Re: Specific vs Improvised Feats

From: Steve Dempsey <eg0sum_at_...>
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 09:55:27 -0000

I thought the whole point about Feats, as opposed to Affinities is that they are realted to specific myths and heroquests. That is why, if you possess it, a Feat is more powerful than improvisation from an Affinity.

I have no problem with improvisation from an Affinity but considering Feats are gained by the Character through direct interaction with the myth, I would like to see the myths, subject to regional variations as they may be. I may not even allow improvisation from a Feat.

I see these Feats as 'easy' Heroquests. The paths are so well trodden and known by the cult that obtaining them should not be a problem for a competent hero (much in the same way as Rune Magic was obtained in RQ). If GMs could be bothered to roleplay acquistion of Feats then differences might appear, depending on the actual experience of the participant but on the whole I see each Hero as only being able to do one thing with one Feat.

I did roleplay acquistion of the Make Sacred Feat in the Rufleza madness affinity last week. It involved quite a lot of the participants own blood. Subsequent uses will have a metaphor of this, the reflection of the myth in the "real world".

Babester Gor's Affinities are Combat, Terror Bellow and Vigilance. There is nothing particular to darkness here so I wouldn't allow Snarl Darkness to use darkness, only to chase it off or reduce it etc. I see the feat as previously described by someone as BG fending off the Darkness that surrounded Ernalda.

So Snarl Darkness can be used as a simle task to keep Darkness powers at bay or an extended task to fight the powers.

Cheers,
Steve

Powered by hypermail