ParanetOnline
The Dresden Files => DFRPG => Topic started by: FishStampede on October 12, 2012, 12:53:22 PM
-
One of my players is playing a pure mortal. He has expressed interest in getting a weapon like a Warden Sword. He's a (distant) descendant of Martha Liberty and is related to the Warden living in Atlanta, GA, so it's not entirely outside the realm of possibility (if vanishingly unlikely). It would certainly tie in more to his background as the muggle of a wizard family and give him some nice new tricks.
How would you handle a mortal getting enchanted items? I'm less concerned with the potential implications of a mortal with such a rare weapon (those implications are just better story fodder) than I am with potential balance. Given that they're not really making the item, perhaps a stunt to give a mortal access to "slots" that they then spend on that single item?
Stunt proposal:
Lore
Well Equipped: You may or may not be supernatural, but either way you have access to magical gear. Who makes it for you? This gives you two enchanted item slots. You can swap these out any time you could change enchanted items, but justifying the change may be a bit harder if you don't have any magic yourself. The strength of these items is still set by your Lore.
-
Maybe he has a Wardens sword but it doesn't mean he can use a Wardens sword.
I'd just make it a high quality sword so that'd it do a bit more damage. It has all these powers locked up in it but he doesn't have the power to access them. Maybe give the sword an aspect (like "Wardens Sword") that he can tag in certain situations, like overcoming magical blocks or something. If he ever chooses to take Evocation, then he'd gain access to the powers of the sword(and lose his Pure Mortal refresh bonus).
-
Really don't think it's something a pure mortal could use, here's something from the custom power list that does the same thing:
BAG OF TRICKS [-1]
Description: For whatever reason, you have access to a few minor magical trinkets.
Skills affected: Contacts, Resources, Burglary, Lore.
Effects:
Enchanted Items: You have four potions, each with a strength equal to your Contacts, Resources, Burglary, or Lore skill. You may not increase their strength in any way. At the beginning of each session, you must declare which potions you have on hand.
More Trinkets [-1]. You have four additional potions. Furthermore, you may choose to leave potion slots open to be filled later with Declarations.
-
If you're going strictly by the RAW it's pretty easy, the player would lose the +2 refresh bonus from being Pure Mortal. Fairly certain YS even goes out of it's way to specify even powers gained by an IoP count against the Pure Mortal template.
-
A quick note on the setting:
A Warden Sword is forged for a specific warden and only that warden can use that sword. Should that warden change to the point that he no longer the same person who was given the sword then he cannot use it. In theory if someone became a mental and spiritual duplicate of a warden then that someone could use his sword - but that is incredibly unlikely (and only referenced in a Q&A session with Jim Butcher). Virtually all Warden Swords in existence were made by the same person and when she switched bodies she lost the ability to make new ones.
That said, if you want to leave setting and allow inherited swords, I'd go with the Item of Power for them because, well, as written Warden Swords more or less break the rules. Allowing others to use them just makes that break that much bigger.
Richard
-
All very good points. I think I'm going to have to say no to a "warden sword," unfortunately. It just breaks setting and established rules far too much. I really do hate saying no to players, especially when they have an interesting idea that fits their character.
However, I'd like to keep my stunt on the table for him. The character has, if not actual magical talent, at the very least magical awareness manifesting primarily as a "spooky sense," so it would make sense if he had some ability to use enchanted items. I think it should be possible to take them without giving up the mortal bonus, provided you spend other character sheet resources.
As is, is the stunt up there balanced? It's not an Item of Power, it's significantly weaker than Ritual or even Bag of Tricks (giving only two slots instead of four), but does gain the inherent flexibility of Stunts and could allow a mortal to get a couple enchanted items. I'd veto the Warden Sword, but would probably allow a stripped-down "Deputy Sword" or something.
