>I agree, it's a wicked problem. But I would also point out that
>there is a huge difference between talking Achilles down and Using
>MAGIC to calm Achilles down. (Including how pissed off Achilles
>will be when he finds out you used magic on him.) I may end up
>just nailing people with modifiers for resisting with the mundane.
This leads to a whole new question - Should magic be more effective than a mundane skill, just because it is magic, or is the effectiveness still solely the domain of the rating. In other words, should your "Calm Down 17" feat be any more likely than your "Soothing Words 17" skill in calming down Achilles "Rage 20W3", or would you need a couple of masteries in the feat before you start to stand a chance? (But the flip side of this is back to your "Leap over Trees 17" feat not being good for much above a small shrub...)
I sort of like the idea that all magic works against a resistance of 14 (because it's magic...) but that active resistance allows you to augment that resistance as normal. This would mean for the above example your "Soothing Words 17" skill is rolling agianst "Rage 20w3" but the "Calm Down 17" feat is rolling against "Base resistance 14"+ "Augment(+6) from rage 20w3"= 20 This will tend to make magic much more powerful, however, and a specific "Magic Resistance" skill much more valuable (If it would replace the 14 base) or much less useful (If it could only be used to augment).
Powered by hypermail