Jonas Schiött:
> >Indeed yes. The playtester that spotted this one shall remain nameless
> > -- or would, except her name's in the book. ;-) (Though it was less
> >marked at the time, as there wasn't quite such a big 'step' between best
> >and rest abilities.) I'm not sure I'm much vexed by it, though.
> >Simplest measure would be to ban it outright: HP equivalency is
> BAN it??? Geez, as if aspiring HW magicians didn't have it bad enough
> already...
Well, just for the sake of simplicity, _if_ the unbalancing bothers one. Otherwise you'd need to stipulate _different_ starting values for affinities vs. ordinary abilities.
> I mean, even at 5w I'd be wary of trying for more than a +1 augmentation,
> because it has such an excellent chance of backfiring.
True. I'm not wild about the augmentation rules, myself, but that's not really particular to magic. An especial disappointment is if you want to have 'passion' type abilities. ("Hate Pernitious Black Oak Oiks.") There's just not enough bang for the buck about them. (Rules hacks for such cases welcome.) I think the difficulty the rules are being so careful to avoid is a 'generic' augmentation that one might end up doing all the time...
Cheers,
Alex.
Powered by hypermail