-
A quick note on the setting:
A Warden Sword is forged for a specific warden and only that warden can use that sword. Should that warden change to the point that he no longer the same person who was given the sword then he cannot use it. In theory if someone became a mental and spiritual duplicate of a warden then that someone could use his sword - but that is incredibly unlikely (and only referenced in a Q&A session with Jim Butcher). Virtually all Warden Swords in existence were made by the same person and when she switched bodies she lost the ability to make new ones.
That said, if you want to leave setting and allow inherited swords, I'd go with the Item of Power for them because, well, as written Warden Swords more or less break the rules. Allowing others to use them just makes that break that much bigger.
Richard
The point I as trying to make in my last post was let the Pure Mortal have a Wardens Sword; It's still going to act like a normal sword if they swing it around. They won't get any abilities from it, although it might be of incredibly high craftsmanship, which would warrant an extra point of damage for a sword of that size.
If they take any powers after (and if, as Richard pointed out, your game includes being able to use an inherited sword), then let them get powers from it.
EDIT: You posted while I was typing. I wouldn't VETO the wardens sword. IT makes for a good story. Even if he takes some powesr later that allow for an item of that type, you can flavour it as Recrafting the sword, or re-attuning it. Inherited weapons are cool.
-
I wouldn't veto it all together either. You can make some one off narratve excuse, you could start it out as just a really nice sword he inherited but he can use any of the magical powers tied to it right away. Later on in the campaign maybe give him the choice to gain the full benefits of a warden sword by giving up his mortal refresh bonus. This leaves for a lot of good narrative hooks as to how it happens.
-
I have to agree with the others about the sword. It's just too good of a hook to say no. Give him a nice sword and let it develop as he does.
As for the stunt, there are a few different things I would note. Firstly it's a bit weird that it works off of the character's lore when someone else is making it. I'd look to bag of tricks for the solution to that (and allow the thematics to guide the mechanics).
Secondly a stunt is usually only capable of providing two shifts of effect. This stunt could easily provide 8 or 10 shifts of effect (albeit in a bit more limited sense). To me that seems too powerful for a stunt. Heck it's more powerful than some equivalent powers (aquatic for example).
Lastly, you seem to be looking at refresh from only the mechanical side. When we have talked to Fred about refresh he talks about it from two sides. There is the mechanical side (mortals get a bonus because they don't get powers, characters with equivalent refresh should be equivalent, etc), but then there's the thematic side. Refresh is free will. Characters with less refresh have less choice in how they act. And by extension characters with more power have less choice. This character has more power. He is capable of powering enchanted items. From that side this character should not be eligible for the mortal bonus.
-
Bag Of Tricks wouldn't quite work, actually. It's limited to potions. And it doesn't give you the ability to make multi-slot items.
The proposed stunt, unfortunately, is probably too good. Stunts shouldn't be that open-ended, generally. You can fix this by giving it a more rigorous, nailed-down write-up.
My personal recommendation would be to limit the stunt to one specific (non-optimized) item or pair of items. And don't allow any of the clever shenanigans that real Crafters can do.
There's still some versatility there since you can swap out stunts at milestones. But that change should make shenanigans much harder.
Previous discussion, with links to other previous discussions: http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,32561.0.html (http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,32561.0.html)
-
Frankly, i'd tell him
"NO"
Or he can take it and give up being a pure mortal and also have to take a Stunt that lets him use some of the swords powers.
-
I say give it to him if it'll make for a good story.
He's essentially paying 1 point in refinement for the enchanted item slots, so it's not unbalancing. He should lose the pure mortal bonus though, I agree with that.
A "latent Magic bloodline" or some such aspect can cover how he uses it, even if it stretches canon a bit. Maybe he gets drained if he uses the power too often, since his gift isn't strong or developed. And Luccio hasn't been in her new body that long, so an aspect of "I saved the warden commander's life" could cover how he got it.
-
I won't give your player a warden sword per se, but Luccio had to get the idea somewhere. Maybe the PC's great grandfather had an ealier crazy prototype that was slated for destruction centuries ago.
