Re: HQ Beginner - Character Generation questions

From: Thorsten <eisigerprinz_at_...>
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 22:06:57 -0000

I'm fully aware of that.  

> No, it doesn't make sense to "spend" words or a list slot on
> something you get from the keyword, though if you want to increase
> the ability you *might* want to mention that he's a really good rider
> (or whatever), but that can be done without spending words; just use
> some of your 20 points on it.

Okay, this confirms what I was thinking. I was just a bit surprised to have read "abilities start at 17 if part of a kw" so often, because this seemed to indicate you had to "get" those abilities from somewhere explicitely. That it _may_ be better for the narrative because of style or whatever reasons to include abilities you'd get anyway from the keywords I didn't doubt.

> >2. Magic keywords and the narrative method. [...]
> Doesn't every character have some common magic, no matter if
> >it's mentioned in their narrative or not?
>
> I don't have my book with me, so I can't saw what the rulessay on the
> matter. But yes, you should mention that "Bob belongs to the "Really
> Old Faith" (where "ROF" stands in for the name of your Common
> religion). You *don't* need to say what magical abilites he gets
> from it in your narrative.

Okay. I was very certain on not having to list the abilities - after all, that's what keywords are there for. I've heard different opinions on having to mention CM now, though. So I guess it'll just be a personal decision I'll have to make.

> >3. is related to #2. I think I read somewhere in HQ that all Puma
> >People are spiritists. I don't mean the paragraph in the Homeland
> >description where it says "Your hero is probably a spiritist of ..."
> >(p. 51). How strong is that notion?
>
> All puma people are *animists*. I don't have the source material at
> hand (man I hate to be away from my library!).

Hm. Not so. I know that animism is one of the three general systems of magic. However, the rules do not say that Pumas are animists, but that they usually belong to the puma ancestors tradition, which is an animist tradition (their path/religion within animism). And from what I've gathered, following any animist tradition means you're at least a spiritist of that tradition, that being the lowest possible level of membership. I might have overlooked something here, though. I'm not sure I've grasped the magical abilities <-> religion <-> membership concept fully.

> You need to include his "rank" (Spiritst, Shaman, whatever) and the
> path/tradition he followes. So "Spiritist/Practitioner/Shaman of The
> Grand Puma" (or whatever it is they worship - did I mention I hate
> being away from my library?)
>
> If you don't include a rank, then *I* would figure the characdter is
> at the lowest level of worship.

As I mentioned above - isn't the lowest level possible that of the spiritist?
>
> >4. Concentration. Should a char who wants to concentrate their magic
> >either during gen or in the near future pick appropriate common magic
> >abilities only (i.e. charms for an animism concentration)? [...]
>
> If you want to mini-max, then yes, all those Common Magic abilities
> should be specified as whatever translates to your magic system.

I don't know what mini-max means, but it sounds like "getting the most out of the character" to me. No, that's not my intention. But I had the situation where a player said "I want to start at the lowest possible level, but my aim is to become a shaman. I'd also like to discover concentration in-game." When I told her she'd then lose all non-charm common magic, she was not so thrilled about it. However, I'm beginning to see my mistake here. I wasn't clear enough on the benefits of concentration, and that all she will lose, after all, are some +2 augments. The question really is "Is it common practice to select the 'right' type of common magic abilities during character generation or is that considered powergaming?"

>
> Note that some magical ranks (Devotee) mean that you give up common
> magic all together - so if you start the game as a devotee, don't
> even bother with Common Magic.

Alright, I didn't know/remember that. Thanks for pointing it out!

> >5. Magical abilities listed/narrated. If my narrative indicates
> >one or more magical abilities, what do I do with those? Do they
> >count among the common magic / specialized magic abilities I'll get
> >from my magic keywords? That is, if it says "is known for munching on
> >hot coals" (stolen from some discussion on here, I think), does that
> >leave the player with only 4 other common magic abilities to get due
> >to a common magic keyword included elsewhere? If it counts as an
> >extra
> >ability: Can it be used actively without concentration?
>
> It depends on where you put those abilities in the first place. if
> you put them into "Common Magic", then they follow all the rules of
> Common Magic. If you don't put it into any particular magical
> category, then it becomes a Natural Magic ability. See the "Natural
> Magic" article on the Issaries website [...]

Thanks for referring me to the natural magic article. I'd read it a year or so ago and had completely forgotten about it. However, both the article and your answer don't clarify the problem for me. You say "depends where you put those abilities". That's just the question. Where DO I put such abilities? Is there any rule governing this? Or is it "where you think it belongs"? It seems difficult for me to decide whether something is common magic, belongs to a specialized magic keyword (at least if it's not very similar to another ability in that kw), or is a natural magic ability, which seem the most powerful and thus possibly unbalancing.
Also not answered is the question whether putting such an ability under common magic means the player now has 6 CM abilities to start with, or 5 and that narrated ability is one of the 5.

[extra info on Puma]
I've read them, but thanks anyway :)

Powered by hypermail