Question: I was wondering if there was a reason that the Fire boon Blazing Weapon seemed, well, measurably worse than the Frost boon Hrimmthurssar's Touch. The Frost power costs 1 Legend and 1 Willpower for the whole scene, and automatically adds additional damage dice equal to the number of Frost boons to BOTH unarmed and melee attacks. And there's an alternate use.
Indeed, there is a reason! The two boons are not intended to be identical, and their different capabilities naturally lead to different mechanical implementation.
Hrimmthurssar's Touch does have advantages over Blazing Weapon, at least in terms of dealing damage; it can be applied to both weapon and unarmed attacks as the Scion wishes, and it automatically grants damage dice equal to her Frost boons. It also has the ability to freeze water and other vulnerable substances with a touch, which is helpful when you really need to cater that divine party and just don't have time to call out for a few bags of ice.
Blazing Weapon, on the other hand, can get up to a Scion's Fire boons in dice, but may also get fewer if he happens to be catastrophically bad at the boon's Manipulation + Occult roll. It can only grant those dice to weapon attacks, not unarmed ones, and doesn't have the additional party trick that Hrimmthurssar's Touch is rocking. However, Blazing Weapon also has the ability to grant its bonuses to the Scion's allies, lighting as many weapons on fire as the Scion wishes, and further it can create weapons out of nothing if an unarmed Scion needs them, two things Hrimmthurssar's Touch can't do.
Basically, Blazing Weapon has slightly less potential for overall damage because it's more flexible than Hrimmthurssar's Touch. It uses a roll instead of a flat value because its successes can be apportioned between various different things - damage on weapons, yes, but also accuracy and defense on a new weapon that is created by it and multiple weapons that can be lit on fire at the same time. It's also higher-level than Hrimmthurssar's Touch because it has a much greater damage potential once a Scion gets to Legend 8 and can pair it with Baelfyr, making its damage aggravated (which is something the Frost purview can't duplicate, even at that higher level). It's also worth noticing (if only a minor issue) that there are only 17 boons in the Frost purview as opposed to 21 in the Fire purview, which means that Hrimmthurssar's Touch will always have a slightly lower damage cap than does Blazing Weapon.
In fact, the only things Hrimmthurssar's Touch has over Blazing Weapon are the slightly reduced cost (depending on your point of view - for some characters, Willpower's at more of a premium than others), the inability to roll low and the ability to roll Brawl instead of Melee for attacks. In every other way, Blazing Weapon's superior and furthermore can gain in power as the Scion grows in ways that Hrimmthurssar's Touch can't, so we're comfortable with the first being higher-level and more expensive than the second.
Why is Blazing Weapon a manipulation roll?
ReplyDeleteCause several attributes could really work for it. It was probably already manipulation, and manipulation was underrepresented.
DeleteThis one I don't get. The RAW version has no roll at all, which I thought was weird cause Manipulation doesn't make a lotta sense and I figured y'all might be sticking with what the rules said because you just hadn't found a better solution.
DeleteBut I don't see the connection to social manipulation. You're not *convincing* your weapon to catch fire, you're just setting it on fire. The fire and the weapon don't have a say in the matter. There's nothing social about that interaction. It's just *poof!* and fire! It kinda reminds me of way back in VtM where there were some random Necromancy powers that required Manipulation to do things like rot someone's flesh off. It seemed like the choice of "Manipulation" was based on the idea that you're "manipulating" fire in the way you "manipulate" dials on a radio, which is to say not at all the way the Manipulation Attribute works.
Why not just base the effect of Blazing Weapon of Number of Fire Boons Known (I call that Fire Rating)? It'd be less math and faster to use, reduce the theme on Fire Gods needing to be Social (many are not..) and I don't see much of a balance difference, because you cap the successes at that anyway.
So you're saying the phrase "I'm manipulating the fire" doesnt apply to this particular boon? Most of your argument here goes greatly towards the "take all attributes off boons" argument. The same thing you're saying about manipulation could be argued about all but the most direct boons. We heartily disagree. We think widening and growing the uses of attributes, and specifically spreading their use across many purviews for boons makes them better and more interesting.
