From: tdunn@ecst.csuchico.edu (Tim Dunn)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: WereVamp->Ars?
Date: 6 Oct 92 17:58:46 GMT
Article-I.D.: charnel.1ask4mINNhmq
Organization: California State University, Chico
NNTP-Posting-Host: cscihp.ecst.csuchico.edu

Bryant Durrell writes:
>I write:
>>The difficulty system is too contingent on the referee's whimsy.  Is it a 
>>6 or a 5?  No, wait, it's written in here _somewhere._  Look in the book,
>>I'll look through the _Player's Escalation Guide._  This brings up another
>>point -- has anyone noticed the severe power disparity that the Player's
>>Book introduces?  It's as bad as Champs3.
>
>Buh?  I'm honestly confused.  Champions doesn't index *every* possible
>action with a difficulty, does it?

No, the reference to Champions3 was wrt (with regards to) the escalation
in power attendant to the Players Handbook.  Each rulesbook has at least
one minor instance where they add a difficulty number to complicate the
referee's efforts, and they each add new rules.

Side ranting on rules: rules which are added in this fashion strike me
as being not wholly consistent with the baseline system.  That is to
say, they don't look like they mesh well or were originally tested with
the system, so I look at them as suspect.  (Does this apply to Hero, my
favorite system?  You betcha, at least with the old collection of Champs
1, 2 & 3.  Under the new rules, it's less of a hassle.)

No, the advantage of Champions is that the referee doesn't have to set
a difficulty (then again, the default difficulty in VampWulf is 6, so
it correlates).  Most of the time, the referee decreases a character's
skill total (roll that or under on 3d6) for a particularly difficult or
opposed task, that's all.

>The organization suck large rocks.  That's the price I pay for a system I
>enjoy.

Won't conflict on that.  If it's worth it to you.  However, I don't find
the system particularly elegant or well-implemented.

>About munchkins -- Vampire is a system that attracts them.  However, we 
>shouldn't judge a system by the people who play it.  

Where would that leave Champs, if I was guilty of that?  I've been fortunate
not to play with many munchkins, but the net.consensus is that they are
a dime a dozen.  Mind you, the ones I played with (and was a member in 
good standing with) were pretty bad, but that was the time of Champs 3.
Hence the reference.

>I don't think the system or the world encourages munchkin play, for the most 
>part -- with the admitted exception of the Player's Guide, which has been 
>referred to by certain WW staffers as "Our handbook for munchkins."  

Hunter's Hunted from the ravings the group of Vamp-munchkins I know have
given it seems like a good bet as well.  White Phosphorous 12g shell?
Flame units?  Are we playing Aliens here?  It's absurd to believe that
players will not make use of the equiptment detailed in there.

I won't judge the game by it's players, but I will judge the players as
they have shown their actions.  I find it hard to stop from generalizing
about the game based on the players, however.  IME (in my experience)
I've encountered a group of vamp-munchkins, and another group run by a
very clueless referee.  I've read and heard of great situations on the
net and from another gamer, but until I see it and take part in it, I'm
afraid my opinion of the game is negative.

-- 
[Nuclear war] ... may not be desirable.
		-- Edwin Meese III
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc