Post originally by Dan Davenport at 2005-02-16 07:31:02
Converted from Phorums BB System

David Fooden wrote:
-------------------------------
<b>Nicely reviewed Dan, thanks! Glad you enjoyed the setting, we tried to pack in as much Chi-Chiany goodness as we could.</b>
-------------------------------

Hi, David! Yup, great job on that.

-------------------------------
<b>I'll pitch in with my co-creator's 2¥ on some salient points and try to clear up a few things...

Character Creation:

Mettle isn't really a physical stat, it's more like courage or ability in conflict. Health is the vigor to Mettle's vim, and yes, it is a holistic physical stat. I think it works given the lack of focus on precise tactical simulation.</b>
-------------------------------

See, I understand what you're trying to simulate there; I'm just not sure that the courage aspect really serves the purpose you intend it to serve -- the OOMF rating already covers steadiness under fire to some degree.

But more to the point, the Mettle/Health division brings up some odd situations. Take target shooting, for example: the character isn't under fire, so it's not combat. Does Mettle still apply?

Likewise, if agility isn't part of Mettle, do characters use Health to dodge random falling objects? And if the objects are dropped by an enemy, does the dodge move back under Mettle?

-------------------------------
<b>Good call on pointing out the missing Enhanced Agility. We should have included that, my bad. Chi cost would be the same as for Enhanced Strength.</b>
-------------------------------

My initial guess as to why you didn't include such a Capability was that it might break from the two basic types of rolls -- Stat, or Stat + Capability -- in cases in which a given skill-like Capability used Health. (IOW, it would lead to a roll of Stat + Capability + Capability.) But then I realized that there <i>are</i> no skill-like Capabilities based on Health.

-------------------------------
<b>I can see how one could classify this as a supers game based on the style and breadth of the character creation. We wanted players to be able to create just about anything. The setting as written doesn't readily lend itself to vigilantes in tights though, unless they're particularly outré. Hmmm... that gives me a fun idea for a new scenario to run at cons </b>
-------------------------------

Well, to clarify my point, I don't think that a "supers" game necessarily has to be a super<i>heroic</i> game.

Rather, I consider a supers setting to be one in which certain individuals may have either unique superhuman powers from a common source (e.g., Wild Cards, Abberant) or superhuman powers from a more or less unique source (e.g., the Marvel Universe, with characters like Spider-man).

This, as opposed to settings in which characters may have a specific selection of superhuman powers based on the category of being to which they belong (e.g., the World of Darkness).

Not that this matters all that much.

[snip]

-------------------------------
<b>Combat:

The rules do magnify differences in ability levels, particularly to allow a beat-em-up style when dealing with low-powered goons and to encourage alternatives to combat against martially superior foes.</b>
-------------------------------

See, that's a laudable design goal, but I think it runs counter to the design goal described in the text -- the end result being players having their characters attempting bold actions against tough odds and getting the royal smackdown.

-------------------------------
<b>There are lots of ways to tweak the system to fit your tastes, but yes, it is more work for the GM/players. We will post errata, new and alternate rules, and scenarios on aetherco.com in the future, and we'd love to hear suggestions and feedback.</b>
-------------------------------

Cool!

-------------------------------
<b>I don't want to say too much about the spoiler section, but hey, those arachnids are tough monsters </b>
-------------------------------

See the "smackdown" observation above.

-------------------------------
<b>I hope that adds some lucidity </b>
-------------------------------

Yup! Thanks, David! I'm always especially appreciative of designer feedback on my reviews.

--
Dan Davenport