Legolas write-up to match FOTR SB

(I was off by one. The FOTR SB lists him as 23 advancements, I needed 24 to build him.) :)

Legolas Step-by-step Creation

Step 1: Concept

We all know who Legolas is. Here’s a step-by-step based on the FOTR SB.

Step 2: Primary Attributes

Attributes as listed in the book, minus racial modifiers:

Bearing: 8
Nimbleness: 12
Perception: 12
Strength: 8
Vitality: 11
Wits: 12

Step 3: Race

Elf, Sinda: Bearing +1, Nimbleness +2, Perception +2, Vitality +1

Custom Racial Package: Armed Combat: Blades +1, Ranged Combat: Bows +1, Perform: Sing +1, Insight +1, Accurate, Observe (Spot) +1

Race grants the edges Fair, Keen-eyed, and Swift Recovery

36 points of Racial Skills: Language: Quenya +4, Language: Silvan +4, Language: Sindarin +6, Language: Westron (Common) +4, Lore: History (Elves) +5, Lore: Realm (Mirkwood) +6, 7 points unused

Step 4: Order

Nimbleness, Strength, and Stamina are favoured.

Warrior; 15 picks: Armed Combat: Blades +3, Ranged Combat: Bows +3, Stealth (Sneak) +3, Survival (Forests) +3, Climb +2, Run +1

5 additional picks: +1 Stealth, +2 Armed Combat: Blades, +2 Ranged Combat: Bows

Order edge: Favoured Weapon (Longbow)

Order ability: Evasion

Takes the flaw Enemies (Orcs) (2 picks) and selects the edge Armour of Heroes and +1 Run

Step 5: Free Picks

+2 Stealth, +2 Survival, +1 Search

Step 6: Record Final Attributes and Modifiers

Final attributes and reactions are Bearing 9 (+1), Nimbleness 14 (+4), Perception 14 (+4), Strength 8(+1), Vitality 12 (+3), Wits 12 (+3), Stamina +3, Swiftness +4 Willpower +3, Wisdom +3, Defense 14, Health 13.

Step 8: Advancements (24)

+1 Stamina, +1 Swiftness
+1 Swiftness, +2 Acrobatics
+1 Swiftness, +2 Acrobatics
+1 Wisdom, +2 Acrobatics
+1 Willpower, +1 Search, +1 Insight
+1 Willpower, +1 Survival, +1 Search
+2 Acrobatics, +2 Climb, +1 Observe
+2 Climb, +2 Insight, +1 Jump
+2 Climb, +2 Jump, +1 Observe
+2 Insight, +2 Jump, +1 Observe
+2 Jump, +2 Observe, +1 Perform: Sing
+2 Observe, +2 Perform: Sing, +1 Ride (Horse)
+2 Observe, +4 Ranged Combat: Bows (2 picks), +1 Stealth
+2 Ranged Combat: Bows (1 pick), +2 Ride (Horse), +1 Run
+2 Survival, +2 Run, +1 Stealth
Swift Strike, +1 Renown
Archer
Favoured Weapon (Shortbow), +2 Run
Mighty Shot, +1 Renown
Deadly Shot, +1 Renown
Far Shot, +1 Renown
Swift Shot, +1 Renown
Courage +1, +2 Stealth
Courage +1, +1 Ride (Horse)

Which should match the final write-up as listed in the FOTR sourcebook, plus 1 advancement.

Well done! I can't compare notes right now, 'cause I don't have the FELLOWSHIP book with me, but perhaps later this evening? I looked at my rendition of Legolas (which I happen to have handy), and I gave him a few ranks in Noble and Ranger as well, so he has a total of 56 Advancements. BUT only about 45 picks were devoted to these Noble and Ranger developments, which accounts for only 9 Advancements. So at first glance, Legolas, stripped of all my house rule additions comes out to 47 Advancements, more than twice what Decipher gives him. Even if I'm overlooking a few things--several things even--I can't see how I could be 24 Advancements (120 picks) off!

But, who knows, maybe I'm missing something basic? If so, I'll issue an apology to Decipher every bit as vigorous as my criticism.

T.

Could you have done it cheaper still?

As Courage and Renown can be granted by the Narrator and do not necessarily need to have points spent on them, those characteristics might have been gained through "experience" as opposed to purchased with advancements.

