On 8/3/21 5:29 am, Timothy Collinson - timothy.collinson at port.ac.uk
(via tml list) wrote:
>
>
> Ummm, I love the analysis, but isn't that kind of the point?  NPCs
> *don't* roll on these tables really but get on and live unadventurous
> lives without Events and Survival rolls for the most part.
>
> These are for PCs who clearly have ummm, higher risk factors...  :-) 
>
> tc
>
> (Not that I'm not partial for serious NPCs in using the tables to
> generate them!)
>
> (But I wouldn't think even they were indicative of the standard
> population as a whole.)
>
Collision,

That analysis was _for_ such NPCs - no survival rolls, no event rolls,
nothing except stat gen and aging rolls. Thus, "unadventurous lives
without Events and Survival rolls".

Bringing in PC-level risk factors (such as survival rolls, events, etc)
would have (most likely) shortened the life expectancy and (definitely)
complicated the coding.

Alex