Character Components issue: Hawkeye would have a high Metagame component whereas Thor would have a higher Effectiveness component.Question: is that metagame component able to be achieved simply via social contract and gentlemen's agreement, or does it have to be reduced to mechanics? I understand that the Buffy game takes the "reduce to mechanics" approach to make sure it's a lock. In my view, 4e martial powers should also be seen as a "reduce to mechanics" way of locking in martial PCs metagame weight-of-screentime.According to the recent Legends and Lore columns, it seems that WotC aren't going metagame with martial, but instead tackling effectiveness head on - high-level fighters and rogues will have mythic levels of effectiveness comparable to those of high level wizards.</blockquote>

Verification