> Hmm... it seems to me that *he* was moving *them*, he
> was not giving them to ability to Leap themselves. If
> you see what I mean. Almost like saying the rest of
> the warband with the theoretical Vingan can stay up in
> the trees as long as she holds their hands. Or maybe
> I'm splitting hairs here?
>
That's my impression too. And I think that it does make sense to say that a Vingan could take others (with the penalties) but not simply grant someone else the ability.
My general guideline is that a Feat is something you do. So that a healing feat lets you heal someone (I can think of at least one "Heal Self..." feat that excludes healing others) while running on treetops is something you do, yourself, not to someone else.
On the case of Feats which are effectively "Augment only", like Swordhelp then I think being able to augment others is a reasonable use. In game terms a feat that can only be used to augment yourself has very little value (none to initiates) and isn't really worth listing. While that's not a killer argument in world terms it still seems likely that none of the "common" Feats are limited to augmenting the user even on that level.
Powered by hypermail