I don't have my book handy, but our Narrator has been awarding us those based on achievements in the campaign, rather than making us buy them (though he does allow us to purchase them). It makes much more sense for Renown to be outside the player's influence, as well.

Good job Ineti; I'd be interested to see how the others compare as well. Not only so I can use write-ups I've missed by not have the Fellowship SB, but to see if Decipher was accurate on all/most of them. ;) :D

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Taliesin
But, who knows, maybe I'm missing something basic? If so, I'll issue an apology to Decipher every bit as vigorous as my criticism.

T.

---

Very sportsmanly of you. :cool:

...part of the problem is in the ATTs. Your write-up assumes Legolas rolled unbelievably well at character creation (3 three 12s and an 11
!). The only way to be impartial and arrive at a true benchmark is to remove the element of randomness in this process. Therefore, I start with the Pick Method as described in the book for all my NPCs, so they start on a level playing field, so to speak.

I also didn't give Legolas a "Custom Racial Package". I started him with the Sindar Elf of Mirkwood package from the Core Book. I figured I'm using Decipher's own published standard as a starting place.

This strategy will add a number of Advancements right off the bat, since the Pick method allows 50 starting ATT points, total, and Legolas has 63. That's 13 points he would have had to "pay for" using the Pick Method. Since these cost, what-- 4 picks average?-- you're looking at something like 10 extra Advancements, plus the one you found for a total of 34 Advancements. Now this is all off the top of my head, mind you (I don't have the book with me), but I think you get the idea.

As for Jason's comment about the giving away Renown and so forth, I agree with him in principle--but giving away picks that are in fact listed on the Advancements tables as having a cost further degrades the reported Advancements number as a useful benchmark. Seems like every published NPC should have to pay for everything for the purposes of establishing same.

My two cents.

T.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jason Durall
Could you have done it cheaper still?

As Courage and Renown can be granted by the Narrator and do not necessarily need to have points spent on them, those characteristics might have been gained through "experience" as opposed to purchased with advancements.

---

Absolutely. I think I figured Legolas out to 21 advancements not including the Courage and Renown points, but I added them to this write-up so that I accounted for everything listed in FOTR SB.

In retrospect, I think I made an error on some of the points allocations. Non-lore and language racial skills are supposed to be considered "non-order skills" for the purposes of advancement. I think that's more a matter of moving the picks around than anything else. I don't think it'll add any more advancements.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Taliesin
...part of the problem is in the ATTs. Your write-up assumes Legolas rolled unbelievably well at character creation

---

Not at all. My write-up assumes the writer of the FOTR SB pulled those numbers out of his head in an effort to model one of the key characters from the book. :) I wouldn't use the pick method to generate key NPCs from the novels.

Further, as Narrator, I probably wouldn't use either method of generating attributes for my NPCs. Granted, I could use either method and just add advancements as needed, but it's much easier to start the attributes exactly where I want them and add the advancements I need.

Different strokes, and YMMV. :)

Okay, guys, here you go: my take on the FELLOWSHIP sourcebook's Legolas. There's quite a difference from Ineti's version. But again, if the purpose of the Advancements number is to give a rough indication of how "powerful" an NPC is compared to other NPCs (and indeed PCs) it seems that one has to start them on a level playing field--one has to use the pick method of character creation. Otherwise, there's way too much variance in randomly rolled ATTs (which also determine starting Reactions and Health, Defense, etc.)--so much so that the Advancements are rendered useless as a meaningful benchmark. With that caveat in mind, here's my take on Legolas. I feel this is a true reflection of the ELf's overall might compared to the PCs in my campaign (also created with the Pick method, and at 8 Advancements right now). Actually, the Legolas in my campaign has a little Noble and Ranger in him as well, for a total of 56 Advancements!

Ineti, note that I didn't get to squeeze in the Dodge edge, but it looks like you may have overlooked it as well, unless I'm going blind (a real possibility; I've been looking at this too long, but I think its an important exercise). Your version also left some items from the Official Errata, which I've been including in my count all along, since I had them almost immediately after obtaining my copy of the book. Anyhoo, turns out my guesstimate this afternoon was pretty close!



Legolas Step-by-step Creation

Step 1: Concept

We all know who Legolas is. Here’s an alternate step-by-step based on the FOTR SB, with official errata.

