[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: (TFT) Re: Brawling
I have found that wizard become relatively more powerful
over fighters as they get into high attribute totals. This is ESPECIALLY
bad in my campaign where there are plenty of spells up to IQ 30 and
a few that go as high as IQ 37. (By the way no PC has ever topped
IQ 29 (including a 5 pt IQ adder) in my campaign, but I strongly
believe that there should be things to look forward to.)
I remember reading the Fafird and the Grey Mouser stories
by Fritz Leiber. They had swords that were called 'Greywand' and
'Catsclaw' (a greatsword and rapier). I had naturally assumed that
these blades were magiced up and enchanted in bunches of different
Then (I think it was in the 3rd book of the series) Leiber
mentions that they had both lost their blades several times and replaced
them with simular weapons. This completely blew me away. Holy
cow! these guys are great not because of magic but because THEY
Then I thought, how do I do that in TFT?
Well they could take Sword, and Fencing, and....
That was it. They could take those two talents and raise
their attributes. And you didn't have to be very good before you
had both talents.
It was then that I decided that the way to fix the increasing
gap between high attribute fighters and wizards was by making a
bunch of higher level talents so you could become a truely awesome
fighter who has speciallized in swords, or morningstars or picks or
what ever. This meant that highly skilled warrior could fight dragons
or demons without having to have a bucket of magic weapons and
The thing that prompts me to write all this, is the suggestion
below that fighters be required to take a 2 memory point talent in order
to get to where they are now. I don't know about how the balance is
in your campaign (some times the smallest rules can make a huge
difference) but I suspect that punishing fighters by forcing them to
spend 2 memory while not forcing wizards to put in a simular
'apprenceship' is NOT the way to go. I think that wizards (especially
high IQ wizards) get more bang for their buck when compaired to
what a fighter or a thief gets for 1 memory point.
I don't mind Brawling as an extra 'dirty tricks / low science'
form of combat training. But I get very worried by the idea that it
is a requirement for competent weapon use.
Also if virually all fighters have to have it, where is the
variation in characters which was one of the strengths of TFT (as
opposed to GURPS Magic for example, where all wizards were
basically going along the same path of spells prerequisits and the
only variation between characters is how far they are along each
I'm not saying this is how it SHOULD be done, (many the
time has been I've disagreed with something and said nothing), but
look on this as some 'words of experience' from someone who has
run a high powered campaign for many years. I'm just wondering
if this is really where you want to go.
>Actually, the concerns raised here are legitimate. The cost is too low, in
>retrospect. Two points is probably ideal. I don't see it as being all that
>complicated, but it does raise things up a notch and is mildly inelegant,
>for the reasons stated. I don't prefer Justin's version, but I will say he
>did it right, in that by simply making it a +1 in HTH only, it works out
>fairly well with the other Unarmed Combat talents. I don't think the IQ need
>be increased, as the "dirty tricks" strike me as being more instinctive then
>anything else. It's more a matter of aggression than skill.
>Wizard - obvious
>Warrior - classed as hero, must take "brawling" to be minimally effective,
>in addition to weapon talents.
>Thief - Various thief talents (silent move, thief, master thief, etc.)
>Priest - Priest and Theologian
Post to the entire list by writing to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Unsubscribe by mailing to email@example.com with the message body