DeleteMany X gods arent X is again the exact same argument that people who like using no attribute rolls on boons use, again. We find it very boring. YMMV.
To the specifics of the roll. Its capped at fire boons per target. But the fire god using it can give extra successes to extra weapons that their friends might use that would also be on fire.
I do use an Epic Purview system (no Attributes), but I'm not suggesting that here since I know you and Anne are both quite against that. It just seems *really weird* that you need to socialize your fire into behaving, like Commander Badass and his Free-Range Fire.
DeleteI don't know why, but this issue pops up with Manipulation more than any other Attribute. It isn't just y'all, either, I mentioned it happened back in VtM. I distinctly remember reading that Necromancy (Mortis?) power and saying "What? You're lying to their skin so it will fall off?"
Manipulation just means so much *outside* of it's in-game context that it's easy to say "Yeah, you're totally manipulating fire in this one, so Manipulation" but those two contexts don't line up. It'd be like rolling Strength to determine if you can shrug off a social attack with your strength of will.
How is manipulation here any different then charisma for inferno? Stamina for flash freeze? Wits for Dragons Breath? Strength for Landslide?
DeleteDisciplines had the same issues with other attributes as well, it just seems manipulation sticks out more to you for some reason.
The whole d10 system is based on Attribute + Ability rolls. Some will seem odder then others but generally you try to spread them out evenish and try not to stiff any too badly. Manipulation, Im not certain but pretty sure, gets the least love across purviews, but maybe thats only outside the two purviews that severly overuse it.
It may indeed be a bias that I notice Manipulation being used vaguely most often, but normally I can stretch my brain some kind of way to accept the others. Somehow, if you look hard, there's some kind of logic behind them. Flash Freeze, well, you need to be tough so you don't freeze yourself? Dragon's Breath needs quick thinking to aim accurately, Landslide needs a lot of raw power to toss around that earth.
DeleteInfero, I got nothing for. That's another one that really doesn't fit for me at all. It's just pure, balls-to-the-wall, elemental force. There's no connection to any Attribute. It's just 100% pure mastery of Fire. I had the same problem with Rainbow Bridge. How does being Perceptive or Dexterous or Intelligent help you teleport? The best I could come up with is that you have a visualize your destination, so Perception is helpful with that.
These kinds of questions are why I eventually switched to an Epic Purview system. But even inside the normal system of Attribute+Ability, not all powers require a roll. The difficult in Scion that wasn't present in VtM is that it didn't have Epics inflating the levels of successes involved, so it was possible for it to use Willpower as a brute-magical-force trait for powers that didn't relate to an Attribute.
I don't have a suggestion for an Attribute that fits "making fire" better than Manipulation because it isn't really an Attribute thing. It's not something humans can do *at all*, just produce fire from nothing. It's not a human ability enhanced to mythic levels, it's purely mythic and has nothing to draw from. In your system, I'd probably just try to find some way to make it an unrolled power, or use Legend somehow and rejigger the Boon to use a smaller success pool.
I know that's not how y'all roll. It's just always seemed *so weird* to see these Attributes wedged into places that feel so alien for them.
I call huge BS on landslide. You're using the same Strength of will argument you said didnt work before. Flash freeze not freeze yourself? You have frost immunity.
DeleteIm following your thought process on most of this, but the epics inflate successes doesnt seem to make any sense. And most purviews shouldnt be things humans can do raised to mythic levels. Past a few hero levels... maybe animal. There should be nothing in boons that humans can do. But attributes arent just human things...again...your argument doesnt seem to fit past: "I dont like it" "It seems weird" Which are fine arguments, but Im trying to see to what you're saying.
