Re: (TFT) what Dark city modules have you played? Im thinking of getting

[Joel BoardgameRpger <joel.siragher@gmail.com>]

good point hulka.

And thats the reason I came up with my spread sheet. I wanted to see what
all the numbers looked like from different point total perspective.

Ok, so I put about 20 hours into sheet, but That will save other people on
research time.

So aesthetic/altruistic :D

On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 9:57 AM, Sgt Hulka <hulkasgt@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Everyone seems to be concluding the same thing, but coming to those
> conclusions from a slightly different angle. To come at it from yet
> another...
>
> A 32-point character can carry a spear (ST 11) and wear leather armor and
> a light shield (Dex 13) and still be effective in combat, hitting on an 11-
> (AdjDex 11). That's a pretty good fighter, but it's not quite the level of
> dark ages household warrior or medieval knight, who would need to be able
> to do the same with at least a broadsword (ST 12), chainmail and large
> shield (Dex 15, AdjDex 11).
>
> So I've concluded that a 32 point character is the equivelant of a bondi
> or yeoman type...a farmer trained in war...or a roman rank and file
> soldier. Not a leader or a hero, who would require at least 34 or 35 points.
>
> Keep in mind this assumes an 8 IQ, which I actually don't think means the
> character is stupid. It just means the character is more focused on warfare
> than on other pursuits. A 32-point shop keeper would be a less capable
> fighter.
>
> --- On Sat, 5/19/12, Joey Beutel <mejobo@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > From: Joey Beutel <mejobo@comcast.net>
> > Subject: Re: (TFT) what Dark city modules have you played? Im thinking
>  of getting
> > To: tft@brainiac.com
> > Date: Saturday, May 19, 2012, 7:44 AM
>  > On May 19, 2012, at 4:47 AM, Jay
> > Carlisle wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 11:42 AM, Joel BoardgameRpger
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Sewers is suggested at *ADVANCED: 38 point
> > characters*
> > >>
> > >
> > > ???
> > > As I recall DCG has its own system that translates into
> > TFT simply.
> > > So I'm not trying to get into that directly but I am a
> > bit curious as to
> > > how folks view the ideas of attribute points and levels
> > in TFT.
> >
> > I believe we've had some discussions of this before, and it
> > is all relative to the other characters in the campaign
> > (including all the NPCs in the world).
> > >
> > > In the view I use starting 32pt Figures are fresh out
> > of high school so to
> > > speak, a bit more talented than Joe Average at 30pts
> > but not prodigy's.
> > > Were they american football players they would be well
> > recruited standouts
> > > on their high school teams but redshirt recruits at top
> > level university
> > > programs.
> >
> > I always viewed it as being more like:
> > 30: Inexperienced/lacking in any real talent. People who are
> > 30's rarely go much higher. Most people are not 30's, but
> > they are a large minority. Not "average" but "low average."
> > 32: This is more like average. Many attain this level of
> > ability at one point in their lives or another.
> >
> > Stats are flexible over time, of course, but if you see a
> > random person from the age of 18 to 35, he's probably
> > somewhere between 30 and 36, with the median being 32.
> >
> > > College level standouts move into the 40 to 60ish
> > attribute points level
> > > which is a rough average at the professional level.
> >
> > Thats a massive jump. What about 36? 38?
> > I don't think I've ever had a 60 point character in my
> > games.
> > There is enough difference (a fairly large difference, that
> > is) between a 36 pointer and a 32 pointer in my opinion.
> >
> > 40 starts to represent the elite.... a 40 pt soldier is one
> > of the better soldiers in his unit, or perhaps a knight
> > trained from birth to fight. If he is a scholar then he is a
> > professor... highly knowledgeable on many subjects (note
> > that assuming he is average, 11, in DX and ST, then his IQ
> > is 18-- genius level according to TFT, though I'd note that
> > 'genius' does not mean 'einstein,' it just means 'very
> > smart.')
> >
> > By 50, in my game worlds, you're dealing with literally the
> > best of the best. The best fighter in the kingdom, the best
> > archer in the kingdom, the head wizard, etc.
> >
> > I know this isn't reflected that well by the employment
> > experience bonuses but I tend to assume that those would
> > work differently for a non-PC and I also tend to tone those
> > down for PCs... they are a little too much in the long run.
> > I usually just reduce the rolls from once a week to once a
> > month and multiply the salary by 4.
> >
> > > Assuming that human maximums are around 30 in a
> > attribute (only directly
> > > suggested for ST but not too big a leap perhaps) then
> > the statistical
> > > maximum for humans is approaching 100 in a 'realistic'
> > campaign.
> > > Sure the attribute points get expensive in experience
> > points, something
> > > like 2.5 million exp per from 95 to 100 I think, but at
> > that level of
> > > attribute points it's not unimaginable to see
> > situations where a Figure
> > > might muster enough to get some mighty big chunks of
> > exp quickly.
> > > I'm thinking of the Dark Lord leading a small army of
> > apprentices with Aid
> > > and a mess of ST batteries mustering a nuke-like
> > Fireball on a city.
> > > And of course 6500 exp gets a Figure to 29 in an
> > attribute at minimum and
> > > 46 total points is still under 10,000 exp.
> >
> > I've never had a character like that (my games are slightly
> > more mundane than the dark lord leading the army of
> > minions...) but I could see it being the most powerful
> > individual human around. Totally fantasy-- how many people
> > do you know are the strongest (herculean, in fact, so pure
> > mythology), most dexterous, and intelligent people in the
> > entire world all at once, and to the point where they are
> > the best in all categories that the world has ever seen?
> >
