OK.
> * An initiate can improvise a known feat from an affinity at, say, an
> improvisation penalty of -5.
Well, this has become rules-y, but I forgot to switch lists. :)
p.118 makes that a -10, -5 only if concentrated.
> * An initiate may improvise a previously unknown feat from an affinity
> at a penalty of -5 plus a further penalty of up to -15 depending on
> how well they can justify it to the group (i.e. 1 min to quote or
> improvise a myth) - the better the justification, the less the penalty.
Whether or not an Initiate can do this at all is somewhat vague. The implication in the rules is that Devotee can do this on a fly, while an Initiate is limited to the Feats known to their cult. The thing is, since the game lends itself so well to just making stuff up as you go, how do you know what their particular version of the cult has as feats?
(The question is worse for Gods not yet detailed, where we know their affinities, but have not had Feats listed for them.)
> Is this any better than your approach? No, and as long as everyone in
> the group accepts one approach or another, I see little problem with
> either. The one real difference is that your approach tends towards
> the nitty gritty whereas what I suggest may allow a grand story-arc to
> progress more freely. And this is a choice that each group (narrator
> and players) has to make for itself.
Oh, absolutely. But the rulebook certainly leans towards only Devotees can make up new feats. (Using feats in a creative way,that's for the player to talk the narrator into allowing.)
LC
Powered by hypermail