-
I would give it to him as well. Like has been said before it can act as a normal sword. When it becomes an IoP then he would have to lose the mortal refresh. I dont particularly thing that he would have to take any magical abilities besides the IoP, as long as he has an aspect relating to his posesion of the sword. That may change when it becomes active as well for instance:
"Great grandfathers Sword"
"Great Grandfathers Active Warden Sword"
In the game that my GM is running we are using warden swords and we had a character obtain one from a warden. So I feel like you can do what you want in the details, remember it is your story, not Jim's
-
I admit I am just "over" swords
Swords are silly weapons.
Magic Swords are sillier.
Let him do it, but make him pay for it.
Also, like anything, he can take it, but its going to cause him Trouble. So much trouble
-
I admit I am just "over" swords
Swords are silly weapons.
Magic Swords are sillier.
Even a +5 magic sword of Ogre-decapitation?
-
Even a +5 magic sword of Ogre-decapitation?
If you said a +5 Magic Bear Trap of Ogre-Decapitation
I'd be with you.
-
Swords do get done quite a lot, but after all they're the iconic weapon of nobility and heroism as well as battle, so it makes sense.
A set of Warden Swordchucks would be pretty cool, and are actually a possibility. Luccio obviously custom crafted each blade to fit the style (combat and otherwise) and personality of each wielder so in some rare cases (because a sword is also iconic of the wardens) she may have made exceptions to the sword motif.
-
Swords do get done quite a lot, but after all they're the iconic weapon of nobility and heroism as well as battle, so it makes sense.
True, but do you need it to be a magical sword?
Mega-gaming here but unless the campaign was magic heavy I won't get my pure mortal character a warden sword. First you lose the dice for being a pure mortal, then you pay for the cost of the sword. Better to just get a deactived warden sword (zero cost), and pay for a stunt or two that ups your Threats/Intimidation. Then just run around and threaten magical folks like you do have a fully magical warden sword.
Cheaper for sure...
-
Better to just get a deactived warden sword (zero cost), and pay for a stunt or two that ups your Threats/Intimidation. Then just run around and threaten magical folks like you do have a fully magical warden sword.
Or. Just get a regular sword and have the guy take really high deception equivalent skills so that he can trick magical people into believing it is a Warden/Magical Sword.
-
OR
Make it a real Warden's sword that does absolutely nothing special because the guy is a Pure Mortal. Instead, it will give lots of plot hooks and room for the character to grow into something more later on down the road.
Also, I'm sad that no-one got my Ogre Decapitation reference.
-
OR
Make it a real Warden's sword that does absolutely nothing special because the guy is a Pure Mortal. Instead, it will give lots of plot hooks and room for the character to grow into something more later on down the road.
Also, I'm sad that no-one got my Ogre Decapitation reference.
Is that from the "I attack the Darkness" Skit?
General Question?
Why can't the sword be an Enchanted item, that another wizard is powering? If the source of the power comes from another character it shouldn't kill his refresh right, Like harry's coat being usable by other people? I didn't see anything in the template suggestion pure mortal's should lose the extra refresh if they have an enchanted item, just if they take a power.
I could understand him not being able to use the counterspell ability in normal action, but with the use of an aspect and a fate point I could see it coming into play. The weapon 6 I could see going the same way or being allowable.
-
Also, I'm sad that no-one got my Ogre Decapitation reference.
I got it, but I rather have a Troll Decapitation Sword. They're like a pinata....
-
Is that from the "I attack the Darkness" Skit?
Gamers. If you've ever RP'd - especially D&D, it's funny.
General Question?
Why can't the sword be an Enchanted item, that another wizard is powering? If the source of the power comes from another character it shouldn't kill his refresh right, Like harry's coat being usable by other people? I didn't see anything in the template suggestion pure mortal's should lose the extra refresh if they have an enchanted item, just if they take a power.
Yes, but I wouldn't allow an NPC to give something like that. Maybe another PC, if they want to give up an Enchanted Item slot for another player since that's their choice, afterall. Somebody has to pay the refresh for it.
