Re: Specialization, bad wording of the magic rules...

From: jorganos <joe_at_YQmsRfh3NGM-TBUrmtk05VSNbjKsVZ_9CpCg1bmJZm5L6I9WN40p5wV9zRSh4j5XFiXji3un>
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 06:42:29 -0000


LC:
>>> So why is it only the Theists don't have active magic at the 30% level?
>>> (Well, they do, but have to improvise for it?) It just seems weird to me.

>> They are the only ones who can improvise the way their magic
>> will go. A spirit can only do as its nature dictates, and a
>> spell is very specific in its target etc. conditions.

> That's interesting. I'm not sure feats are THAT much more > flexible than Spirits, to be honest.

Feats probably aren't. Affinities, though - it is quite hard to come up with things you can't improve (augment) with a mobility affinity, for instance.

Improvising a new feat out of an affinity will be hard. However, if it is rewarding and repeatable, you're on your way to become a worshipped entity...

>> IMO the "reduced penalty" is considered to be a pay-off for
>> the loss of flexibility that goes along with it. The closer
>> the use of the feat or improvised feat is to "this is what
>> god X does", the lower will be the resistance, too, regardless
>> of the amount of specialisation of the user.

> I don't know about lower the resistance. That's an interesting > interpretation but I don't think it is supported by the rules. (

Compare the resistances for Tree Leaping - if it is an ordinary tree, it is default. If it is a magical tree, it won't augment with its tall - harder, but still less hard than it would be with a mundane leaping skill.

So, if your Helamakti invokes the powers of the Sivin Event against the right kind of opposition, resistance will be minimal.            

Powered by hypermail