From: Andrew J. Weill (aweill@netcom.com)
Date: Sun 20 Feb 1994 - 21:48:49 EET
On Sun, 20 Feb 1994, Steven E Barnes wrote:
> Again, I have to disagree. This is a Good Thing. In the old system,
> if my character ever wants to increase his POW, then I have to cast
> spells in combat (or engage in the less common spirit combat). This
> means that at some point in the battle, I *have* to cast a spell at
> someone. Often, this is some useless disruption spell cast at the
> start of the battle. This is blatent check-mongering, but the old
> rules require it.
> >So, how about a POW check whenever the character crits a magic roll?
> >And should this include critting MP vs MP resistance rolls? (I say, sure.)
>
> This also encourages characters to cast spells during games, just
> on the off chance that they can get a check.
I'm completely with Steve on this one. I think the rules should be
designed to avoid silly but obvious minimaxing strategies, such as weapon
caddies and pointless spell casting for power gain. Magical actions
should feel magical, not part of the numbers game. If people don't want
the GM to have that much discretion, then they shouldn't be playing with
that GM -- who has far more awesome life or death powers than the POW roll.
Really, the GMing chapter should address this. I really have only two
primary rules of GMing: (1) Find out what my players really want out of
the campaign; and (2) set up a challenging, but fair, way for them to get
it. I like the new POW rules because it causes players to think in
long-term planning, rather than tactical choices dictated by character
sheet advancement.
--Andy Weill
0,,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:35:39 EEST