Re: Re: consistency; feats

From: Mikko Rintasaari <mikrin_at_...>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 18:48:21 +0300 (EET DST)

The big D writes:

> Mikko gave an example
>
> > Hrolf Swordthane was a famous fighting hero in his time, and I've
> > learned his "Leaping Sword" feat from one of his followers. Hrolf was
> > famous for throwing his sword at deadly accurasy, a last ditch move, but
> > one that saved his or a friends lives on occasion. But lately I've
> > started wondering... "Since the feat is called "Leaping Sword",
> > shouldn't I be able to make the enemies swords leap right out of their
> > hands!"
>
> Aha, now I understand why people want the myths of feats. In this
> example at least it gives you a great excuse for telling the player
> he's off his rocker.
>
> It's also a poorly named feat, which should probably be called Sword
> Throwing, but I concede that several published feats are similarly
> poorly named. Unfortunately, Hrolf probably did call it his Leaping
> Sword Feat, having some poetic inclination.

This is exactly my point. The Gloranthans don't call feats with names like "bladesharp (4)", they call them "Rising Fire" or "Leaping Sword", but this doesn't necessary tell us (or the gloranthans that don't know the feat) very much about them. The user of the feat still should know what he has learned, as should the GM of the game.  

> I still think a myth is overkill for most feats, which could either
> have a slight renaming or an explanatory phrase.

I'd be fine with that. With the example I was just trying to illustrate the difference between what the Gloranthan feat user knows, and what is apparent from the mere name.  

> BTW, a more plausible improvisation would be to use the feat to knock
> someone out by hitting them with the hilt of a thrown sword (which is
> not what Hrolf ever did).

Oh, but he may have. And that is exactly the sort of improvisation I like to see from my gamers. Well done. And indeed, even if 'ol Hrolf never thought of that (bloodthirsty bastard as he was), Morden's Saga shows us that the feats work best if you have some skill and experience in the thing yourself.

But still, I don't think the feat would help you make your enemies swords leap like sammon.  

> Even if all I had were the two words, and a player has only used the
> feat to throw swords, I might impose the rule about having to touch
> to make the magic work.

I still don't see why we can't have somehing like 6 - 10 words per feat. That would be enough for most to give us an actual idea of what the feat is supposed to be about.

constructively yours,

        -Adept

Powered by hypermail