Greg:
> I actually think that the Keywords should be
> mandatory, including
> (most of) the Personality Traits. I was shocked to
> learn that there
> are a lot of player characters who do not Fear
> Dragons, for instance.
Well in that case, since your average Dragon probably has "Terrifying" at seven or eight masteries, it probably doesn't matter. But I believe people were quoting cases of keywords that include contradictory possible personality traits?
> > I know a group that plays that keywords are simply
> broad abilities, and that
> > you can only augment once with a keyword...is that
> the intent?
>
> Yes.
Interesting. So for instance you could only pick one ability from the Warrior keyword to augment your Combat skill? (Sorry, I don't have the ability list to hand to quote examples from.) That idea certainly makes the exact list of abilities in a given keyword far less critical: since you can only use one at a time anyway, it hardly matters whether you're picking one from six or one from sixty.
> >> The question is too broad or me to wrap my head
> around.
> >> Are the AldaChur Sartarites culturally different
> enough to have their
> >> own keyword? No, not to me. They are Heortlings.
> >> The Volsaxi? To me, they are still Heortlings.
> >
> > Yes, but do they get a +2 for a Farming ability
> when they're fighting inside
> > a barn? Another bad example.
>
> Very bad example. Why would that even apply?
You really can't see it? The farmer knows what you're likely to find in a barn, even if he can't see it. So he can reach into that pile of straw, pull out the rope that he knows has to be there, and swing down to the ground floor from the hayloft. The non-farmer hadn't even realised there *was* a hayloft. Dropped your spear? Grab the pitchfork that's behind that door over there, because that's where everyone keeps pitchforks. I don't think I'd allow the full value of the ability as an augment, but I'd allow something.
Powered by hypermail