>> I
>> now put a limit on this. You first have to prove a myth exists to
>> provide a feat. That's a Mythology roll, suitably modified.
>...
>> This has the side benefit of getting ambitious players to improve
>> their character's Mythology ability!
>...
>
>And also making HPs spent on Affinities less worthwhile.
Why? It doesn't reduce the effect on known feats. I don't know about you, but everyone in our group has seemingly been perfectly happy with the existing feats, possibly slightly Improvised. I obviously allow Initiates to Improvise the feats already listed in the rules without a roll, it only applies to creating new feats. Exactly what classes as an Improv. from a known feat, and what is a new feat is a problem - generally, if it changes more than one word of the existing feat, it's a new feat. And as everyone has a Mythology of 17 to start with, it's hardly a massive problem so long as you think up a feat that makes sense! I also allow a new roll to be attempted anytime the Mythology is improved, so it's not an all-or-nothing roll.
>You might want to consider reducing the cost of improving Affinities.
I really can't see why...
>Or does a large Mythology ability allow improvisation of a broader
>ranger of abilities, as compensation?
Exactly, you know a lot of less well known, possibly foreign, myths, local variations, etc. And you are also one hell of a lot better at HeroQuesting!
>What would happen if someone
>had Mythology 10W2? Could they improvise feats that seem mythically
>incorrect?
Well, any feats out of the ordinary (like Vinga's Mile Arrow Shot) would have a hefty Improv. Mod., maybe -10 or even -20. Truly impossible feats (like Humakt's Healing Cut) the Narrator can simply ban, or put a ridiculous Improv Mod. on, like -3W.
Wulf
Powered by hypermail