Re: Initiates [was part of Re: Make up new Gods, dang it!]

From: Andrew Dawson <asmpd01_at_XFRxO89zb-JUGgQpyzaO3itMXHR-xBkDx0gr8UMukXeu0ajGVAabYryVMFg-GFnilNhw>
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 14:52:26 +0800


I enjoy reading your posts and your analyses, but I think we are talking across each other. My side of the discussion comes from my desire to play an enjoyable game with my players, and perhaps I am incorrect in assuming that there are other playing groups who can sympathize with my situation. For example:


> Except I don't see it as marginalising devotees. If a player selects
> a devotee they are saying that they want or expect their story to be
> mainly about that type of activity. Could be a problem if you get
> players selecting incompatable gods to devote to.

Sometimes they are communicating that since it's a magical world, they want to play the kind of theist who can use non-penalized, active, independently improvable magic - a guy with magical abilities that are more than additive augmentation for non-magical abilities. This is why "initiates" in my current game (i.e., those PCs that can also have magic from sources external to their primary deity) have access to feats in the same way that devotees do in HQ. (I have given devotees other abilities beyond those of initiates.)

As it turns out, there have been issues arising from conflicts between the desires of the player and the limitations of the deity in my current game, and even a PC who doesn't use magic, but those are in-game issues, not rules requirements.

Thanks,
Andy            

Powered by hypermail