RE: (TFT) Fatigue: A Discussion - Part 1 Reply to Neil

["rsmith" <rsmith@lightspeed.ca>]

Hi Neil,
	Most TFT campaigns that I have come across,
(not counting the ones based off my rules which
obviously would be very similar to my campaign),
have changed the rules to address one or more of
these points.  I certainly have no objection if
you see no need to address these problems with new
rules.  But I LIKE to make new rules and fine tune
the game.

	As for the "As for heroes not getting enough
skills, I can't think of any game where a
player thinks their character is powerful enough."
I agree and disagree.  In any game, most players
want more 'crunchy bits' to quote Robin Law.  My
feeling is that in TFT, the fighters do not get
enough stuff for a memory point as compared to
wizards.  (See some old discussions about the cost
of talents on the list.)

	I've also added a lot of non-combat talents,
(see an old post on more talents for thieves for
example).

	Admittedly, in regular TFT, there are many
talents for small subdivisions of combat, but
other subjects are grouped into large super-talents.
(For example, if you are a fighter, you do not pick
just a fighter talent, you pick: sword, bow, missile
weapons, thrown weapons, UC1 thru 5, fencing, etc.
etc. where as if you want to become a thief, you get
Thief and Master Thief, and maybe climbing.)

	However, this is a weakness of the talent
selection that Steve Jackson gave us, TFT does not
HAVE to be this way.


	You wrote:
"Wizards can be pretty powerful but usually not because they can cast an
umpteen-die WizWrath, but through more subtlety. There's a reason that the
TFT magic model requires cooperation for quick, powerful spells and
enchantments."

	I agree with just about everything you say
here.  I've thought that the missile spells are
over powerful, and so increased the IQ requirements
for all of them.  In addition, but making the
'fST batteries' harder to find and less useful,
martial wizards NEED wimpy little apprentices to
help them out.  (Of course those apprentices have
to be protected on adventures...)

	You wrote:
"I've never found that experienced figures are similar. That's what I prefer
about TFT over (older versions) of D&D. Every character seems to be quite
different, even though the stats are similar. The talents and spells wok
well for this purpose;"

	I think we should agree to disagree on this
subject.  I LIKE the idea that the PC's should have
different attributes.  Consider, the GM has the
party make a 4vsIQ roll to notice something.  Almost
everyone makes it, the wizards because they have
high IQ stats for their spells, the heroes because
they need huge IQ for a decent selection of talents.

	Or consider, the party comes up and has to
lift a metal gate.  The fighters can manage it
because they have a high ST for their weapons.
The wizards can also easily lift the gate because
they have taken a high ST to power their spells.

	And EVERYONE needs a high DX.


	I just think it would be more fun is not
every experienced character has a ST 15, DX 15 and
IQ 15+ with a touch of variation thrown in.  If
most wizards have a low ST and one comes along
that has a ST 14(!) people can ooh and awh over
the strange character concept.  Does he work?
This way of looking at the game is orthogonal to
the role playing aspects.  (What I am saying is
that if the characters are well roleplayed and
seem different, it does not matter what the
attribute totals are.  If the stats are different
but the roleplaying is so poor that they seem
like boring combat machines, then you have lost
the prize.  But I see no reason why you can not
have interesting characters and tweek the rules
so that there are reasons why the attributes
would have a wider range.)


	Rick
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"