Step 2: Primary Attributes

Distribute points using the pick method, as follows:

Bearing: 7
Nimbleness: 12
Perception: 9
Strength: 7
Vitality: 7
Wits: 8

Step 3: Race

Elf, Sinda: Bearing +1, Nimbleness +2, Perception +2, Vitality +1

Elf of Mirkwood (Sinda) Package: Armed Combat: Blades +1, Ranged Combat: Bows +1, Perform: Sing +1, Lore: History (Elves) +1, Stealth +1, Survival (Forest) +1

Race grants the edges Fair, Keen-eyed, and Swift Recovery

36 points of Racial Skills: Language: Quenya +4, Language: Silvan +4, Language: Sindarin +6, Language: Westron (Common) +4, Lore: History (Elves) +4, Lore: Realm (Mirkwood) +6, 8 points unused

Step 4: Order

Nimbleness, Strength, and Stamina are favoured.

Warrior; 15 picks: Armed Combat: Blades +3, Ranged Combat: Bows +3, Stealth (Sneak) +3, Survival (Forests) +3, Climb +2, Run +1

5 additional picks: +1 Stealth, +2 Armed Combat: Blades, +2 Ranged Combat: Bows

Order edge: Favoured Weapon (Longbow)

Order ability: Evasion

Takes the flaw Enemies (Orcs) (2 picks) and selects the edge Armour of Heroes and +1 Run

Step 5: Free Picks

+2 Stealth, +2 Survival, +1 Search

Step 6: Record Final Attributes and Modifiers

Final attributes and reactions are Bearing 8 (+1), Nimbleness 14 (+4), Perception 11 (+4), Strength 7(+1), Vitality 8 (+3), Wits 8 (+3), Stamina +1, Swiftness +3, Willpower +1, Wisdom +2, Defense 14, Health 9.

Step 8: Advancements (47)

+1 Strength, +1 Insight
+1 Bearing
+1 Perception,
+1 Perception
+1 Perception
+1 Vitality
+1 Vitality
+1 Vitality
+1 Vitality
+1 Wits
+1 Wits
+1 Wits
+1 Wits
+1 Swiftness, +1 Stamina
+1 Swiftness, +1 Stamina
+1 Swiftness, +1 Stamina
+1 Swiftness, +2 Acrobatics
+1 Willpower, +2 Acrobatics
+1 Willpower, +2 Acrobatics
+1 Willpower, +2 Acrobatics
+1 Willpower, +1 Search, +1 Insight
+1 Wisdom, +1 Search, +1 Observe (Spot) +1
+1 Wisdom, +2 Armed Combat (From the Official Errata)
+1 Health
+1 Health
+1 Health
+1 Health
+2 Climb, Accurate, +1 Observe
+2 Climb, +2 Insight, +1 Jump
+2 Climb, +2 Jump, +1 Observe
+2 Insight, +2 Jump, +1 Observe
+2 Jump, +2 Observe, +1 Perform: Sing
+2 Observe, +2 Perform: Sing, +1 Ride (Horse)
+2 Observe, +4 Ranged Combat: Bows (2 picks), 1 pick unspent
+2 Ranged Combat: Bows (1 pick), +2 Ride (Horse), +1 Run
+2 Survival, +2 Run, +1 Stealth
Swift Strike, +1 Renown
Archer
Favoured Weapon (Shortbow), +2 Run
Mighty Shot, +1 Renown
Deadly Shot, +1 Renown
Far Shot, +1 Renown
Swift Shot, +1 Renown
Courage +1, +2 Stealth
Courage +1, +1 Ride (Horse)
Mighty Shot 2, Ambidextrous (From the Official Errata)
Swift Shot 2, Two-handed Fighting (From the Official Errata)

Not accounted for above:
Dodge edge


* Thanks again to Kor (aka Ben Hur) for showing us how it's done.

Good work, Taliesin. Interesting to see how two people can come up with two versions of the character and both be right.

I had forgotten about the Dodge edge and the errata stuff.

Also, neither of us caught that neither Acrobatics nor Insight nor Perform are order skills of Warriors or Archers. All the picks with those skills need to be changed, since each +1 would cost 2 advancement picks. None of them are part of the racial languages and lores picks, which would cost 1 pick for each +1.

This was an interesting exercise, though. Thanks for the challenge. :)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ineti
Good work, Taliesin. Interesting to see how two people can come up with two versions of the character and both be right.

---

I'll agree we're both right, technically; but I hope you'll agree that the only useful way to use Advancements as a meaningful benchmark is to adopt my methodology. This is because a character with extremly high ATTs and 23 Advancements is massively more "powerful" than a character with merely average ATTs and 23 Advancements.

