> >This is, in my mind, not how Augmentation works. This IS how the
> >feats would work if used stand-alone.
>
> I fail to see the difference. The topic is a Humakti who
> uses all these feats as augment. The augments from certain
> feats such as truesword stroke would seem to me to be lost
> with the sword.
The difference is in the use/purpose of the magic. With Augmentation, you only get a little bit of the 'strength/intensity/power/whatever' of the magic - in game terms, 1/10 the rating, or whatever you get from Augmentation. You don't get the full deitific efect. That's why Initiates can use Augments but not feats at full Ability, they can only get the lessened effect of an Augment. Therefore, you don't get the full results either. Just a bit better at whatever was Augmented. Your sword is stronger, sharper, bites into another sword/shield a bit deeper. You as plaayer are not rolling for the effect of the feat, so you don't GET the (full) effect of the feat. It's weaker magic, but easier to use (no opponent resistance).
I can see the case for this to be interpreted as one Augment per Affinity (it's generalised magic). I cannot, however, see a case for every successful blow from a sword Augmented by a point or two (a different, weaker Humakti than the one that started this thread, but nonetheless one with the relevant feats) by Decapitate Foe being an instant kill, nor every blow from one Augmented by Shatter Sword being the end of another blade.
Wulf
Powered by hypermail