Re: Fix Augments

From: Thom Baguley <t.s.baguley_at_...>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 15:48:38 +0100

> From: Alex Ferguson <abf_at_...>
>Nick Brooke:
>> It's not so bad when you apply the failure penalty to the augmentING
>> rather than the augmentED ability. Which is the player's free choice
>> in the rule as she's written, anyway.
>
>I don't _think_ that's the intended meaning of the rule as written
> -- but it's a very good idea, IMO. I'm sure I've seen it explicitly
>suggested as a variant/fix/house-rule. The main fuzziness is how long
>one should apply such a penalty for, since it might be argued that
>the intended duration of the augment (i.e. current contest, as a rule)
>will often be a neglible downside. (*rolls against some affinity*
>"Fireblade didn't work -- oh well." *rolls repeatedly and with
>extreme prejudice on a (or indeed The) combat skill*)

I used it for a while and it has been blaed on me (though I'm sure someone else suggested it first).

The main/only drawback is a book-keeping one as you suggest. First, remembering the penalty and second when to "expire" it.

My present fix is to only apply a penalty if the augment fails AND either the resistance criticals or the augmenter fumbles. This seems complicated, but has the advantage that rolling a 20 (or a 1 on resistance) is a salient event when people feel something bad _should_ happen.

Having said that, I'd like a fix on augments that clarifies the existing rules and deals with obvious problem of symmetrical penalties/gains.

Other wish list for HW2:

i) mysticism fixed (tick)
ii) sorcery tweaked (grimoire cost seems too high, or is that just me?) iii) animism (no major problem; more detail please)

General improvement of clarity and examples ... did I miss anthing?

Thom