I'm kind arguing against myself, since I'm trying to form an argument against using Manipulation inside the framework of a system that I don't agree with in the first place. It's hard. The examples you gave of other weird Attribute uses, like Flash Freeze and Landslide, I'm saying are *less* entirely insane to me than using Socials for Fire. I still don't agree with the logic because even the vague, crazy-fun-house-mirror-glasses reasons I listed don't hold water. That's why I ended up scrapping the whole idea of tying inhuman magical force to Attributes. You're good at Fire because you're good at Fire, not because you're charming or manipulative or sexy or physically strong. There are just so, so, SO many cases of Boons in RAW (and y'all's system) having rolls that boggle my mind in the reasoning behind them.
DeleteI feel super-strongly there needs to be a direct, logical connection between what you're rolling and what you're doing. I can't get behind that when it's Random Attribute + Sometimes Understandable Ability. The Epic Purview system, despite its flaws, allows you to at least sub in Legend or a Virtue for the Ability and have the entire roll make perfect sense. Then you don't suddenly have a Fire God that gets the shaft on his Blazing Weapon uses because he's low on Manipulation and the only reason Blazing Weapon uses Manipulation is because Manipulated needed more things that used it. As a player, I'd be kinda miffed about that. As a Storyteller, I had a hard time coming up with reasons for my players as to why they couldn't use a different Attribute that made just as much sense (which was mostly no sense, like the original) in place of the one listed in the RAW. Eventually I had made so many compromises and exceptions that I threw the whole system out the window and did Epic Purviews.
You're right, most Boons shouldn't be human abilities at mythic levels. That's what Knacks are for, after all, and the Epic Attributes themselves. That's why I have such an incredibly hard time buying the connection between Boons (totally inhuman expressions of raw power) and Attributes (fundamentally human traits). What I mean by that is humans HAVE strength and stamina and wits and intelligence and charisma and sexiness. They do those things. But how do you apply those human traits to totally alien things unrelated to being good at those things? How does being more socially manipulative help you set more weapons on fire or set them on fire better? I can't explain it to myself, so I can't explain it to a player wanting to know why his Fire-heavy character sucks at his Fire boons.
The epic inflation was referring to how (sometimes) VtM avoided the issue of a roll that no Attribute fit: they could use Willpower instead. It had the same statistical equivalence of an Attribute + Ability for most games. It admittedly got a bit off when you worked with low-Generation vampires and their very high Trait ratings. There's nothing comprable in Scion. You can't trade an Epic Attribute for a Legend or Fire Rating roll without an Epic Purview system because you won't have the auto successes from the Epic to keep your rolls at the same scale. Everything has to be reduced, which then falls out of line with resists... it's a whole mess.
So you're left either with a system that divorces Epics and Purviews, or one that keeps closer to RAW and inevitably ends up with utterly nonsensical choices in what gets rolled when. Y'all go with the Attribute+Ability system, and we've talked about it before; I totally get the arguments y'all have for it. But of all the examples that I can think of off the top of my head, the shoe-horning of Social Attributes into Boons that summon fire is the *weirdest* of them because not even with crazy-fun-house-logic can I follow any kind of rational connection between the roll and the result.
Man, I hope that made sense. It did to me? I think. My spine hurts :(
It made sense to me.
DeleteOn the one hand, I can visualize charisma manifesting something like inferno, because we associate fire with passionate emotions. So I can accept someone being so forceful of personality that fire explodes into existence.
On the other hand, I have a very hard time visualizing someone being so manipulative that they say something and fire springs into existence because they were so persuasive. Maybe if they were speaking some imaginary language that formed the creation of the world?
I really think Epic Purviews are the way to go, but if you don't believe or like the idea of them, then you shouldn't be afraid for a boon to have no activation roll if the roll doesn't make sense. You can write the boon to be based off your number of Fire Boons.
See, but if you're going to have attributes in purview rolls, across purviews each attribute should be represented about equally. Some attributes shouldnt be the powerful attributes that make boons work and others dont.
DeleteYeah, it made sense. I think the break for me is, the connection doesnt need to be that amazingly rational. Its the roll cause its the roll. You try to keep it close and have it make some kind of sense, but when it comes to what things cause the shift in the world and what can form fire out of thin air....having to explain why each attribute goes where...doesnt really seem that necessary. Like anon said below, there was no fire around, and then you used your power of manipulation to coax, convince, demand the fire into being.
