01-20-2019, 01:32 PM | #51 |
Join Date: May 2015
|
Re: Dragon Safari: An adventure for TFT
Would it be easy to have it allow setting any average attribute total from say 24 to 50?
The existing levels don't match my following of the ITL meanings of attribute totals. I.e. 30 is supposed to be average human, so I'd like a setting for 30 average, and if I can select above-average people, why can't I select below-average people? The lowest you have, Beginners, gives average 32-points, which to me undermines 32 point PCs meaning above average (ITL says "high average"). The next level you offer, Regulars, seems to average 38, where to me that's a very gifted and/or experienced person (ITL says "superior"). Then your two higher levels seem to be 38-39 point average, but with piles of talents? |
01-20-2019, 02:03 PM | #52 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Pacheco, California
|
Re: Dragon Safari: An adventure for TFT
My rule is:
Should I switch from Evil Steve's exponential attribute costs to my quadratic model?
__________________
-HJC |
01-20-2019, 02:28 PM | #53 | |
Join Date: May 2015
|
Re: Dragon Safari: An adventure for TFT
Quote:
But 32 should not be the starting point, and 500XP per year is wrong for NPCs. |
|
01-20-2019, 02:41 PM | #54 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Pacheco, California
|
Re: Dragon Safari: An adventure for TFT
Quote:
What is the basis for using any number other than 500 XP/year for NPCs? That's where all of my calculations wind up at.
__________________
-HJC |
|
01-20-2019, 03:18 PM | #55 | ||
Join Date: May 2015
|
Re: Dragon Safari: An adventure for TFT
Quote:
Quote:
If you take even a 24-point character (ST 8, DX 8, IQ 8) and give them 500 XP per year, then they can become a 34-point character in two years. So those two data points are incompatible. Looking at data such as the opponents in Death Test and/or Tollenkar's Lair, or almost every other product published for TFT, even typical but not exception dangerous armed men tend to very often be in the 30-33 point range. That's consistent with it not being a mistake that most of the population averages 30 points. Meaning they must not be getting 500 XP per year, or else they almost never spend any of it on attributes at 100 XP per point up to 34, or else if they did, yeah, you'd be right, most of the population would drift up to 38 points or so quickly, and the average would be more like 36-38 points. And with a threshold topping up about 40 points, that would mean that instead of starting out as above-average people at 32-points, PCs would start as inexperienced incapable people who have no business trying to go on adventures at all, and that the most of the population of competent people will tend to be in the 37-40 point range, a really small slice of really powerful people that is well above the sweet spot for most TFT play. i.e. I think it's a mistake to think everyone in society is getting 500 XP per year. |
||
01-20-2019, 06:12 PM | #57 | |
Join Date: May 2015
|
Re: Dragon Safari: An adventure for TFT
Quote:
Per the earlier discussion of XP costs varying for races with different-scaled attributes, I would tend to think that points for individual giants and gargoyles could vary, but ST would vary more than humans, and DX and IQ would vary less and be subject to limits. Gargoyles: It seems to me that 32-point PC gargoyles are sub-average for typical adult gargoyles, because a "regular gargoyle" is listed in the Summon Gargoyle spell (and basic Melee, as always) as ST 20 DX 11 IQ 8 (39 points). Original ITL PC gargoyles were ST 16 DX 11 IQ 8, no extras. I think the 32-point PC gargoyles are clearly 32-points for (meta) "fairness" notions, but does mean ST 13 gargoyles are thought reasonable, though well weaker than the "regular" ST 20 ones. Seems to me the GM is left to interpret that (and your generator is optimistic trying to do all combinations of races and types - gargoyle ranchers? gargoyle navy?). Notably, we don't know what their actual normal min stats are. My own interpretation would be that: * Common capable warrior gargoyles are about ST 20, corresponding to 32-point humans (from comparing Summon Gargoyle to Summon Myrmidon, and Melee stats). * Average human 30 thus equates to average gargoyle ST 18. * ST 16 gargoyles are probably weak and/or young. * ST 13 gargoyles are probable at or near minimum for normal non-dependent-youth gargoyles, maybe min ST 11 or 12. * Gargoyle min IQ 8, statistically like human IQ 8-12. 9 like human 13-15. 10 like human 16+. * DX seems to tend to be 11, but I imagine could be as low as 9 or as high as 13 and still be within common norms. So in making random below-average-but-normal NPCs gargoyles, I might make them something like: ST 10 + 2d6 / 2 (round up) DX 9 + 2d6 / 3 (round down) IQ 3d6 -8, min 8 Giants: Giants are unchanged from old ITL, and are one of the few examples that nicely lists both NPC stat ranges, and PC stat ranges, and shows the PC stats are for the low end of all possible giant attributes, at ST 25 DX 9 IQ 7. Melee (old and new) lists giants varying a bit more than ITL does, suggesting min ST 24, and max but exceptional ST at 50, and not mentioning a max DX but says "rarely more than 9" which is cool because it is relevant to NPC population statistic rather than just listing a range and leaving people to think maybe it's as common and as easy for a giant to add 1 to IQ as to ST, just with a maximum. My own interpretation would be that: * Typical average giants have about ST 30 (the ST you get when you cast Summon Giant), so ST 30 DX 9 IQ 7 corresponds demographically to a 30-point human. * ST 25 giants are probably young or weakish for other reasons. Perhaps ST 24 is what giants tend to be when they come of age. * There may be some DX 8 giants, but they'd be about as rare as a DX 8 human. * Other giants are DX 9 or 10, and that's a fairly big deal, with distribution being maybe 50/50 over the healthy adult population that isn't DX 8 or less somehow. * IQ 10 is described as "genius giant", so I'd tend to equate that to maybe human IQ 14-16+, and rare. Many IQ 7 or 8, a fair number 9, only a few 10. So in making random below-average-but-normal NPCs giants, I might make them something like: ST 24 + 1d6 DX 9 (maybe 1 in 6 of being DX 8) IQ 7 + 3d6 / 6 (round down) |
|
|
|