Influence Scales and Adjectives
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2019 12:09 pm
Some years ago, when we changed the support/IP system from a rolling one to a 2-week cadence with no carryover, we never went back and updated the influence scales/adjectives to make it easier to talk about influence ICly. This has been a chronic difficulty for me while playing a noble and especially as Seneschal, because I have no good IC way to talk about how much IP I have available to distribute/bargain with, etc. Nor does anyone else have a good way to communicate their own influence ICly to me.
If I have 19 free IP under score, for example, it still says 'Weak' -- IIRC because it's a personal level which compares my current number of IP against a much larger maximum, which is based on my charisma. My character would never say, "I have a weak amount of influence to direct toward your project."
We need positive adjectives that reflect an objective/common, rather than subjective/individual, scale.
For example:
0 - Nonexistent
1-10 - Modest
11-20 - Fair
21-30 - Good
31-40 - Impressive
40+ - Extraordinary
Then, when my character says, "I have a fair amount of influence to direct toward your project," the person on the other end would understand what that means and could make a reasonable decision because we're operating on the same definition of "fair".
If I have 19 free IP under score, for example, it still says 'Weak' -- IIRC because it's a personal level which compares my current number of IP against a much larger maximum, which is based on my charisma. My character would never say, "I have a weak amount of influence to direct toward your project."
We need positive adjectives that reflect an objective/common, rather than subjective/individual, scale.
For example:
0 - Nonexistent
1-10 - Modest
11-20 - Fair
21-30 - Good
31-40 - Impressive
40+ - Extraordinary
Then, when my character says, "I have a fair amount of influence to direct toward your project," the person on the other end would understand what that means and could make a reasonable decision because we're operating on the same definition of "fair".