Quote:

---

Also, neither of us caught that neither Acrobatics nor Insight nor Perform are order skills of Warriors or Archers. All the picks with those skills need to be changed, since each +1 would cost 2 advancement picks. None of them are part of the racial languages and lores picks, which would cost 1 pick for each +1.

---

Quite right. Therefore Decipher's listing for Legolas's Advancements are off by any measure, but especially whacked if you use the pick method of character creation, which might be renamed the "level playing field" method!

Best,

T.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Taliesin
I'll agree we're both right, technically; but I hope you'll agree that the only useful way to use Advancements as a meaningful benchmark is to adopt my methodology.

---

Sorry, I don't agree with you. :D Happily the system is big enough for both of us to play the way we want to play, and every other Narrator out there to play in their way.

If you require a benchmark and want to use the pick method for every character, go for it. That's not a method I would use.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ineti
Sorry, I don't agree with you. :D Happily the system is big enough for both of us to play the way we want to play, and every other Narrator out there to play in their way.

---

Well...yeah. But I'm appealing more to objective logic than subjective opinion. I've proven how Advancements are utterly useless as a benchmark of overall "power", if one allows randomly determined ATT scores to go unaccounted for. Yet clearly they're intended to be used as such. This seems irrefutable, so I guess I don't understand the nature of your disagreement...

Quote:

---

If you require a benchmark and want to use the pick method for every character, go for it. That's not a method I would use.

---

It's not that I require a benchmark--my point is that Decipher has provided them for us but they're innaccurate and misleading at best, fatally flawed at worst.

So what method would you use? What alternative is there?

Respectfully,

T.

I would have to agree with Ineti on this one.

The fact that the character creation system allows for random rolling of characteristics, and that the GM can award points of Renown (and is even able to award edges and flaws as appropriate, based on commentary from Doug on the main boards), indicates to me that NPCs simply cannot be adequately audited.

Since the CODA system is not like GURPS or HERO or other rigid point-based systems, it doesn't really lend itself to such scrupulous accounting.

I do think that NPCs should follow the same rules as players do, as in qualifying for edges, order abilities, etc., and that their numbers should add up the same way players' do, but I have no problem with assuming that Mr. Tolkien's players were lucky with their attribute dice rolls, and that he was a more generous Narrator when it came to awarding Renown, edges, or assigning flaws.

"I've proven how Advancements are utterly useless as a benchmark of overall "power", if one allows randomly determined ATT scores to go unaccounted for."

Where is it printed in the FOTR book that the characters contained therein should be considered benchmarks? I don't see such a statement. What I see are Decipher's interpretations of the characters, with stats and advancement numbers pieced together to represent those characters from the books. IMO, a narrator or player could use the write-ups as benchmarks, or could say "That's an interesting interpretation. Here's mine," and make up their own.

Decipher may have the license to the game, but that doesn't mean their write-ups are the final word. Far from it. There have been enough people online who have complained, in some cases bitterly, over what Decipher got "wrong."

Ultimately it's all a matter of interpretation. If you feel their write-ups are flawed, do a better one and post it for people to consider. I can guarantee you that you will get a range of responses from "You got it right on" to "What have you been smoking?" :)

Sounds like we need to agree to disagree on this issue. I don't know that I have anything more to add to the discussion beyond what I've already said.

"So what method would you use? What alternative is there?"

A couple examples:

The major NPC that travels with the other PCs in my group was built from scratch. I assigned him arbitrary attributes based on the character concept and history I had in mind for him. He's a zero advancement hero, so I didn't have to mess with advancements.

The major NPC villains and other NPCs I made were either given an important stat or two, or just a number of notes on how to role-play them. I won't create stats for them until I need them. For instance, one of the NPCs is a Minas Tirith Healer. He hasn't had to do anything in game that would require a die roll, so I haven't bothered to make his stats.

I think it depends entirely on the type of adventure you are playing... take, for example, two different chronicles I have narrated or currently do narrate:

Chronicle 'A': We stick directly to the rules; everyone needs stats, everything needs dice rolls and tests. No breaking the rules at all, and nearly no inventing any. The emphasis in this game is 'winning', beating your opponents, surviving, and finishing the quest.