DeleteBut thats just arguing a system you disagree with at the core, which is a hard thing to do. Our biggest gripe is usually that...every fire/sun/earth god being AMAZING at every fire/sun/earth boon....is boring. As both an ST and a player, all my rolls for my purview being exactly the same, and knowing that anyone of my legend I faced that had my purview(or any purview) would be exactly the same as me in it in all ways...that just sounds really frustrating.
Maybe you could tie your epics and purviews into abilities?
DeleteSo if a roll calls for X + Occult, and you've only got occult 5 then you only get to use epic or purview 5 on that roll?
This would give you a good reason to care about skills, and not every god would be identical because not every god would have the same skills?
Well, thats kinda the same system thats already there, but changing the "problem" source J(and others) have with the system from attribute to ability. The same general principle is happening. The same argument that is for changing the attribute, could(should) also be made for changing the ability. And since abilities are so much much much cheaper the attributes, itd be very easy to just be maxed at any ability you're purview used.
DeleteThe nice thing is that if there's no Ability that fits, you can just use Legend or a Virtue or Willpower. That's pretty flexible. I'm pretty sure I have a detailed article explaining why I went with Epic Purviews and how/why they work on my blog.
DeleteThe "sameness" of all Sun Gods being great at all Sun Boons that bugs y'all is, for me, countered by not having to explain to a player why he's terrible at the Boon he's been waiting to buy since character creation. I had a PC who was waiting and waiting for Rainbow Bridge. When he finally got enough Legend, he was shattered to realize that his character would be absolutely terrible at using Rainbow Bridge because he had an abysmal Intelligence score. I had no reason to give him as to why being a big dumb dummy would make him terrible at teleporting when he was perfectly good at using all the other Psychopomp powers.
The sameness is also broken up by having Expectations/Fatebondings that make you better at specific types of powers than others. So Thor is better at Lightning Boons than Quetzalcoatl, but Quetzalcoatl is better at Wind Boons than Thor, because of Fatebonds (whatever you call them), not because Quetzalcoatl has better Wits and Thor has more Charisma.
I don't think abilities are quite the same, because you've got 24 thematic choices instead of just 9, and chances are a lot higher that one of them is going to fit. And even if abilities are cheaper, you might have to buy more of them depending on the purview.
DeleteAnd abilities can always use another reason for people to invest in them. You could even drop the XP discount knacks, which are more like an ooc reward than anything else.
And it would be really nice to play a fire character that was good at fire but not charismatic!
I ordinarily don't like to post without some substance - but there's a lot of flak against the Attribute + Ability system for purviews and I just wanted to say that I honestly think it's fine as is. Moreover, it IS what it is, and it's very transparent about it. If your player wanted to be good at Rainbow Bridge since character creation, and that was a central or driving theme for him, then there's no reason he couldn't have beefed up his Intelligence either then, or on the long road towards Legend 8. And if having a high Intelligence went strongly against his concept then, i guess that's too bad?
DeleteI for one am happy with the way purviews are. Sure, some boons could use a bit of work here and there to tone them up to snuff - but the idea of scrapping the current system doesn't appeal to me. If it appeals to you though, that's fine and I'm sure it works great in your games.
I just wanted to add my opinion to the crowd, since this side of the debate didn't seem to be getting much love.
I think you kind of touched on one of the core issues of this age old debate. In order to use Rainbow Bridge you've got to be smart, even if your character concept doesn't involve being smart, or that's too bad.
DeleteAnd it makes us a sad panda when we want to play a health character and know that means we have to have high stamina. And if we add fire into the mix then we have to have high charisma. And that's two of our attributes basically picked for us. :(
Where do you get the idea that having a purview such as health or fire automatically entitles you to be amazing at everything those purviews do? The concept seems so foreign to me, and quite frankly rather boring. There are lots of other boons that don't use stamina within Health, and those which do not use charisma within Fire. Take those. And when your stamina and charisma based boon rolls are so-so compared to someone who has minmaxed for it... Then deal with it - their boon rolls in areas you've specialized in within those purviews are gonna be so-so compared to you, in turn. That to me is just fundamentally more interesting and rewarding of a system than having the minmaxing done for me, and the instant gratiication handed to me on a silver platter along with everyone else equally.
