THE RULES
First, the rules, as they are written in HW:RiG are unclear (pages
28--35, and especially pages 34--35).
The rules clearly state that an item can be cemented for 1 HP. They clearly state that an item can be (temporarily) taken away from a character. They say little more.
FAVOURED INTERPRETATION OF THE RULES (INTERPRETATION A) The character generation example suggests that magic or other unusual items have an ability rating (e.g. The Sack of Black Winds on page 28). If items do have ability ratings, we need to know what the rating of a newly cemented item would be. Most people seemingly take this to be 12, the same as any other new ability. This the interpretation we use in our game group.
PROBLEM WITH INTERPRETATION A
Interpretation A does not scale to more powerful games. For example,
imagine all the characters were at Argrath level and decided to
embark on a long story arc to gain Arkat's Unbreakable Sword. It
would be silly for the results of their immense efforts and risks to
be an ability of 'Arkat's Unbreakable Sword 12'. This problem applies
to all new abilities, not only newly cemented items.
INTERPRETATION B:
As for interpretation A, items have ability ratings. However, instead
of the initial ability rating being 12, the rating indicates how
powerful the item really is. For example, Arkat's Unbreakable Sword
might be 10W4.
PROBLEM WITH INTERPRETATION B
The interpretation is unbalancing because the cost (1 HP) is
independent of the reward. The unbalancing is subtly present even for
feeble items (as shown in my Ken & Bob example).
COMMENT
Many posters have suggested post hoc kludges (that is, additional
rules) to try and mitigate or remove the problems I have indicated.
CONCLUSION
The official HW cementing rules are flawed. They require either post
hoc kludgy fixes (which most people seem to favour), or new cementing
rules.
Powered by hypermail