11-11-2015, 09:56 PM | #21 |
Join Date: Mar 2008
|
Re: A Question about the perk “Named Possession”
Either capping the energy that can go into enchanting or having a list of abilities that can be enchanted, possibly based on type of item. So an enchanter can make a sword that sharper, does more damage, doesn't break etc. but one that warns of the presence of enemies or lets you turn invisible only happens via named weapon.
|
11-11-2015, 10:04 PM | #22 | |
Join Date: Apr 2013
|
Re: A Question about the perk “Named Possession”
Quote:
|
|
11-11-2015, 10:45 PM | #23 | |
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lawrence, KS
|
Re: A Question about the perk “Named Possession”
Quote:
One of the players in my current fantasy campaign is playing a trollwife. A while back she sought out a group of elves in an area where the PCs had travelled, and asked them to use their ability to enchant wood to make her an extremebow (like a longbow, but about a foot longer) with a name graven into it. Of course, she couldn't read the name herself—trolls are racially dyslexic and rely on eidetic memory—but she could memorize it. Since then, she's put points into things like extra HP for the bow and the ability to fire two arrows per shot. (This is a world where mana-based magic doesn't exist, so the character points go to buy traits with gadget limitations, rather than energy points of enchantment. But the principle is the same.) This isn't an incredibly powerful weapon—so far—but the player is having a lot of fun customizing it. It's becoming part of her legend. And that's really what Named Possession is for.
__________________
Bill Stoddard I don't think we're in Oz any more. |
|
11-12-2015, 07:03 AM | #24 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 100 hurricane swamp
|
Re: A Question about the perk “Named Possession”
|
11-13-2015, 07:39 AM | #25 |
Join Date: Nov 2015
|
Re: A Question about the perk “Named Possession”
Wow, I did not expect this much of a response. Thank you.
So many questions, where to start? evileeyore: The creature in example one was a recurring monster of the GM’s design. I at this time I do not know where he is going with it. It shows up when we are not ready, kills some stock animals or NPC’s. We are slowly learning about it and it quirks. For that night I would call it a reoccurring speed bump. I considered it significant because a PC’s life was on the line. That’s pretty significant to us. Also you said “Your next two are also in my opinion insignificant. Those are actions, those are not deeds.” A deed is an action. Please read the definition that I posted in the main question. If got the definition wrong please let me know. Arnej; The Item used was my mages staff, with the mage staff spell placed on it. Yes it was helpful to the casting of spell. Kalzazz; I did not mention the weapon used, because the question was about interpreting this perk. tbrock1031, evileeyore; tbrrock1031, you are right on the subject about the level of weapons as named possessions. “Glamdring and Orcrist were not typical swords of Gondolin, after all.” Named possessions are a one point perk, not Glamdring and Orcrist. This perk would fit Arya Stark when she got her first sword from her brother. One thing I want to point out about this perk. On the issue of point spent and what they get for this perk. Both rule versions quite clear. The GM alone decides when and how the points are manifest. In GRUPS the player spends his XP for his character. The player can negotiate with the GM about how the XP are spent on an Allie. But Named Possession perk, its all GM. If the GM wants +2 vs. goblins, fine. If the GM wants Pink butterflies, then you need the fine a use for pink butterflies. Please continue with the wit and wisdom, I am impressed and indebted to you all for the ideas here in. |
11-13-2015, 09:52 AM | #26 | ||
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 100 hurricane swamp
|
Re: A Question about the perk “Named Possession”
Quote:
Quote:
However I should have been focusing on the word significant. Neither of those last two events sound significant to me (as I mentioned for the vampire, is this the BBEG or a walk-on Buffy staking?). Basically there are two ways to run this Perk*, Parsimoniously and Generously. Parsimoniously - Only 'truly' significant deeds count. Slaying Balrog (or even the Rock Troll, if you aren't Gandalf), overcoming the Swamp of Despair, Ousting the Evil Necromancer from his Throne of Bone, etc. Not defeating ten goblins, not crossing a flooded river (even though dangerous), not putting on your pants in the morning. In other words the things a storyteller would talk about the character doing long down the road. Generously - Every exp the PC earns the item earns. For the most part (as long as something occurred that could be considered 'significant' (plot-moving) or in the Perk's wheelhouse (Thaumaturgically)). * Okay, there is a third way: Inconsistently; that is sometimes the GM could decide "The gobbos this session were 'worthy' of earning the item points" when normally gobbos are a nuisance threat and normally the item only earns exp for seriously important deeds. Something to keep in mind... this is a Perk. It's 1 point. In my opinion it needs to remain in the realm of "worth 1 point". Now if it's paired with Signature Gear and the PC has to keep upping the SigGear to compensate for the growing Named Item? That changes things... I could even be swayed to the Generous side of the argument (depending on the setting). Last edited by evileeyore; 11-13-2015 at 09:56 AM. |
||
11-13-2015, 10:02 AM | #27 | |
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lawrence, KS
|
Re: A Question about the perk “Named Possession”
Quote:
Compare the rules I originated for qabalistic power accumulation: You get 1 energy point for 8 hours of prayer and meditation, 16 hours of studying scriptures, or 32 hours of leading a good life by the teachings of your faith—but a siingle major mitzvah gains you 25 points.
__________________
Bill Stoddard I don't think we're in Oz any more. |
|
11-13-2015, 10:07 AM | #28 | |
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lawrence, KS
|
Re: A Question about the perk “Named Possession”
Quote:
__________________
Bill Stoddard I don't think we're in Oz any more. |
|
11-13-2015, 01:39 PM | #29 | |
Join Date: Nov 2012
|
Re: A Question about the perk “Named Possession”
Quote:
I had a GM who used to do stuff like this to us irregularly. It always turned out to have some kind of use--in which case, the GM would describe the cloud of pink butterflies that appeared every time you drew the sword (or whatever the effect was), and left it up to us to discover on our own that it granted -1 to all opponents' active defences. Last edited by Tuk the Weekah; 11-13-2015 at 01:41 PM. Reason: tenses. |
|
11-13-2015, 03:35 PM | #30 |
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lawrence, KS
|
Re: A Question about the perk “Named Possession”
Yeah, but in that case, the effect is the improved attack capability. The pink butterflies are a special effect.
__________________
Bill Stoddard I don't think we're in Oz any more. |
Tags |
fantacy, named possession |
|
|