Thought as much, just wanted to double check.
Knuckleheads +2?
Q - Btr, characters should have 3 Traits. Grogs should have Loyal +/-, and "warriors" should have Brave +/-. Does that mean that turb grogs only have 1 unique Trait, or are the "mandatory" ones in addition? (Brave and Loyal have limited affect on how they're played most of the time.)
How are we playing this?
I suppose you're right, but I don't think it would be harmful to give a grog an extra trait or two.
Scott
I'd suggest that if a Brave/Loyal trait is a key part of their personality (which is likely to roughly equate to having higher values) it makes more sense for it to count as "one of your three" rather than if it's largely nominal (so Theodoric, for example, having remained faithful to the covenant/order throughout the entire "inter-regnum" is noticeably loyal*).
*(I'm still wondering a little on whether he's quite as sane as all that - 15 odd years spent in a ruin on the offchance magi come back seems a little obsessive to me).
These traits seem appropriate for the brothers:
Brave/Loyal +1, as I think they have not been at N.C. long enough to have it higher.
Jovial +2, because otherwise they're not at all fun to write. I didn't like the negative implication that knuckleheads can sometimes include.
Then one would have Cautious +1, the other Direct +1. I forget which is which at present.
Those seem reasonable.
I've started a topic in the general forums about the "transformation" effects Fray would like to design in the future (here). I didn't want to thrash it too much here, and I think the general forums can help with the banter, but if this avenue of spells will be a non-starter in this game please let me know now before I get too invested.
For the sake of completeness here is the post, but perhaps put the ideas/opinions over there.
For purposes of this saga, I'm fine with whatever the consensus of the assembled eminences in the forum is. I'd be a little more hesitant if Fray were granting hinself magical powers, rather than just changing into funny-looking creatures.
Scott
cheers, ty.
The wider forum seems to have said "powers" are way beyond "normal" so I'd rather not get int that. imho a magical power would require a special virtue, or some sort of cult initiation, or whatever, etc. I'm thinking of a few specialised combat forms, and a better travel form, and all sorts of effects from gear and equipment. That alone should keep me busy.
That's the way I feel - 1 trait is a caricature, 3 traits are a character. (Altho' a grog might easily fall between the two.)
So we add Bravery and Loyalty on in addition, as extra dimensions critical to their role in the saga, but outside their core characters.
I've always understood the 2 to be separate - a librarian could be loyal but not brave, and a new grog could be brave but not loyal (or vice versa, for that matter!). The difference is standing up to danger vs. standing up for the covenant.
The brothers seem at least average brave - +0 to +1, maybe +2 (unless they don't walk their talk - which is always possible). As for Loyal, maybe, maybe not - that's a very ymmv measurement, esp for any new(ish) recruit.
Let's try to keep OOC discussions about a particular story in the thread for that story--that makes it far more easy to go back later and look at what happened.
Scott
Oh, sorry - I'm used to keeping OOC questions/comments in the OOC threads, and reserving IC threads for only IC posts, so the story isn't disrupted as you read it.
Will do.
Over the last couple of months, I've had to go through every story in order to summarize them for the chronology. That gets hard when posts are spread out among multiple groups. Even if you're just reading the stories are stories, rather than as a record, if you can't find the OOC posts, you're going to miss a lot of what's going on.
That being said, anything that applies generally to the saga can reasonably be posted in "OOC Discussion", even if it's inspired by a particular story.
Scott
I mentioned this in a reply to Sal's note about last weekend, but I'll be incommunicado from later today until after the weekend.
I might have time to log back on later tonight, but otherwise, readya then!
(Theo will push ahead as per his last plan - wait and watch, try to be "temperate" and a "clear thinker", even while being treacherous.)
ALSO, I missed that he is "Humble" - so he should have been consulting the brothers more than he's been. That is starting with the most recent post.
And back (in body if not in mind).
I hate to see any rule get nerfed when it doesn't need to be, esp here where it's "fallout" from a diff issue. One solution would be to allow VA to create larger bonuses, maybe bump "default" bonuses by 50% (once only). That could explain where some of the higher-end bonuses like Red Coral (+10 vs. demons) and Silver (+10 vs. lycanthropes) came from (which might otherwise have only had +7 or so, which is already very strong).
Of course, many of the existing bonuses might already have been "boosted" in this way as listed, and so are not available to be boosted again - which leaves the door open for SG discretion on a case by case basis.
Perhaps a cap of +5 for quick ones, and we leave the defaults alone from the core rules, with the hand waving / understanding that they might have been discovered through VA or not.
Yeah, something in that direction. (I have a hard time picturing any mage to have spent a season to gain a +1 bonus in any Shape or Material, or even anything much less than +4, yet those are quite common. I like our interpretation better.)
Another topic - are we ruling that Range:Personal spells have to penetrate that caster's own Parma? Or are we ignoring that extra source of dice-rolling? (If it matters, I'd vote for the former, but I've played both ways.)
I'm still not sure about the extra complication of having two levels of bonuses, but I'll consider it....
I think canonically range Personal spells don't need to penetrate.
Scott
By RAW, personal range spells don't have you pentrate Parma - see page 85 of the main rule book, under the "Functioning of Magic Resistance" section. I don't think there's any reason to deviate from this.
On the Shape and Materials front, I'm a bit wary that this turns into "and you get +5 to your lab total whenever you're making an enchanted item", but am struggling to come up with ways to prevent it from doing so that don't add masses amount of bookwork. I suppose there could be a complete houserule that says using a non-standard shape/material bonus costs something, but I'm not sure that's compatible with the original desire for the shapes and materials to be only examples.
Yes, most enchanted items are going to get a shape bonus or a material bonus, or both, but I think that was the original intent of the list--and the shape or material that gives a bonus isn't always the most convenient one. Plus, using them adds color, and makes enchanted items seem more appropriate to their uses.
Scott