04-03-2011, 02:40 PM | #1 |
Join Date: Nov 2006
|
Limitation Question
I'm working up magic items as gadgets (for pricing purposes). I'm trying to figure out if there should be a limitation added to items that have to be attuned before they are used. I am already halving the limitation for Can Be Stolen naturally, but I'm figuring that attunement rules would be an Accessability limitation of some sort.
For mages it will simply be hold the item and spend FP (one or more) to attune it to your aura. For non-mages I'm thinking some sort of ritual: like sleep with it under your pillow wrapped in a silk cloth for a night (or more complicated for more powerful items). I'm thinking -10% accessability for most things, -20% for really complicated attument rituals, and for the mage atunement a -1% per FP cost (basically a -70% limitation on Costs Fatigue). Does anyone see any serious flaws in these numbers? |
04-03-2011, 02:45 PM | #2 |
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Oregon
|
Re: Limitation Question
Question: Are you requiring characters to buy enchanted items as gadgets (even ones they find while adventuring)? Or are you just using cp values to balance items against each other, and determine a fair $ cost?
If characters already have to spend points on an item, that's basically attuning to it. In fact, I'm not sure how you'd even have a gadget *without* the need to attune to it. The attunement process can be whatever you'd like, but it wouldn't be worth any extra points. If the characters don't have to spend points on gadgets, and you're just treating it like equipment, then sure - attunement as an Accessibility limitation makes sense. |
04-03-2011, 02:58 PM | #3 | |
Join Date: Nov 2006
|
Re: Limitation Question
Quote:
What do you think of the values I was thinking of applying to it? Mages could use the non-mage method if they wanted to not incure a Threshhold debt (as most mages in my world get their energy that way) but they also have the option of the quick method which is why I figured that the non-FP way doesn't get a reduction in its value like the FP one does. |
|
04-03-2011, 03:36 PM | #4 | |
Join Date: Jun 2006
|
Re: Limitation Question
Quote:
Why do you think it's a limitation at all? That is, in what way are you worse off having a gadget with this property than without it? As far as I can see the only time is could ever make a difference is the day you acquired it - a drawback that wears off after one day isn't a serious limitation.
__________________
-- MA Lloyd |
|
04-03-2011, 03:42 PM | #5 | |
Join Date: Nov 2006
|
Re: Limitation Question
Quote:
|
|
04-03-2011, 04:34 PM | #6 |
Join Date: Dec 2007
|
Re: Limitation Question
|
04-03-2011, 05:18 PM | #7 |
Join Date: Nov 2006
|
Re: Limitation Question
|
Tags |
limitations, q&a |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|