Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 4942043" data-attributes="member: 82106">@Alex319 This is a good analysis. Better than my own critique. I can see some minor advantage with point 4 to a BYOP system. On the other hand with the current system you really do have a lot of flexibility. Because powers always "do their thing" mechanically regardless of what the narrow description of the power would sensibly allow from a fluff standpoint the definition of what is appropriate needs to be mechanical. That shouldn't cause a narrative problem. "Prone" just means "can't move, grants CA, etc" so how often is it IMPOSSIBLE to come up with some rationale for a condition or other effect when you attack something? Whatever the power did, it had the given effect and only an insufficience of imagination can account for it being a "problem".So, yes, it would be easier, perhaps, to narrate where your power could produce one of a variety of effects, but that still assumes the player is willing to give up a mechanically superior option and presumes he's going to use an inferior one simply because he can't adequately narrate the better one. But what if he still uses the better one? SOME narrative has to exist and so the issue remains.Admittedly it can strain people's imaginations to explain things, but in the entire 6+ levels of the campaign I'm running currently nobody has yet been totally stumped at describing what happened when a power was used. Not every explanation was brilliant, but it still works.I think it would be excellent to have an example of how this whole BYOP should work. An idealized transcript of how it would work in play.</blockquote>

Verification