DeleteI'm honestly not sure what you mean by someone being entitled to be amazing. We're talking about letting purviews give you automatic successes like epics, and then using abilities to limit the amount of successes you get from both epic attributes and purviews.
DeleteSo you could only be as good as your abilities from one boon to the next.
"And if having a high Intelligence went strongly against his concept then, i guess that's too bad?"
DeleteI switched to Purview+Ability being the key factor if you're decent at said boon in a Purview. Simply HAVING Fire or Health does not automatically make you amazing at them. If you've only got, say, Command 1, then you're only going to be able to use Fire up to an equivalent power as if you had Epic Charisma 2 in the boons that require command.
I removed Attributes deciding the crux of your boons and purviews because I felt that Abilities allowed the same specialization without forcing people into the same 3-4 pigeon holes that RAW did for each Purview. Sooner or later, the Charisma-junkie Death God Concept has been done to death. Or the Manipulative Moon God, or the Dexterousness Darkness God.
With Abilities defining everything, A Death God who has specialized in Command is amazing at controlling the dead, but say, poor in other areas. It's the same deal except the deciding factor is the ability and the Attribute doesn't come into play at all.
However, this is only possible if you disallow Cherry Picking (which I don't allow). Otherwise, it gets weird, balance-wise.
I don't disagree with how RAW's done, I simply don't like it but I don't advocate that everyone should go over to a new system.
Also, Royce, while you might be a-ok with "dealing with it", the fact that some people feel constrained by the RAW style IS a valid argument. Telling someone to deal with it because of the mechanics can strip away some of the agency one can have in roleplaying their characters. I kinda makes you look like a grump too. Everyone plays differently and what you find boring is novel and exciting for others.
I think it's a useful addition to this conversation to ask: why are you okay with abilities and not attributes? If your objection is that you don't want you character to be "forced" to take on qualities that you didn't plan for them, why are you cool with them having to max their Occult or Awareness or Larceny or whatever? Isn't that the same idea of "man, I have to spend XP on something I may or may not want if I want to be good at this" that is causing your dislike of the attribute system?
DeleteIf the difference is just that abilities are XP cheaper than attributes, that totally makes sense, but it doesn't remove the problem of characters needing to take certain stats to be effective, just moves it to a different place.
(Not that y'all don't already know, but I really love the Attributes system. The ability of a Scion to say, "I'm going to take this purview and be good at X, Y and Z because those are in my nature but not P, Q and R because they're not" makes for a more varied and interesting set of Fire gods than everyone being equally good at everything with only an average difference of 5 successes. Or, players can choose to build up those things that would make them equally awesome at ALL THE BOONS if they want; it's always a choice.)
Man, Aynie's comment dived in ahead of mine with no warning. She says smart things.
DeleteHmm, I don't think I quite get the system, Aynie - how does level of ability restrict successes for purview? I read it a few times and somewhere a connection's not being made in my brain.
"Where do you get the idea that having a purview such as health or fire automatically entitles you to be amazing at everything those purviews do? The concept seems so foreign to me"
DeleteRoyce said what I was trying to say better then I did. I dont understand the need to be better at EVERY boon in a purview.
It's not necessarily that you want to be awesome at 100% of a given Purview. Many Boons don't even have rolls at all, everyone is equally awesome at them. No one Co-Locates better than someone else, for example. There may be just one or two powers that fit your character perfectly, but their roll is, *for no good reason*, based on an Attribute that doesn't mesh with your concept. That's a hard pill to swallow as a PC and a hard choice to defend as an ST. The issue is being able to define what you want to be good at without compromising your character concept. You specifically want to be good at Rainbow Bridge, why do you need Intelligence for that?