I could understand him not being able to use the counterspell ability in normal action, but with the use of an aspect and a fate point I could see it coming into play. The weapon 6 I could see going the same way or being allowable.
I'm not sure I'd allow any of the powers of the sword per se. The sword itself would be declaration fodder, so it could have minimal "latent" powers. So while I wouldn't allow the counterspell ability, you could tag a +2 to get through a magical block, for example(assuming you succeed on the declaration or spend a FP). If he wants the full powers, I'd say he'd have to pay the refresh.
-
Gamers. If you've ever RP'd - especially D&D, it's funny.
Yes, but I wouldn't allow an NPC to give something like that. Maybe another PC, if they want to give up an Enchanted Item slot for another player since that's their choice, afterall. Somebody has to pay the refresh for it.
I'm not sure I'd allow any of the powers of the sword per se. The sword itself would be declaration fodder, so it could have minimal "latent" powers. So while I wouldn't allow the counterspell ability, you could tag a +2 to get through a magical block, for example(assuming you succeed on the declaration or spend a FP). If he wants the full powers, I'd say he'd have to pay the refresh.
No invoke for effect based off aspects? Only allowing the +2? As to NPC's paying the refresh, couldn't that be his trouble? Some one is paying for it, and they want it back? It doesn't always respond well, infact sometimes being detrimental, though occasionally it works as it's supposed to?
Not that I have a problem with your way, Actually seems like a really good solution, I'm just trying to find other options.
Which Gamers? Dorkness rising? or the first one?
-
No invoke for effect based off aspects? Only allowing the +2? As to NPC's paying the refresh, couldn't that be his trouble? Some one is paying for it, and they want it back? It doesn't always respond well, infact sometimes being detrimental, though occasionally it works as it's supposed to?
Not that I have a problem with your way, Actually seems like a really good solution, I'm just trying to find other options.
Which Gamers? Dorkness rising? or the first one?
It could also be his trouble, which is why I like the idea of giving the player a weapon like this. He could Invoke for Effect, I suppose...I don't know...it would really depend on the situation
The first Gamers.
-
Is that from the "I attack the Darkness" Skit?
General Question?
Why can't the sword be an Enchanted item, that another wizard is powering? If the source of the power comes from another character it shouldn't kill his refresh right, Like harry's coat being usable by other people? I didn't see anything in the template suggestion pure mortal's should lose the extra refresh if they have an enchanted item, just if they take a power.
I could understand him not being able to use the counterspell ability in normal action, but with the use of an aspect and a fate point I could see it coming into play. The weapon 6 I could see going the same way or being allowable.
If another player who has ritual and has enough enchanted item slots to make such an item and is willing to give it to the character without any kind of compensation maybe, It's the whole purpose of spending slots to let others use enchanted items. It would still need follow all the enchanting rules and limitations if it were up to me though. Which going by the RAW, I don't think It's possible to make an enchanted item exactly like the warden sword in the powers chapter, but you could come pretty close.
Alternatively, if he has said Enchanted Item as a full time power (in the case that It's not from another PC) that's always at the ready should he want to use it. It should be considered a power on his character sheet regardless of the narrative flavoring. If It's something he manages to channel once in a great while (at the GM's discretion, NOT the players) for dramatic story moments as a temporary power, then I would let him have it for a scene for a few Fate Points.
The reason I and a few others have stressed it would need to be from an PC and not an NPC is mostly because it would devalue IoP's. Why take an IoP when you can just say you have some amazing enchanted item that some random self-declared NPC made for you?
-
If another player who has ritual and has enough enchanted item slots to make such an item and is willing to give it to the character without any kind of compensation maybe, It's the whole purpose of spending slots to let others use enchanted items. It would still need follow all the enchanting rules and limitations if it were up to me though. Which going by the RAW, I don't think It's possible to make an enchanted item exactly like the warden sword in the powers chapter, but you could come pretty close.
