> There is still the issue of whether any particular improvised feat
> makes sense to the narrator and player group.
> ...
> In my opinion, the narrator (advised by the player group) should
> have veto over whether any particular attempt of improvising a
> feat
Sure, I'm not suggesting that be changed, merely that some automatic
checks and balances could be added so that the game remains fair.
> And furthermore, the narrator can and should impose a
> difficulty on some feats - what's being attempted is hard and the
> world or target gets additional resistance.
Aye, but the difficulty of the new feat (in rules, the D+ number) is
not related to the improvisation of the feat, which is the topic
under discussion.
> Placing mechanical obstacles in the way of improvisation will just
> lead to players finding mechanical ways around the problem
> (increasing their mythology or devotee ratings) or, even worse,
> discouraging creative storytelling.
Sure, but that could be said of any rules mechanic.
> There are specific uses of the mythology and devotee abilities
that,
> to be fair, have seen little use in our game so far.
> The mythology
> ability is used for rituals in general and opening the path to the
> otherworld in particular. The worship/initiate/devotee ability is
> used to see how well the user can act as their deity in
ritual/quest
> situations and also for divination.
> Again, rulesbooks not to hand so
Even with these additions, their usage still seem to be fairly
marginal to me.
Many years ago I read an article by the person who upgraded Kingmaker
for Avalon Hill. The approach taken, which I think has value, was to
look at how much work a particular rule (ability in our case) is
doing. If something wasn't working hard enough, he dropped it, or
gave it more work to do.
Mythology of X and Devotee of X are not working hard enough, IMO.
Cheers,
sjjh
Powered by hypermail