DeleteBuying a bit of an Ability is far less of a change to your character concept than investing in an Epic (and Mundane, remember) Attribute. Attributes shape your character a lot more than Abilities, especially since Abilities are such a tiny, vestigial part of Scion's system. If you're using Abilities to define how good you are at a rolled Boon, you have a *lot* more choices and better odds of coming up with a thematically appropriate choice. You're not so great at Melee? When then that Boon about summoning a magical sword isn't gunna work so good for you. That's a lot easier to swallow as a PC and defend as an ST than the utterly bizarre relationship between not being Charismatic enough to start a giant fire. It helps shape characters in a *logical* fashion. Plus, as I mentioned, since the portion of the roll that is customizable no longer has to involve Epic Successes to inflate the roll, you can use more traits there. If none of the 24 Abilities work, what about just a Purview + Legend roll? Or a Purview + Virtue roll? Those become viable solutions, whereas a Legend + Ability roll is far more complicated to integrate due to not being balanced against a possible Attribute+Ability resist roll.
Aynie's referring to another rule that I originated in Atlanta and she's picked up: You only benefit from Ability*2 dots when rolling an Epic. Dex+Melee and your melee is 3? You only get the benefit of Epic Dex 6. Fire + Melee and your melee is 1? You only get the benefit of Epic Fire 2. The idea behind that rule is to prevent people from buying just 1 dot of an Ability and letting their huge Epic Success pools dominate entirely. No more Hacker Gods with 1 dot of Science (Computers). And an actual, important reason to invest in Abilities that are important to your concept.
Imma just link the article where I explained the Epic Purview system, though it doesn't touch on the Ability part. I may update it to do so. http://tinyurl.com/epicpurviews
I respect that there are different ways of doing things for different folks, and these are only my opinions - even if I sound like a grump :)
Delete"Hmm, I don't think I quite get the system, Aynie - how does level of ability restrict successes for purview? I read it a few times and somewhere a connection's not being made in my brain."
DeleteI think Telgar and I came around to the same idea though in different games.
A Scion who only has 1 dot in Melee, but 5 in Athletics and, say, Epic Dexterity and Strength 6 can apply all of his divine innate talent to any roll requiring an Athletics check because he's mastered that skill. He'd rival Olympic-skill athletes even without applying his epics.
However, by only having 1 dot in melee, he's barely more than a layman. He might know the basics, how not to stab yourself when you're fighting someone else, ect, but he doesn't have such a strong grasp on how weapon-to-weapon fighting works to apply all of his innate talent to that area. A Scion with the exact same level of Epics, but Melee 5 does. He's a better swordsman through training and refining his practice and so, can bring forth all his awesome through his fighting moves.
It'd be the same for, say, Water Control. A Scion who works at mastering the ability to control and create with elemental materials (AKA Craft (Nature)) would be able to bring forth all of his growing connection to Water. A Scion who doesn't have the dots in Craft (Nature) simply cannot do the intricate and amazing things that the first can, even though they're both attuned to the element.
Basically, I took the RAW rule of "If you have no Ability, then you cannot use your epic" and just expanded on it.
"I respect that there are different ways of doing things for different folks, and these are only my opinions - even if I sound like a grump :)"
Oh! No, I completely get the first part. I agree even. Different strokes for different folks. It was more of the dismissing of a character concept and telling someone to suck it up that was the grump part.
But I completely respect your opinions. Even if I found myself reaching another conclusion concerning Attributes and Purviews and all the fun mess that is Scion
"Why are you okay with abilities and not attributes".
DeleteThis is a good question! Because very few abilities influence the behavior of my character the way attributes do. I can have an Occult of 5 and it says nothing about my character at all. She could be bookish, passionate, indiana jones, or reluctantly come across it through years of exposure to the unknown. I can express it any way I want.
But if I have Epic Charisma 5 then I still have a lot of ways I can express it, but all of those ways have to involve being more charismatic. Even if it makes no sense for my character to be charismatic. My passive charisma is always going to be influencing the world around me.
