Jane:
> No, because there's a lot more to it than adding up 20
> points. The break-points from a +1 to a +2 augment and
> from +2 to +3 have to be allowed for. You don't
> increase a 13 ability to 14, you increase it to 15 and
> then stop. Check which abilities overlap between
> keywords and how high that takes them to. Work out the
> comparative value of increasing an affinity against
> increasing just one feat. If you're not concentrated,
> that's a negative, how many points do you now have to
> put into the magic to hit the next augment breakpoint?
> Are you more likely to use an ability as lead (so any
> increase is good), or as an augment only? Do we have
> to allow for the phase of the moon, and what does that
> do to break-points at different stages?
I realise this is besides the main thrust of the debate, but I thought
I'd add that it would never even occur to me to do any of that while
designing a HQ character. Granted, I've only ever really designed one
player character for my own use in a campaign (so far), but I can assure
you that I didn't do *any* of the things you list above, nor would the
possibility have ever entered my brain - I just don't think like that.
Of course, its possible that all the other players in the campaign do
think like that, which raises an interesting question about the relative
power of characters designed using apparently identical restrictions...
Not that I think a good GM can't get round such problems, but its an
interesting thought, nonetheless.
--
Trotsky
Gamer and Skeptic
------------------------------------------------------
Trotsky's RPG website: http://www.ttrotsky.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/