Yes, that feels better. Of course, given my dislike of rules, it would!
> And it becomes too mechanical for the random feel you're going for.
True.
> (And remebr, the diety might also interfere with common magic to some
> extent - just another hint that the hero is not listening).
I think I'd have RW events crop up, too, and be interpreted as deity-inspired tests. "I'm facing an underground fight in darkness *again*? Does Humakt think I have a problem with this, do I need to do more about that "hate trolls" skill? And, er, up or down?" Yes, we know, Compromise, deities can't do that. Your PC isn't all that sure.
> I think you'd be better served (as the narrator) by just
> assigning a bonus
> to actions that are useful to the diety (A Humakti in combat
> would get some
> bonus to his magic) and penalizing magic that is being used
> "contrary" to what the god wants.
Works for me.
> Of course, you'd need to discuss the potential change in status with the
> player, which means that some of the "where the heck did THAT
> come from?!?" is lost.
To some extent, yes - discussion would be vital. But once you've agreed to the general concept, it's no harder than "I have an enemy who is trying to track me down and may show up at any time".
> After all, if the Player doesn't want to play a devotee, I wouldn't
> want to force him/her to do so!
Ye gods, no!
Powered by hypermail