Re: Magical Augments - A little extreme?

From: David Cake <dave_at_...>
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 18:25:27 +0800


At 8:27 AM +0100 10/4/02, Nick Brooke scribbled:
>Peter writes:
>
>> That's true, but I think people would run out of ideas after
>> the second or third compatible feat.
>
>Both you and Roderick appear willing to leave the problem in place while
>providing oodles of handwringing to explain that it isn't *really* a
>problem, and that in your games it'd be *hugely* unlikely that anyone would
>ever augment twice off the same affinity, and that in published books
>nobody will ever be seen augmenting twice off the same affinity...
>
>Me, I'll just say: "You can't augment twice off the same affinity."

        I'm with Nick. Its a simple workable solution. If you think one augment is too much, change the number of maximum augments to something else.

        But basically, allowing large numbers of augments from the same affinity messes up game balance hugely for virtually no actual gain in game play I can see.

        I venture to suggest that it is unlikely that anyone will augment twice off the same affinity in Peters game, but I think assuming that the entire world will have such limited imagination that its no problem is naive. Never underestimate a determined powergamer.

At 10:02 AM +0100 10/4/02, Benedict Adamson wrote:
>Is someone using 8 augments a problem? I don't think so. What matters
>is not the absolute rating of a character, but the rating of the
>character relative to their foes. If your Humakt Sword can power up
>to W6, so can your Tarnils opponent.

        Sure its a problem. Do you want your characters relative worth to be measured by their ability or the time they have spent augmenting? The latter skews the game in a weird, and rather unheroic (tending to elaborate ambushes) direction.

At 10:02 AM +0100 10/4/02, Benedict Adamson wrote:
>The concern is that this character is a power gaming monster. How was
>it generated?

        Even if HW didn't explicitly encourage starting your characters at above the base level, this would still amount to 'this level of power isn't to my personal taste, and so is obviously wrong'.

At 10:02 AM +0100 10/4/02, Benedict Adamson wrote:
>For consistency with the character improvements rules, powerful
>characters should not, generally, excel in all their affinities.
>Their affinities should lag further behind their other abilities.

        And on the other hand, affinities are extremely useful abilities, and so players are likely to put more points into them. The idea is that these two tendencies will balance out.

	Cheers
		David

Powered by hypermail