Re: Re: Digest Number 297

From: Wulf Corbett <wulfc_at_...>
Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2000 22:30:46 +0100


On Sun, 01 Oct 2000 21:21:29 -0000, " JEFFREY KYER" <jeff.kyer_at_...> wrote:

>I would point out that requiring AP expenditures forces any usage to
>being an extended contest or to be no penalty at all. My own opinion
>is that the rules are remarkably powerful and on the far side of
>playablity as there seems to be little downside, but I think others
>have (and will) comment on it...

Yes, I've been working out some more examples for myself, and I agree some limits, penalties and added difficulties are needed to prevent abuse. making it a Difficult (D+10) feat is easy, but it makes almost any illusion too difficult to make realistic, even whispers in the dark. Likewise, splitting the Rating between abilities on the Multiple Targets roll appeals, but makes complex illusions too difficult, and doesn't prevent excessive simple illusions. I can think of lots of rules-mechanic rules based on some numeric limits, but these aren't HW in style.

A simple restriction would be that every ability must be learned as a separate feat from a separate teacher, like the Trickster Rune Spells in RQ. Not a limit on USING illusions, but the Narrator could limit WHICH illusions are available. These feats could be specific (like Subdued Lighting), or general (like Tiger - allowing any ability the narrator agrees a tiger would have).

Wulf

Powered by hypermail