Re: Re: Augment-only stats

From: L C <lightcastle_at_...>
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2010 16:03:37 -0500


Matthew Cole wrote:
>
>
> to aid comprehension, LC is saying:
>
> do others think "augment only" is a useful category to put abilities into
> when they are "almost always" used that way.
>

Actually, I was asking if it makes any sense to exist as a category at all.
>
>
> David is saying:
>
> "no" because no other abilities are "magic". To paraphrase him: The reason
> magic abilities are treated thus is because they have no earthly parallel
> that we can draw on and therefore cannot be subjected to a credibility
> test.
>
> so, I think David is saying "option B, Auntie LC"
>

That's the impression I had - that he was answering B. However, "therefore cannot be subjected to a credibility test" is clearly wrong.
Just sticking to Glorantha, even when there is direct magic use, there are credibility tests: can I use the Fire rune to burn the house down? (Yes) Can I use the Darkness rune to burn the house down? (No.) Credibility test, right there. "Cannot be used to create extraordinary effects" - That's information to help you make a credibility test.

So obviously magic in Glorantha has credibility tests people can judge. So would magic in any other genre. Jedi powers will require credibility tests. Earthsea magic will require credibility tests. The genre support will help Narrators determine the result of those tests.

Given that, does it make any sense to have "augment only" stats? If HQ2 is a narrative engine, where the most appropriate ability to the story at that moment is the one that is used, then I can't see what limiting an ability so that it can never be the main point of a contest is.
>
> I don't think he's directly answering your question though.
>
>
> For myself, I see no harm in a group deciding together that a certain
> ability is "augment only" but to say that this method shouldn't be
> used for
> magic.... well that's a larger discussion topic.
>

I have some difficulty finding any use for an "augment only" rule for a stat - especially in HQ2. (An "almost always augment" stat is another beast altogether.)
>
>
> On the subject of rule mods:
>
> We have experimented recently with removing the "pay a HP to covert a
> flaw"
> because we can see no sense in it. Some abilities are clearly flaws
> under a
> wide group of circumstances and clearly not under equally widely defined
> circumstances.
>
> If anyone's interested, perhaps this could become a new thread?
>

I say repost it as another thread.

LC

Powered by hypermail