Alternatively, if he has said Enchanted Item as a full time power (in the case that It's not from another PC) that's always at the ready should he want to use it. It should be considered a power on his character sheet regardless of the narrative flavoring. If It's something he manages to channel once in a great while (at the GM's discretion, NOT the players) for dramatic story moments as a temporary power, then I would let him have it for a scene for a few Fate Points.
The reason I and a few others have stressed it would need to be from an PC and not an NPC is mostly because it would devalue IoP's. Why take an IoP when you can just say you have some amazing enchanted item that some random self-declared NPC made for you?
Because you aren't in control of the NPC. Which lets the GM play with the powers as he wants(Have start to fade because the wizard has poured any energy into it recently, Have it turn back on him because he used it in a way that it wasn't intended, Have the wizard come looking for it cause it was stolen from the one he gave it too 100 years ago or whatever), and allows for some pretty awesome situations. The other reason is IoP's are more powerful. A lot more in some cases.
All that said, I can understand why a GM would say no in most if not all cases, but I'm wondering if there is any rule preventing it.
-
I'm currently setting him up that he may be placed as "deputy warden." The city we're playing in is located at the split between a ley line, where it merges again further north. This creates a vortex effect that draws in magic and causes it to be "trapped" here. Despite its low population, there's a LOT of magic here. His cousin is the unnamed Warden in Atlanta, and needs someone to watch over this city. The two of them do not get along though, and currently he's sort of stolen the PC's house (long story), causing two other PCs to be evicted as well.
They will either resolve this peacefully and he will (despite having no magic) be unofficially put in charge of this city, or they are going to end up murdering the warden of Atlanta. Fun times ahead!
-
A pure mortal, the average person doesn't have supernatural power to back them up, in response to this deficit a person has to rely on what made us the dominant species, ingenuity, guile and creativity. For me I see part of that extra refresh bonus as being an extension of that mindset, its extra stunts or a few extra aspects invoked in a game session, it reflects the outside the box thinking and resourcefulness that makes people people and how they manage to win or survive against the bigger faster meaner things that go bump in the night. But give a man a hammer (or sword) and every problem starts to look like a nail.
A mortal with a supernatural power is going to start seeing the world in terms of 'how can I superpower my way to victory?' Once you have that power you start to try and 'game' everything towards your strength. Options that don't rely on that advantage stop being considerations and your world view starts to shrink. The bigger and better the hammer, the more you try and make your problems a nail, and those hammer free solutions fade completely from view. This is how a person becomes a monster, how they loose their free will and how they use up their refresh.
If you're giving a character a real supernatural advantage like a powerful magic sword, then you should make them pay for it just like any other hammer in the tool box, regardless of the narrative justifications for it. He's still going to be seeing his problems as fencing dummies. "I got it from my brother" and "I got it from my faerie father" just the mode of transition rather then the fact that its magic and its family.
-
As far as the rules go, it's doable. But the player would need some sort of Refresh allocation to account for their access to an item who's Enchanted Item Slots are associated with an NPC (unless they can talk a player into it). Two item slots cost 0.5 Refresh, so the remaining 0.5 to externalize it to an NPC wouldn't be bad.
So while it works for game mechanics, I'm still not sure about the story reason why a Pure Mortal would be entrusted with a Warden's Sword, since it's the symbol of magical police and the intent behind it is to allow them to kill rogue spellcasters without using their own magic.
-
Because you aren't in control of the NPC. Which lets the GM play with the powers as he wants(Have start to fade because the wizard has poured any energy into it recently, Have it turn back on him because he used it in a way that it wasn't intended, Have the wizard come looking for it cause it was stolen from the one he gave it too 100 years ago or whatever), and allows for some pretty awesome situations. The other reason is IoP's are more powerful. A lot more in some cases.
All that said, I can understand why a GM would say no in most if not all cases, but I'm wondering if there is any rule preventing it.
The situation you just described would fall under the sponsored magic mechanic, which still counts as a supernatural power.
