Making the Players work....

From: Tim Ellis <tim_at_...>
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 14:44:59 +0100

Tom B. suggests

> he can let the player describe the feat
> and then approve, disapprove, or modify it.

This seems to me to be the best way to work things. Don't try and define all the feats up front, wait for them to come up in play and let the players do the work. If you were expecting them to use a feat to solve a problem and they just aren't coming up with a solution at all, you can always give them an appropriate "mythology" roll to remember an appropriate myth...

Mikko counters

>You don't think that published scenarios and stories will have some
>(narrative) descriptions of feats and magic. I disagree. The already
>published stuff on the webpage seems to give some definitions on the
>feats used therein.
 

Some published material (official or fan, paper or web) will undoubtedly include some sort of descriptions of feats, either in terms of hints for handling possible player actions, or what the opposition might do. I don't this is generally a problem though, since HW Characters are not limited to certain feats, or certain numbers of feats. Just make the variant a new feat in that affinity.

>No? So that Babeester Gor PC:s with strong darkenss powers won't
>contradict the published scenarios. We'll just see about that.
 

This, I'll grant you, might be more of a problem. If a feat can be interpreted in completely opposite ways, as this one can, then it is likely that one of the definitions will be "wrong". How important it is that you are "wrong" is going to vary from person to person.

-- 
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Tim Ellis           EMail tim_at_...                      |
| Curiosity killed the cat - Why? What did it want to know?               |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Powered by hypermail