> > 1) why should you know a feat one week, then promptly forget it
> > next, based on a roll of the die? To be fair, you'd have to note
> > improvised feats (not an arduous task, but more paperwork).
> I'd say you forget the improvised feat just like you lose any
> that you do not cement by spending HP.
Yes, but you can continue to improvise an uncemented ability. Would you allow improvising a feat even if the mythology roll failed? Would you allow the feat WITHOUT improvisation penalty if the mythology roll succeeded?
> I guess I was thinking purely from a rules point of view. It seems
> me that the Devotee of X and Mythology of X abilities are under-
> maybe that's just the London group's game.
No, I'd agree there.
> > > Furthermore, you could increase (or decrease) the HP cost to
> > improve
> > > an affinity depending on the number of feats the character has.
> > As above, which would it be?
> More feats/subskills = more HP cost. Upping the Affinity rating
> you more if you have more feats, so it should cost more too.
>From a rules and play balance that would be the way. But from a
narrative view, couldn't it be just as easily said that the Affinity you know best, use most, and have the greatest interest in, is easiest to improve?
Powered by hypermail