Re: Questions from our first session

From: Peter Metcalfe <metcalph_at_...>
Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2001 13:48:17 +1300


Wulf Corbett:

> >Whether or not there's a listed feat that corresponds to what the
> >initiate attempts to improvise has nothing to do with the
> >improvisation penalty. The penalty is -3 regardless of whether
> >he is using the combat affinity to destroy a shield or to throw a
> >melee weapon.

>You misinterpret my comment, which was imprecise, admittedly. What I
>meant was "Your Narrator will decide if it's close enough to the sort
>of thing the deity is known to have done already, using the listed
>feats as a guide, to be a simple Improvisation, with the standard
>penalty. If not, but still a possible Feat within the Affinity, the
>Narrator may still allow it, but at a higher penalty."

If it's a possible feat within the Affinity, then it's normally allowable for the initiate at the standard penalty (-3). I don't see anything that requires a narrator to tack an additional penalty onto it other than it being a difficult task.

>Taking your own
>example, the penalty should be more than -3 to use a Combat Affinity
>to, say, repair a shield, but if a known Feat is Unbreakable Shield it
>MIGHT be allowable at about -6 or so.

Um, this is not my example. My example made reference to the Shield Destroyer in Humakt's Combat Affinity and the "Throw Melee Weapon" that bryan neff thought of (but wasn't in Humakt's listed combat feats - however "Throw Sword" might be better). For an initiate, both can be improvised at the standard penalty (-3) according to the rules. Nothing is said about whether the improvised feat has to be similar to a standard feat or not.

--Peter Metcalfe

Powered by hypermail