People seem to be falling into a range of opinion about this topic. I do like the fact you can improvise feats differently as often as possible (guided by your affinities).
This is better than the painful old days of RQ where I use my one and only point of Rune Magic in the first encounter for a fun or life-saving reason and then have to wait several sessions before I can get another. Then I have to watch all the amusing things I could do slip away because my GMs are allergic to Rune Levels <sigh> (probably because the RQ rules tend to break down, but I have never had a chance to find out <double sigh>).
For those who want definitions why not have your own general definition that all the plodding NPC's tend to use (e.g. NPC's only know ?Hralf's? Leaping Sword feat as a throw sword ability). However the key thing is the players are the HERO's around which the Hero Wars will centre. So they can think outside the envelope and thus can get away with coming up with new (even opposite sometimes) interpretations (e.g. PC has a flash of inspiration on the battlefield and uses Leaping Sword to make his opponent's swords leap from their scabbards, with an improvisational modifier). If you look at Argrath he certainly does this with his magic regiments.
Major NPC's can also do the same, so you don't get your players going "Aha, a Babeester Gor enemy can't possibly use Darkness powers to her advantage, it says so in the rulebook/houserules". It helps keep the PCs on their toes.
Of course I am not suggesting that the published supplements cut background to put in these definitions. If a GM really wants to "dot every i and cross every t" that is there choice and their job.
Just a thought,
Andrew
PS I don't have problems with arrow fights either, now I just have to persuade my simulationist GM to use Simple Contests and get on with the interesting roleplaying bits.
This message was sent through MyMail http://www.mymail.com.au
Powered by hypermail