Thanks, Aynie! (And Anons, and Source J, and all the peeps in the conversation.) That does make a lot more sense, although it still doesn't solve the problem of gods of the same thing basically all being exactly the same proficiency at them for me. Unless you're making Abilities really, really expensive, the investment is piddling - and, as Anonymous says right below it, players really don't care about abilities much and are fine stacking them even if they wouldn't normally, so I can't imagine many people are going to sit at one Melee if they plan to use Melee boons.
DeleteI think, Anon, that that's actually one of the major reasons that switching to abilities doesn't work for me. Abilities do matter, very much, in our games; nobody would ever be able to say "having Occult 5 says nothing about my character at all". I'm confused about why for some people abilities are somehow handwavable but attributes are not - neither are handwavable for us, and both mean and do concrete things all the time when you have them. A god with 10 Occult is vastly different from a god with their points in other things, and I have no more difficulty explaining ninety different ways my Charisma might manifest than I do explaining ninety different ways I can to have that much Occult.
But then, I really like the idea that gods simply aren't that great at some boons in their purviews. Except for those rare superstars with all the attributes their purview uses (hard to do), I think it's awesome that Hestia is good at different kinds of Fire usage than Shango, because they do and represent vastly different kinds of fire and fire-related symbolism. The ability system outlined above looks like it probably works just fine, but it's based on that baseline idea of "all fire gods should be awesome at all fire boons", and that's where we disagree. I don't think all Fire gods should be awesome at all Fire boons. I think they should be awesome at only the ones that it makes sense for them to be awesome at.
Plus, I'm a big fan of attributes that make sense for a boon - you need Charisma to be an effective battlefield commander, so it makes total sense to have Charisma be an attribute rolled for several War boons. I do get grumpy when there are boons that don't have a particularly awesome attribute choice (like this Manipulation roll that started the whole thing!), but i love the overall system.
But yeah, I don't think the boons-as-successes system doesn't work or anything, and plenty of people like it. We have conceptual differences here, not mechanical ones.
There is also some hardship for players if they cannot be good at something. This is just one example, but imagine they want to play a bookish scion with Stamina, Perception, Intelligence, and Fire.
DeleteThe player really wants to be good at Fire. They don't know the rules and picked something that sounded neat.
Out of twelve boons that have rolls, only one uses the attribute spread of the character in question. Fire's Eye.
That would definitely be frustrating, but we make a point of always encouraging players to look at the powers they're interested in ahead of time. If a player doesn't know the rules or isn't getting any help to plan ahead from us, we're not doing our job as Storytellers.
DeleteI ...kinda see what you're saying about all Fire Gods being equally good at Fire is lame. But then, aren't all Brawl-heavy Gods equally good at punching people in the face? Bear with me, here, because I'm talking about before their selection of Knacks and Relics and outside modifiers. The base character concept is "Brawler". All brawlers are going to invest heavily in the Attributes and Abilities that let them be good at that. It's what they've chosen to base their character on. So, naturally, they should all be good at it. Equally good, in fact. The diversity comes from their Relics, Knacks, Fatebindings, Virtue uses, Deeds and stunts that provide specific bonuses to different circumstances.
DeleteSo if your concept is to be a master of Fire, what's the difference? Why can't your choice of Boons, Relic bonuses, Fatebindings, Virtues, Deeds and stunts be what differentiate you from another Fire-user instead of actually being really terrible at specific parts of Fire? There's *lots* of ways to improve your abilities in Scion. You can plan out synergies that boost your effectiveness using other powers to enhance effects. You can invest specifically in one part of a Purview, like the Lightning abilities of Sky, more heavily than others. An Epic Purview system doesn't mean all Sky/Fire/Whatever Gods are exactly equal or roll exactly the same pools for everything, even if they DO max the Abilities involved.
It gets back to the rationality of the rolls. If you want to be a brawler, your concept and your character sheet mesh perfectly. You invest in Physical Attributes and Physical abilities in order to accomplish a physical task. Your character makes sense. But if you want to be a Fire Brawler, you now *also* have to invest in traits that *don't* make sense, because the rolls themselves don't make sense.