Chronicle 'B': We play very loose. The players make their characters only vaguely according to the normal creation rules. There are almost no tests outside of combat; and combat itself is quite loose, with lots of on-the-fly rules or just plain rules-breaking to let players do what they will (as long as it's not too wild or out of character). The emphasis here is on roleplaying (as in role, not roll) opportunities with characters, doing heroic things, solving puzzles, and travelling over the great world of Middle-earth.

Needless to say, the second chronicle is not only much more fun and is not only in the spirit of the LotR itself, but the LotR RPG. It's basically meant to be played extremely loose.

But of course, it's lots of fun to see a nicely done write-up of a character such as Legolas, done totally according to the rules; it just looks really cool!

I think it's hard for Decipher to please everyone; not only will some people play very to-the-rules and others will play loose, but some will play a both or a mixture... such as me. ;)

So... fan-made write-ups I would very much like to see done concretely according to the rules, but I definitely won't get ticked off if they aren't; I just won't the work as much.:cool:

Sorry if that was all bogus or incoherent! :D

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jason Durall
I would have to agree with Ineti on this one.

The fact that the character creation system allows for random rolling of characteristics, and that the GM can award points of Renown (and is even able to award edges and flaws as appropriate, based on commentary from Doug on the main boards), indicates to me that NPCs simply cannot be adequately audited.

Since the CODA system is not like GURPS or HERO or other rigid point-based systems, it doesn't really lend itself to such scrupulous accounting.

I do think that NPCs should follow the same rules as players do, as in qualifying for edges, order abilities, etc., and that their numbers should add up the same way players' do, but I have no problem with assuming that Mr. Tolkien's players were lucky with their attribute dice rolls, and that he was a more generous Narrator when it came to awarding Renown, edges, or assigning flaws.

---

Those are all sound arguments and your points are well taken. In fact, I agree that unless all characters are created equally (pick method) the Advancements become meaningless (or as you say, "simply cannot be adequately audited"). In fact, that's my whole thesis. If that's true, we should just ignore the Advancements, or Decipher should do away with them altogether, since they don't provide a useful benchmark. I mean, why even track or report them? I'm not trying to be difficult, I'm just posing a valid question: Why Advancements? I guess the only useful purpose they serve is you need six in class before you can qualify for an for elite order? Is that it? That's kinda lame...

I certainly don't disagree with you, and I'm not even sure Ineti and I have a disagreement; I'm just trying to discover how my own convictions might be flawed.

T.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Taliesin
If that's true, we should just ignore the Advancements, or Decipher should do away with them altogether, since they don't provide a useful benchmark. I mean, why even track or report them? I'm not trying to be difficult, I'm just posing a valid question: Why Advancements? I guess the only useful purpose they serve is you need six in class before you can qualify for an for elite order? Is that it? That's kinda lame...

I certainly don't disagree with you, and I'm not even sure Ineti and I have a disagreement; I'm just trying to discover how my own convictions might be flawed.

T.

---

In my mind, the advancements for NPCs are useful, mostly because they give a ballpark figure of how much 'experience' the character might have had - rather than needing to know exactly how he spent his points and when (for multi-class characters, the possibilities become endless).

For characters, I like the incremental advancement, rather than level-based progression. It gives a bit of a "step" and lets you control how your character develops, and isn't as rapid as straight-out levels. Other people like levels. Some people like skill-based systems. There are strengths and weaknesses to each.

I wouldn't say your convictions were flawed, either, but I think you're asking Decipher to have done something one way, when it's pretty clear they did it another.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ineti
Where is it printed in the FOTR book that the characters contained therein should be considered benchmarks?

---

What other purpose could the Advancements number possibly serve, other than to allow a character to qualify for an elite order? Why should we care that Saruman has 65 Advancements? What bearing does it have on anything?

Quote:

---

Decipher may have the license to the game, but that doesn't mean their write-ups are the final word. Far from it. There have been enough people online who have complained, in some cases bitterly, over what Decipher got "wrong."

Ultimately it's all a matter of interpretation. If you feel their write-ups are flawed, do a better one and post it for people to consider. I can guarantee you that you will get a range of responses from "You got it right on" to "What have you been smoking?" :)

---

Clearly the material Decipher publishes can be used or discarded at the whim of the Narrator. But they also represent the official version, the "reference" version if you will. People can disagree with their interpretations (my Legolas has everything theirs has plus a little Noble and a smidgeon of Ranger to boot!). But shouldn't the Advancements be a good rule of thumb of relative power of characters, regardless of the specific interpretation?

