------=_Part_27106_4072483.1192568578085
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
>
> From: dq-pub-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-pub-owner@dq.sf.org.nz<dq-pub-owner@dq.sf.org.nz>
> ]On
> Behalf Of Stephen Martin
> I have always believed and played that a masterwork is required for
> Artisan skills, but it does not need a GM sign-off.
>
> If the player is happy enough with his choice of masterwork to stand in
> front of his peers and say "this is what I did for Rk 8", then it's good
> enough.
>
Perhaps a rule exception isn't needed; perhaps a better GM understanding of
the bar for Artisan (and other) masterworks is.
Masterworks, and their GM sign off, were originally intended (back in the
old days when the rule book was incised in clay tablets and we walked ten
miles barefoot in snow to DQ games -- uphill both ways), as a way of
emphasizing the importance of high ranked skills and encouraging players to
make the high ranked skills part of their character's personality / way of
thinking, rather than a just collection of numbers.
The idea (as I understood it) was that while at low ranks that
(hypothetical) character might be an elven earth mage (who does some
healing), at high ranks they are a Healer (who's an elven earth mage); the
masterwork was an encouragement to consider the impact on the character's
nature, philosophy, approach to adventuring, etc that being a master Healer
would / should have.
There has always been something of a "tension" in the masterwork concept as
the straightforward approach of "I will spend 6 months out healing paupers
in Hicksville" is at odds with the major purpose of DQ to provide a setting
in which to play your characters, leading to the dilemma that the way to
"prove" your dedication to healer and wanting to play a Master Healer is to
not be able to play your Healer character. Insane.
> Artisans skills don't have a big game effect, master rank in Artisan is
> not going to unbalance the character or a party, they are primarily for
> character flavour and background.
>
Perhaps this is true / should be true of all skills. We don't require GM
sign off for high ranks in spells or weapons, and if there are skills that
are significantly unbalanced at Rank 8+ then they are a problem in their own
right and the masterwork rule isn't really the ideal solution.
> If you decide to skimp on your masterwork, then you are only cheating
> yourself and cheapening your character background.
>
This. QFT. (and other intratube inanities). I completely and totally agree.
I like the masterwork concept and wish to retain it, but I don't see that
making it terrifically hard to rank skills beyond 7 is helping anyone
either.
> And when Basalic spends a year with his hands in the dirt and goes on high
> level quest to achieve his masterwork in Artisan, it raises the bar for
> the rest of us!
>
And is that a good thing? Masterworks (historically) were used by a
candidate for guild mastery to prove they had the skill level needed for a
master. They weren't the artisan Olympics or Guinness world records. A
newly minted master (Rk 8) should be expected to exhibit the minimum
requirement for mastery, not try to out-shine all past masters. (Rk 9 and 10
works should exhibit increasing mastery).
In my opinion, creating a huge and functional farm and ranch from scratch
should provide the fodder for quite a few different masterworks.
Treating such a huge project as an atomic unit and doing it all for one
masterwork simply risks a form of inflation that means when Basalic (or
someone else) wants to get Rk 10 farmer they find they have to put a
significant proportion of the Alusian continent under cultivation in order
to qualify.
Cheers,
Martin
------=_Part_27106_4072483.1192568578085
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
<div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div><p><font size="2">From: <a href="mailto:dq-pub-owner@dq.sf.org.nz" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">
dq-pub-owner@dq.sf.org.nz</a> [<a href="mailto:dq-pub-owner@dq.sf.org.nz" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">mailto:dq-pub-owner@dq.sf.org.nz</a>]On</font>
<br><font size="2">Behalf Of Stephen Martin</font>
<br><font size="2">I have always believed and played that a masterwork is required for Artisan skills, but it does</font> <font size="2">not need a GM sign-off.</font>
</p>
<p><font size="2">If the player is happy enough with his choice of masterwork to stand in front of his peers and say</font>
<font size="2">"this is what I did for Rk 8", then it's good enough.</font></p></div></blockquote><div><br>
Perhaps a rule exception isn't needed; perhaps a better GM understanding of the bar for Artisan (and other) masterworks is.<br>
<br>
Masterworks, and their GM sign off, were originally intended (back in
the old days when the rule book was incised in clay tablets and we
walked ten miles barefoot in snow to DQ games -- uphill both ways), as
a way of emphasizing the importance of high ranked skills and
encouraging players to make the high ranked skills part of their
character's personality / way of thinking, rather than a just
collection of numbers.<br>
<br>
The idea (as I understood it) was that while at low ranks that
(hypothetical) character might be an elven earth mage (who does some
healing), at high ranks they are a Healer (who's an elven earth mage);
the masterwork was an encouragement to consider the impact on the
character's nature, philosophy, approach to adventuring, etc that being
a master Healer would / should have.<br>
<br>
There has always been something of a "tension" in the masterwork
concept as the straightforward approach of "I will spend 6 months out
healing paupers in Hicksville" is at odds with the major purpose of DQ
to provide a setting in which to play your characters, leading to the
dilemma that the way to "prove" your dedication to healer and wanting
to play a Master Healer is to not be able to play your Healer
character. Insane.<br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div><p><font size="2">Artisans skills don't have a big game effect, master rank in Artisan is not going to unbalance the
</font>
<font size="2">character or a party, they are primarily for character flavour and background.</font><br>
</p></div></blockquote><div> Perhaps this is true / should be true of
all skills. We don't require GM sign off for high ranks in spells or
weapons, and if there are skills that are significantly unbalanced at
Rank 8+ then they are a problem in their own right and the masterwork
rule isn't really the ideal solution.<br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex; font-weight: bold;"><div><p><font size="2">If you decide to skimp on your masterwork, then you are only cheating yourself and cheapening your
</font>
<font size="2">character background.</font></p></div></blockquote><div>This. QFT. (and other intratube inanities). I completely and totally agree. I
like the masterwork concept and wish to retain it, but I don't see that
making it terrifically hard to rank skills beyond 7 is helping anyone
either.<br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div><p><font size="2">And when Basalic spends a year with his hands in the dirt and goes on high level quest to achieve
</font>
<font size="2">his masterwork in Artisan, it raises the bar for the rest of us!</font></p></div></blockquote><div>And
is that a good thing? Masterworks (historically) were used by a
candidate for guild mastery to prove they had the skill level needed
for a master. They weren't the artisan Olympics or Guinness world
records. A newly minted master (Rk 8) should be expected to exhibit
the minimum requirement for mastery, not try to out-shine all past
masters. (Rk 9 and 10 works should exhibit increasing mastery).<br>
<br>
In my opinion, creating a huge and functional farm and ranch from
scratch should provide the fodder for quite a few different masterworks.<br>
<br>
Treating such a huge project as an atomic unit and doing it all for one
masterwork simply risks a form of inflation that means when Basalic (or
someone else) wants to get Rk 10 farmer they find they have to put a
significant proportion of the Alusian continent under cultivation in
order to qualify.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Martin<br>
</div></div>
------=_Part_27106_4072483.1192568578085--
-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
|