It's your game and any and all rules are more or less at the GM's discretion. As a GM I'm personally very hard nosed about it. The book on several occasions says to take a concept and match it to a game mechanic that works. The problem with the half dozen or so threads I've seen where someone is trying to justify getting powers and keeping the +2 refresh is that they do the opposite. They are trying to justify breaking, twisting, or exploiting how a rule is written to hamfist the narrative concept.
My method is very simple. Does the character have regular access to ANY powers regardless of narrative flavoring? If the answer is "yes" then they are not Pure Mortal.
-
The situation you just described would fall under the sponsored magic mechanic, which still counts as a supernatural power.
It's your game and any and all rules are more or less at the GM's discretion. As a GM I'm personally very hard nosed about it. The book on several occasions says to take a concept and match it to a game mechanic that works. The problem with the half dozen or so threads I've seen where someone is trying to justify getting powers and keeping the +2 refresh is that they do the opposite. They are trying to justify breaking, twisting, or exploiting how a rule is written to hamfist the narrative concept.
My method is very simple. Does the character have regular access to ANY powers regardless of narrative flavoring? If the answer is "yes" then they are not Pure Mortal.
DING DING DING
-
DING DING DING
Well, that settles it. No Warden Sword for him.
Now, getting a normal sword and maybe the Warden cloak (I don't think its stainproofing is worth a refresh hit) would not be entirely out of the question, depending on how the current arc goes. How would you feel about a "Deputy Warden" pure mortal being in charge of a small but highly magical city?
-
Well, that settles it. No Warden Sword for him.
I still dont understand your reasoning. Give him the sword but dont give him the power to use it unless he wants to lose the refresh at some point. Until then it would just act as a normal sword. You might even consider that when he "activates" the sword maybe it shifts into something more his style. For instance if he is a sneaky person maybe it becomes a warden dagger, if he is a brute it becomes a warden great sword. Flavor it up as much as you want because you can. The creator of the swords made each one for specific people, maybe because it does it itself.
I dont know, I just feel you are wasting a lot of story by simply denying him the sword and the ability to activate it in the future.
-
Not denying it completely, let me clarify. I'm just saying that if he wants to remain a pure mortal, he can't have a sword that acts like a Warden sword. It could be such a sword, but it won't act like one.
-
It sounds like the player just wants the pure mortal bonus, since flavor wise he'd still be a vanilla mortal with a warden sword, even if he spent a point of refresh to get it.
-
It sounds like the player just wants the pure mortal bonus, since flavor wise he'd still be a vanilla mortal with a warden sword, even if he spent a point of refresh to get it.
Yea but he would technically be spending 3 fate points to get it since he would lose his pure mortal bonus.
It could be such a sword, but it won't act like one.
Perfect. Thats what it should be.
-
Not denying it completely, let me clarify. I'm just saying that if he wants to remain a pure mortal, he can't have a sword that acts like a Warden sword. It could be such a sword, but it won't act like one.
Yes. This is what I've been saying all along. Give him a sword that gives no abilities that would normally require refresh. Let him keep his Mortal Bonus. If he ever chooses to want "unlock" the powers of the sword, he'll have to pay the refresh for it AND lose his Pure Mortal bonus.
I might let the sword do an extra point of damage. I'd do the same if someone told me they wanted to be a Pure Mortal Samurai with a really High Quality Katana who built his whole concept around Sword Fighting.
-
I might let the sword do an extra point of damage. I'd do the same if someone told me they wanted to be a Pure Mortal Samurai with a really High Quality Katana who built his whole concept around Sword Fighting.
Yea but that wouldnt really affect the swords capabilities. It would just mean he is good with a sword. It states that a sword is a weapon 2 as RAW, even when applying it to an IoP such as the SotC.
-
If you wanted to flavor it as having really subtle power without actually crossing that boundary of having power and losing the Mortal refresh then you could make the sword the key to some unusual stunts, something like while he's wearing the sword it lets him use the Lore ability to sense the supernatural with his Alertness skill instead is just the first example that comes to mind. Basically have the sword serve as the justification for some stunts that he could acquire. Obviously having the sword on his person would be a prerequisite for activating any of those stunts, so not having the sword would indeed affect his effectiveness.