> > Might make for an interesting ubermensch big bad, if the
> > characters have enough allies, but its not what I'd consider
> > the 'normal' maximum for a human... its a level only
> > attainable by nearly god-like (in the greek "hero" sense)
> > beings, and even then it doesn't come naturally... they need
> > to train to reach that level.
> >
> > I have had characters approaching 30 in individual stats,
> > however... if you're around 50, the best in the kingdom at
> > something, you can easily be a 30 ST hercules-type hero. Or
> > a total genius wizard. Or a great enough archer to easily
> > split others' arrows. That said, you will be much more
> > average in other ways.
> >
> > > There also seems to be an assumption that Joe Average
> > pretty much stays
> > > static at 30 pts over the course of their lives even
> > though the Job Lists
> > > suggest otherwise for at least some Joe's.
> >
> > Yeah, the job lists are clearly broken for basing the entire
> > world around. Hence, I adjust them for PCs and almost
> > entirely ignore them for NPCs.
> > On one hand people do evolve over their life time, but
> > Traveller got it right-- basically people learn their stuff
> > when they're pretty young, and the rest of their lives
> > they're mostly just using what they know.... they learn more
> > about the world and become more experienced but their
> > capabilities are actually fairly static.  Maybe a new
> > skill every couple of years if you really focus on it.
> >
> > > I also think about stuff like The Princess Bride or The
> > Bridge of Birds
> > > where the concept of the best in the world at something
> > is strongly
> > > featured in areas of the overall story often as driving
> > reasons to quest.
> > > What's stopping a Figure with New Followers from
> > questing for the strongest
> > > man in the world or similar?
> >
> > Nothing, I like the idea and have used it before... its just
> > that those characters (the strongest or whatever) tend to be
> > somewhat limited in other ways.... not ridiculously so, but
> > he's not going to be a super genius too.
> >
> > > Another thought, if 30pts is considered an average in a
> > medieval (ish)
> > > setting what might the average be for a modern "first
> > world" Joe?
> >
> > I'd imagine they are roughly equivalent. The big change will
> > be in Talents.
> > I've read some stuff that suggests that very ancient man
> > (pre-civilization hunter gatherer types) were at about
> > olympic levels for us... some think that hunters could run
> > at speeds approaching Ursain Bolt. (that said I think most
> > people can, for a short period, probably do something
> > similar if they are desperate enough... its just that on a
> > track with no danger of death chasing after you, people
> > don't have the burst, so its impressive that guys like Bolt
> > can run like that 'casually')
> >
> > However, by the time that people were farming and living in
> > villages (3000 BC, say), that had changed... and honestly
> > I'm doubtful of those archeologists who think that the above
> > is true, because, honestly, look at hunter gatherers today.
> > Sure, they aren't living on the best land, usually, and they
> > are somewhat restricted in where they can go by the modern
> > world, but ultimately that doesn't make up for the
> > difference between "fairly average guy who might be
> > considered fit and relatively experienced in
> > spearing/archery or whatever compared to a 'modern' man" and
> > "better than anyone alive today."
> >
> > Anyway. Medieval-ish. Ever went to a museum and stood by a
> > suit of armor? Knights were very short.
> >
> > I'd say that a modern person is still around 30-34 on
> > average. Strength really hasn't changed that much (people
> > probably put more points in intelligence and DX and less in
> > ST but its ultimately averaging out). DX has arguably gone
> > up as people have better nutrition so keep their eyesight
> > better for longer. IQ is probably about the same (little
> > higher?) but people get more IQ-y talents and less fighting
> > and farming talents.
> >
> > The base line for some talents changed. No longer does
> > mathematics mean "can do any math at all" as everyone can do
> > math, its more like "knows post-calculus math well and uses
> > it."
> >
> > > I consider that statistical maximums are pretty much
> > inevitable at some
> > > point in a campaign game.
> > > This doesn't mean that there's a bunch of Figures on
> > the high end of the
> > > statistical bell and in a setup with a strong fixed
> > class society where 80
> > > or 90 percent of the total population are peasants the
> > few near the
> > > maximums are most likely peasants who may never be
> > considered for
> > > knighthood or otherwise excluded from most
> > consideration but even then an
> > > occasional Faraday or Ramanujan trickles through the
> > cracks.
> > > Or maybe I'm completely off base...
> > > It's something like 25 million exp to get to 100
> > attribute points.
> > > At 20 exp per Joe Average it's around one and a quarter
> > million Joe's to
> > > max a Figure statistically.
> > > Rome was probably near that population in her height
> > and perhaps a few
> > > other ancient cities were knocking on that door
> > population wise.
> > > Nothing says the Dark Lord gets exp for nuking a city
> > but nothing says he
> > > wouldn't get anything for it either.
> > > Oddness abounds...
> >
> > One definitely cannot reach those levels by fighting alone.
> > >
> > > "Harrison tore the straps of his handicap harness like
> > wet tissue paper,
> > > tore straps guaranteed to support five thousand
> > pounds."
> > > =====
> > > Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
> > > Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com
> > with the message body
> > > "unsubscribe tft"
> > =====
> > Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
> > Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com
> > with the message body
> > "unsubscribe tft"
> =====
> Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
> Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
> "unsubscribe tft"
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"