Jeff replies:
> > Why not just improvise a feat that allows you to use
> > multiple facets of a spirit in a fetish? Succeed in
> > the feat and you can use your > > Yinkin fetish both
> > to see in the dark *and* to give yourself a tongue
> > bath...
>
> Um, because a fetish is an animist thing and you don't
> get feats?
All the more reason, then. Animists should be able to use frantic creativity on *something*. Why not let them improvise on using a fetish spirit?
> And because, I suspect that being held in
> a fetish is highly unnatural for a spirit. It's
> cramped in there. If they gave you all the powers of
> the spirit, I think that they'd be a bit of a broken
> game-rule. Better just to pick one when you build it.
To me, that sounds like handwaving for the sake of game balance. Or do you really mean that it reflects Gloranthan reality that a bound spirit can only have a single (well defined?) effect? I don't see why a Hero who integrates an Alynx spirit should have to choose between See In Dark and Land On Feet. At some level of integration, though, he might become a were-Alynx. Maybe it's not common, maybe it takes a heroquest - but given the flexibility/stretchiness of the rest of the system, what's the problem? (Perhaps the thing to do is to choose ambiguously cool names for fetishes, then the problem gets pushed off to what the player can con the Narrator into.) Of maybe for every ability/trait after the first you also have to take an appropriate flaw. "So you want Darksense, too? That's fine, but you also get a troll's hunger."
> I'd rather not see a Mostali-Army fetish.... =)
Having said that, you just *know* they have to exist somewhere... <g> They would make a bizarre counterpoint to the exactitude in the rest of Mostal-land...
Powered by hypermail