Anne, you even say that a God should be awesome at the stuff it makes sense for them to be awesome at, but since there's only 9 Attributes and a *lot* of Boons don't even connect strongly with an Attribute at all, that doesn't happen nearly as often as the situations like the ones John and I were talking about. Flash Freeze, Landslide, Blazing Weapon, Inferno, Rainbow Bridge, etc. So you end up having Gods that are shitty at stuff it makes sense for them to be great at, because the Attribute involved in that Boon is one that doesn't make sense for their character.
I still gotta side with the other folks and say that Abilities don't have *as* profound an impact on shaping your character and are a lot more flexible in how they can be portrayed. It's a lot easier to play a dummy with a lot of Occult than it is to play a dummy with a lot of Intelligence. It's easier to justify a weakling with some Fortitude than a weakling with some Epic Stamina. Especially in Scion, where Abilities are the redheaded stepchild of the system: ignored and overlooked.
For my money, there's an important distinction between Epics and purviews; they're different sets of powers with different values, which is a good things that gives more variety to the landscape. Purviews are the things that are the symbolic divine powers of gods, the things they are gods of and representatives of, while Epics are their inborn personal abilities, the powers of themselves versus the powers of the universe. So there's no problem at all for me with all bruiser gods being on a basically equal level of strength (ALL THE STRENGTH), because that makes sense. There's no disconnect between some gods being strong differently from other gods, the way there is for some gods of Water doing very different things from other gods of Water. And what small differences there are for Epics as a Scion progresses, before they reach the plateau of godliness, are ably represented by different knack specializations.
DeleteBut purviews don't follow that same pattern; gods of the same purview can have wildly different skillsets within it in a way that gods of Being Really Smart really don't. So that's the difference.
As I said, rolls that don't make sense are the bugbear of this system; there aren't a lot of boons with rolls that have an Attribute that doesn't make as much sense as we'd like, but the ones that do are a problem (sometimes we just can't find one that we love). But for my money, to preserve that incredibly awesome major difference between different Fire gods who are using powers that do make sense, it seems like a much better idea to remove the roll entirely for those boons where you can't find one that fits well and rework the boon than to move to a system that ends up flattening all gods into a sameness the way the boons-as-epics one does.
I kinda get what you're saying, but I'd rather see the specialization of Gods represented by their Boon choices instead of them having Boons that they're bad at. Of course that requires there to *be* choices and right now, in Scion's current system, that's a problem. There's usually at most two Boons per rank in a Purview, which sucks. I recently had to give up on my love of cherry-picking Boons because as awesome as it would be in an *ideal* system, in a system where the Purviews are basically just Disciplines, it muddies the waters and makes people feel abused when someone "skips ahead" and buys a power they've been working towards.
DeleteI'd love to see 3, 4 or even 6 Boons per Rank for every Purview, really opening up a lot of diversity and choice for how to represent your powers... but that seems like it'll be a long, long way off and it may not even work. It's so HARD to write God-level powers!
That one's probably another difference between our games tripping up the discussion - with the way our Fatebond system works, all gods who heavily invest in a purview are going to end up with all the boons in it eventually, just thanks to mortal belief ensuring it. So while a Scion in Hero or early Demigod can make statements with boon choices, later Demigods and Gods have to do so in different ways. That's a consideration that not every game has, though, obviously. :)
DeleteI'm totally with you, I looooove more boon options at every level. It is my favorite thing ever. I want them right now. I seriously have 80+ possible new APP boon ideas in a file that are being saved against that beautiful day that we have time to work on maybe adding some more new powers to the game.
I should probably just write them all in my spare time (ha ha, "spare time") and then leave the tome on John's desk so he has to look at them. ;)
Can you use blazing weaon and hrimthursars touch together if you have both purveiws?im just wondering if a scin could have the opposing purveiws if they eventually want to be a elemental badass god lol
ReplyDelete-omnidragon :)
Certainly. You know, you can log in with your google account if you like, or make a blogger acount for omnidragon. Then itd show up every time and you could even add some sort of omnidragon picture
Delete