>> If in character creation I decide I can fire lightning bolts from my
>> tips, and you opt for a pea-shooter, and we both give it the maximum 5w,
>> then my lightning bolts are only as powerful as your pea-shooter.
>Neither character should be able to win contests any more easily than
>the other, all things being equal. So one does it in a loud, flashy
>way while the other has the uncanny ability to propel peas through
>someone's helmet slits, through their eyesocket and into their brain.
>Things aren't usually equal -- I imagine the lightning bolt ability
>is far easier to improvise useful effects from.
Fair enough. Still, if we're happy to differentiate between different sorts of physical weapon / armour then I don't see any reason we should have differentiation between differet magical weapons / defenses.
From: David Cake [mailto:dave_at_...]
> But for abilities that are generally agreed as capable of
>doing lethal damage, they are all pretty much equivalent. There is
>very little difference between lightning bolts and death spells or
>flying rocks in a raw contest - they may well differ in play, though,
>as they get different modifiers in different situations.
I haven't really got a problem with making some abilities intrinsically more powerful than others (for discovery during play). Otherwise we lose a lot of the meaning of a 'potent' spell or ability.
Powered by hypermail