>You might have to take every piece of equipment as a sidekick,
>just to account for all the abilities.... ("This is my sword, Widowmaker,
>and my shield, Block All, my bow, Shoots Far, and my arrows, Eyepiercer,
>Birdkiller, Swiftflight, um, Ted, Mary, John....")
Yes, actually, that was the idea. If the suit is indeed gilded, then it should have Gilded 10w2 as an Ability, and the player should be able to make use of that.
What, just because they're not animate, objects shouldn't get more than one Ability to enumerate them? ;-)
Where do you draw the line. Would Stormbringer be an object or a sidekick? The One Ring (I'd say comes complete with a dysfunctional relationship)? And what's the point of limiting the object anyhow? Simplicity? So people are always more complex that objects? Fetishes? Why the arbitrary placement of the limitation.
The rule I'd say is this. If there's a relationship involved in getting whatever it is to do whatever you need it to do, then use the sidekick rules. If not, then just buy the Abilities separately. Basically, relationships are leverage to get more Abilities in an encertain fashion. Hence the extra Abilities balance out.
Doesn't matter if the "object" looks like a "person" or vice versa. Game effect is what's important.
Mike
Powered by hypermail