There have many polarised debates where after listening to one point of view I'm swayed but then listening to the other side sways me the other way. Then I tend to go back to want I think/like. I'm swayed by the Deviadasi, Sligo and Cram ideas and comments but I think I will carry on with what 7E gives me because it gives a good game consistently - it ain't broke so I won't fix it.
For me, all rules are optional. You can call them paragons in the rulebook but I prefer warrior-wizards; you can put them in the optional section but if someone rolls up 12 or better on all 8 stats they can have a W-W. Actually, for all the settings we've done, we have precisely one W-W and that PC is not particularly special in terms of abilities - ok so he gets double armour protection and more dice for fighting and he can cast spells but he often isn't the biggest damage dealer and his CON can go to minus 10 just as easily as the next guy...
No comments:
Post a Comment