| From: | John E Pederson <lobo1@****.COM> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [SR3] Conjuring |
| Date: | Tue, 29 Jul 1997 20:27:59 EDT |
<KGGEWEHR@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU> writes:
<snip>
<<Sorry. At least I'm consistent! ;)>>
That's one word for it:)
<<Seriously, though, adding ways to get more dice for Conjuring can
unbalance characters (I recall an experiment where I allowed a certain
Cat shaman to forego the limit of a single spirit of a given type at a
time... bad idea). Anyway, if you really like this approach you've
described, I say just watch how many dice are possible, because one of
the things that makes Sorcery powerful is the number of supplemental dice
you can get to pump into a spell. Without that Sorcery would not
outshine Conjuring the way it does, nor make people cringe the way it
does. Characters will get more successes and be able to call up bigger
spirits/get more services, and that does a lot to game balance imo.>>
Actually, I agree, I just couldn't find another way to keep both Charisma
and Conjuring Skill involved and still have it make sense to me. Also, as
I've set it up, a character could compensate a low Charisma with a high
Conjuring skill, and vice versa. And, without Conjuring, there's no pool.
One idea might be increasing the number of successes needed to get
services, but that screws up the simplicity a bit by introducing a
non-standard staging. <sigh>
<<And remember, I'm the one recommended some time back killing Magic
Pool>>
<G> How could I forget?
<<(as it's written now) and using straight Sorcery to give spells force
and to supplement Willpower in resisting Drain. That would basically
pull Sorcery down to where Conjuring is now (kinda the opposite of your
approach here). *shrug* Try out your way, but maybe do a few dry-runs
with some fake char's (or the stats of some existing char's) and see how
much it changes them...>>
That's something I'll have to do whatever happens, I just haven't gotten
it done yet.
--
-Canthros
I had rather believe all the fables in the legends and the Talmud
and the Alcoran, than that this universal frame is without a mind.
--Francis Bacon
http://members.aol.com/canthros1
