ability use

From: Richard Develyn <Richard.Develyn_at_...>
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 09:34:37 -0000

From: Timothy Byrd [mailto:timbyrd_at_...]

re: Robespierre:

>Then how did they manage to shoot him through the jaw without him
>talking them out of it?

He obviously lost the extended contest.

>The thing that irks me about all this is that it smacks of taking away
>from the players ability to make decisions for their characters.
>could - without magic - convince a Storm Khan to have sex with a

I *like* the idea of a heroic trickster doing this.

<me> To me, the GT's pole axe attack is just a specialisation of 'Aggression',
<me> whereas Oscar's witty repartie is just a specialisation of 'Beguile'. A
<me> contest between Aggression and Beguile IMO needs no adjustment.

>Oscar had better have the knowledge of what counts as repartie to a
>troll. (I think any verbal attack skill is going to need an
>appropriate knowledge ability to back it up. If you were up against a
>six-year-old child, being a master of sarchasm and irony probably
>wouldn't do you much good because those lingustic tricks just wouldn't
>'take' on him.)

>How insulted would you be if a troll came up to you and said "Your
>skin is smooth and pink and your tusks do not jut past your lips!"?

Oh, I quite agree.

I would probably make Oscar role two Uz related lore skills with results -6/-3/0/+3 applied to his Beguiling - and if he knew nothing about Uz at all he would be at -12 (but if he was a genius he could go up to +6). He would also have to be able to speak Darktongue or it would not be possible at all.


Powered by hypermail