>> My own house rule would be to allow only one augmentation per >> affinity.
> The problem with that is that affinities are then not worthwhile.
> They cost THREE times as much to increase as a simple ability.
> Allowing multiple augments is what players BUY for the vastly
> higher cost.
You still get "multiple augments" from your affinities, though -- you can augment any ability with just one other normal ability, but with *any number* of affinities. (There's normally a ceiling of three, due to the HW cult structure).
So, in my version, the Humakti could augment his Close Combat with one mundane ability (say, "Strong"), *plus* -- time permitting -- a feat from each of his three affinities. We know where he'll max out: four augmentation attempts, rolled against four separate ability ratings. Given the logarithmic nature of the HW ability ratings, this is in itself pretty generous.
In the by-the-book version ("improvise any number of feats"), there's no limit on how augmented he can become, rolling against just one affinity rating. You have to wring your hands, invent special cases, allow his opponents to become equally-but-oppositely augmented themselves, and in general screw up your game.
> Is someone using 8 augments a problem? I don't think so.
Boring as hell, though. (Just like repeating the f**ing "Arming of Orlanth" every time you leave your tula, but that's an argument for another day...)
> What matters is not the absolute rating of a character, but the
> rating of the character relative to their foes.
Quite agree. So we agree that my suggestion (which effectively caps how far the character *and his foes* can augment their ratings) has no effect on "what matters", but that it can rein in abuses.
> If your Humakt Sword can power up to W6, so can your Tarnils
> opponent.
Still boring as hell to play through.
> Let us return to the example character:
I'll bow to your superior numbercrunching abilities, while agreeing with your observation re: scaling the affinity ratings of powerful characters. I still think a potential abuse could easily be avoided, without the need to invent umpteen "special cases", wring hands, and generally implore your players to be less creative when improvising from their affinities. YMMV.
Cheers, Nick
Powered by hypermail