[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
(TFT) Re: Cheap Talents
I don't think the cost of the talents needs to be reduced. I think a
starting ITL character looks like a starting character. That GMs choose
to start with more experienced characters, or to allow purchase of cheap
'memory slots', also to experienced characters, does not mean the low
end of the scale is broken.
Regardless of whatever we choose to have heroes look like, shouldn't the
system be able to model a farmer reasonably? I really don't want to
have to explain why every 9-IQ farmer is a Master Horticulturist, Master
Vet, and knows Control Animal, or have every random tavern's patrons
amount to a brain trust. I also want to avoid the logical lapse of
having these normal folk fail to spend all their available slots.
For Runes of the New World, I left all talents at their regular costs,
gave a 50% bonus to my Memory stat for characters who had 'seen the
Elephant' (to allow peasant levies, who presumably had already _spent_
their full MEmory for talents, to still learn weapons skills.) , and
allowed purchase of Memory as distinct from IQ.
So farmers looked like farmers, '1st-levels' were a cut above, and
heroes could be better still.
The rules as they stand are fine. If you will accept that peasants
can't be trained in less than a year (the time to forget Farming,
Driver, and whatever), or that when your son returns home from the war,
he has gained the six IQ needed to learn Pole, Shield, and whatever.
Giving more points to everyone doesn't work, nor does reducing the cost
of all talents; peasants will still presumably 'use up' their memory
slots. Allowing the 50% for seasoned folks made sense to me, as did my
Your Mileage May Vary, but for me, the cost of Talents is fine, or so
close as to be 'not broken'.
Post to the entire list by writing to email@example.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to firstname.lastname@example.org with the message body