Quote:
Originally Posted by evileeyore
Ahem:
"You are free to suggest serendipitous occurrences to the GM, but he gets the final say."
|
Exactly my point. Serendipity is not under the control of the player the way Luck, for example, is. Accordingly to use it as the basis of this ability won't necessarily deliver what the OP is seeking.
Quote:
|
Also, I'd bet that most us GMs that are 'ruling' that Serendipity is Player 'controlled' are simply off-loading the task of paying attention to the Player's Advantages completely to the Player to reduce GM overhead. That is rather my reasoning behind being fine with the Player pretty much always suggesting when Serendipity gets used.
|
Of course you can play it whatever way you like at your table, but I think this discussion is about a generic case.
Quote:
|
They paid for it, they get to use it.
|
I don't think that is universal or determinative. Characters pay for Allies too, but the GM builds and controls them.
Quote:
|
Sure there is [a Limitation value]. ... Basically, with the Limitation while the PC is getting a 'lucky break', there will always be a problem with this serendipitous occasion.
|
It appears to me that there is an insurmountable problem of defining the borders of the Serendipitous occasion. Other than by 'feel', how do you posit what 'normal' Serendipity would provide in a given case and then how do you figure out what -20% worth of problems would be to apply?