Purplefixer wrote: ↑
Mon Sep 25, 2017 11:56 am
Legend Point Awards:
According to encounter design we take into account the average circle of the party to determine where our critters should fall. We do the same with the defenses, the wound threshold, and the health.
To clarify (because a lot of people assume this), it's not generally intended that you award Legend Points based on the Circle listed in the creature statistics. That is, just because a creature is marked as a "Third Circle" challenge, it isn't worth 200-500 Legend, regardless of the player character Circle.
Rather, the challenge rating listed for a creature is used as a rough ballpark for the equivalent Circle value, mainly based on the modifiers to its base attribute steps -- so a "Third Circle" creature might have an attack step that is +3 to its Dexterity. (Again, this isn't 100% across the board, but a rough approximation.)
So the Circle value given for a creature is merely a starting point, and the more detailed analysis (comparing defenses, etc) is used to double check and see if a particular creature might be easier/harder for your group based on their composition and talent selections. Balancing encounters is as much art as science (if not more), and rather than say "X creature is worth Y Legend" (like they originally did), it's shifted to "for each session, the group should earn between A and B Legend for overcoming challenges. To help, here's a rough guide on how to determine how much of a challenge a combat encounter might be."
It's a campaign pacing mechanic, not a simulationist point system.
Why do we use individual circles for legend point awards? This means that characters who Multi-Discipline and Humans instantly begin to get less legend points because they didn't circle up the same game everyone else did. Further, since their LP awards are less, they slow down further and further as the game progresses. If one character is hurrying to C6 the others could rapidly be gaining a minimal fraction of what that character earns on each adventure.
Award everybody the same Legend, based on the highest group Circle. That's what I've always done (aside from the occasional bonus for roleplaying/heroics, which over the course of a campaign, tends to balance out). If two characters experience the same events, one shouldn't get fewer Legend simply because he's only Circle 2 while his buddy is Circle 3. That's... kind of obviously unfair?
What this means is that somebody who decides to branch out into a second Discipline, or invest into skills or Versatility talents, ends up with more tools, but those tools are a little bit less powerful. It shouldn't hamper their "earning" potential when it comes to Legend Points.
Edit to add:
Undying brings up a good point with regard to a Westmarch-style game. I don't really have a good answer to the its particular challenges (yet). It's a style I have virtually no experience with, and would need to think about it.