Quote:

---

Sounds like we need to agree to disagree on this issue. I don't know that I have anything more to add to the discussion beyond what I've already said.

---

Well, I'm starting to repeat myself too, but I feel like my basic question remains unanswered--and it doesn't have anything to do with the interpretations of various characters. It has everything to do with whether or not the concept of Advancements serve a useful purpose in the game system.

Quote:

---

A couple examples:

---

I'm not doing an adequate job of posing my questions, I fear. I meant: What other method do you suggest for comparing the relative "power" of characters. That's at the crux of this discussion. If you're saying relative "strength" doesn't matter to you, that's fine. But it does matter to me and lots of other folks. If it shouldn't matter, why does Decipher list Advancements at all, but if it does matter, why do they use such a flawed method for calculating them?

For my part, I'm not arguing; I'm asking legitimate questions that I'd love to hear answers to. But I'm running out of steam as well!

Best,

T.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Taliesin

Well, I'm starting to repeat myself too, but I feel like my basic question remains unanswered--and it doesn't have anything to do with the interpretations of various characters. It has everything to do with whether or not the concept of Advancements serve a useful purpose in the game system.

---

Advancements are the entire wheel upon which character development (outside roleplaying) spins. As a means of determining when a character "improves" and what happens when he does, they work just fine. As a relative "power" level indicator, it's pretty obvious you're only going to get ballpark guestimates based on the sheer variety of what you can do with advancements. It seems that you're looking for specific challenge ratings or levels in the D&D sense (not that that's a bad thing), which advancements in Decipher's game are not, and never were intended to be.

Quote:

---

What other method do you suggest for comparing the relative "power" of characters. That's at the crux of this discussion. If you're saying relative "strength" doesn't matter to you, that's fine. But it does matter to me and lots of other folks. If it shouldn't matter, why does Decipher list Advancements at all, but if it does matter, why do they use such a flawed method for calculating them?

---

I'd suggest "GM trust" is the best measuring stick to determine power levels. Even rules heavy games like D&D don't get it right (ie CRs and ELs -- look at 3.5 coming out, what's one of the big changes for monsters?), and in games like Decipher's LotR or White Wolf's Vampire or LUG's line of Trek games (or almost all games I can think of as a matter of course), guaging "power levels" is never an exact science. It's one part game system, three parts GM experience and know-how.

Quote:

---

For my part, I'm not arguing; I'm asking legitimate questions that I'd love to hear answers to. But I'm running out of steam as well!

Best,

T.

---

Hope I've added some steam! In a good way, though! ;)

Cheers,

Steve

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Steven A Cook
Advancements are the entire wheel upon which character development (outside roleplaying) spins. As a means of determining when a character "improves" and what happens when he does, they work just fine. As a relative "power" level indicator, it's pretty obvious you're only going to get ballpark guestimates based on the sheer variety of what you can do with advancements. It seems that you're looking for specific challenge ratings or levels in the D&D sense (not that that's a bad thing), which advancements in Decipher's game are not, and never were intended to be.

---

Yeah, I understand the purpose of Advancements (which Jason also reminded me of above) as a system of character development. But my question is perhaps better stated "What is the purpose of tracking a total number of Advancements, if its not a ballpark indicator of relative strength?". Why is it helpful to know that Legolas is 23 Advancements, when he can just as legitimately be shown to actually have 47 Advancements? Why even publish the number?

Quote:

---

I'd suggest "GM trust" is the best measuring stick to determine power levels. Even rules heavy games like D&D don't get it right (ie CRs and ELs -- look at 3.5 coming out, what's one of the big changes for monsters?), and in games like Decipher's LotR or White Wolf's Vampire or LUG's line of Trek games (or almost all games I can think of as a matter of course), guaging "power levels" is never an exact science. It's one part game system, three parts GM experience and know-how.

---

That's a reasonable explanation, but it would be nice to have a guidelines. I guess I come from 2o+ years of D&D and GURPS where there are levels and character points which one can use to eyeball it and make a quick judgement. And I still think its possible in this system if you force all characters to use the pick system and make them pay for each and every pick per the Advanacements table.

Otherwise, just do away with tracking Advancements althogether. "How many Advancements does Saruman have again?"

The GM smiles a wicked smile, "More than five."

Best,

T.