On only being able to use one trait of a bound spirit:
Why not just improvise a feat that allows you to use multiple facets of a spirit in a fetish? Succeed in the feat and you can use your Yinkin fetish both to see in the dark *and* to give yourself a tongue bath...
On cinematic combat:
Doyle Tavener wrote:
> Instead of your gamemaster saying, "The troll hit him in
> the 12 for 24", one is encouraged to say stuff like, "The
> troll wins 24 AP in this exchange. He winds back with
> his enormous two handed club, and smashes the nasty
> end into your helm, knocking you back, leaving you
> dazed and bloody...
That's not a fair comparison. To give an example on the other side of fair, how about this:
Instead of "The troll hit him in the 12 for 24. The club smashes into your chest, and you go down with your rib cage in tatters." a Narrator forced to use full disclosure would say: "The troll wins 24 AP in this exchange. We won't know if this was bad or not until the contest is over, at which point we'll retcon whether this blow badly injured you or just put you into a disadvantageous position as you barely got out of the way."
> I don't deny that the game is more abstract. But with
> simulationist style rules, you are encouraged to be lazy
> and lets the rules due the storytelling. With the more
> abstract rules, you _must_ use a lot more description
> or the results are boring and flat.
I plead guilty to the charge of laziness, then.
On the other hand, I don't want a system where combat takes an hour or two per round.
Powered by hypermail