The "get +1stat" advances

  • 2 Replies
  • 3741 Views
The "get +1stat" advances
« on: June 11, 2011, 11:24:40 AM »
I've been struggling to see a pattern in what "get +1stat" advances the different playbooks get, but failed so far, so I thought I'd ask. Obviously the ones who can raise their signature stat with color through a move don't also get it as a colorless advance, but apart from that? Is it a numbers thing who gets to advance the same stat twice, or is it purely thematically decided? (I'm not that good with numbers and seeing patterns in them, I'm afraid.)

*

lumpley

  • 1293
Re: The "get +1stat" advances
« Reply #1 on: June 11, 2011, 11:45:51 AM »
It's a balance of maybe 5 things, I dunno.

Some of the playbooks have a more canalized future than others, where it's obvious to me that there are fewer in-playbook directions that a gunlugger will go (for instance) than an angel will.

Some of the playbooks' stat improvements are based on strengthening their strengths - these tend to have fewer - and others are based on strengthening their weaknesses.

Some of the playbooks tend to improve themselves - these tend to have more stat improvements - and others tend to improve their stuff and their endeavors.

For some of the playbooks, essential non-stat improvements crowd out the stat improvements.

And then there's the move thing, where the gunlugger gets Insano like Drano instead of a +1hard improvement. There's a whole different set of concerns there, about what improvement moves I want in the game in what proportions, and should the character be able to start play with the +3, and whatever else.

I'm sure you also noticed that most of the time only the playbook's leading stat can go to +3. A couple of the limited ed playbooks have a strong secondary stat that can go to +3 too.

So: those are the things I'm balancing as I create those lists, and you're right, they come out with tendencies, not with any clear pattern.

Re: The "get +1stat" advances
« Reply #2 on: June 11, 2011, 11:55:07 AM »
Great, more or less as I thought then. Thanks! I'll probably have more questions on the subject later.