-
Yea but that wouldnt really affect the swords capabilities. It would just mean he is good with a sword. It states that a sword is a weapon 2 as RAW, even when applying it to an IoP such as the SotC.
Meh. If you want to roll a higher resource roll and have a "higher quality" weapon, that's all the justification I need to say it's weapon 3 instead of weapon 2. But that's as far as I'd go for a mundane weapon. I see a Warden's sword as a "higher quality" weapon, hence the justification for having it do 3 instead of 2. I mean, he could just say it's a 2 handed sword and it'd be weapon 3 anyways so I don't see it as a game-breaking thing.
-
Nor do I but its a good thing to note that the SotC which is probably a high quality sword, is only a weapon 2
-
Nor do I but its a good thing to note that the SotC which is probably a high quality sword, is only a weapon 2
Right on. I didn't know that. In that case I'd keep it at 2.
-
Esperacchius is Weapon:2. The other two are Weapon:3.
And as I recall, the weapons chart says that some swords are Weapon:2, some are Weapon:3, and the Warden Sword is listed as Weapon:3.
-
Esperacchius is Weapon:2. The other two are Weapon:3.
And as I recall, the weapons chart says that some swords are Weapon:2, some are Weapon:3, and the Warden Sword is listed as Weapon:3.
I remember the warden sword being w3.
Two handed weapons are w3, but aren't all the SotC hand and a half by cannon? I would round down, but I guess that's up to the GM
-
A sword made of silver that is a warden sword n someone else's hands?... sure... an actual warden sword?.. notachance! There is a warden sword in the baltimore section of the book book (which I did not realize until after allowing a player to have one without realizing it . The thing is weapon 5with special powers)
-
6, actually.
Honestly, not sure why people are so hostile to the idea. Warden swords aren't really that awesome.
Also, I think all of the Swords Of The Cross ought to be weapon 3. It seems wrong, somehow, for a legendary weapon to be inferior to an ordinary greatsword. Maybe they're one-handed or 1.5-handed, but...it's not like the number of hands a weapon takes actually does anything mechanically.
If you tell me that a SotC is weapon 2, it makes me want to homebrew up an Axe Of God which is like a Sword Of The Cross except weapon 3. Which is clearly within the letter of the rules, and probably within the spirit of the rules as well.
-
Dont the SotC take on different forms depending on who is wielding them at the time. (this is just what I heard not sure if true).
Also I dont think it really matters if they can or cant as cannon, because it is your own universe to create as you want.
-
They don't take on different forms depending on the wielder, they are just reforged from time to time. Except Amoraccius, which has been the same since the days of the original Merlin.
Inherited warden swords are actually a neat plot hook. A warden in my pbp campaign has inherited the sword of his father along with the responsibilities as a warden. I think the father-son connection is enough to make the magic work.
In the case of a mortal, I'd be bit reluctant as well, but I could see a way it could work rather nicely. Give him the sword, make it a weapon:3 and that's it. It is pretty much like any mundane sword, except maybe for a little more oomph. However, you also give him the option to spend a fate point to activate one of the warden swords special abilities (weapon:6 or counterspell:6) at one time. After that he has to make a choice. Either that action was enough to spark his own dormant magic, or the weapon just had one charge left and is now fully depleted and will never be anything but a very good sword. The loss of refresh would then come from inside the story instead of simply from the fact that he is having the sword, which would make the decision much more meaningful.
-
After that he has to make a choice. Either that action was enough to spark his own dormant magic, or the weapon just had one charge left and is now fully depleted and will never be anything but a very good sword.
Ok so I love this more than anything written on this thread thus far!
-
As I recall from the books, Amoracchius and Fidelacchius are listed as Weapon:3 in Michael and Shiro's write-ups in Our WOrld, but Esperacchius is listed as Weapon:2 in Sanya's. In Your story's write-up of the Swords as a power, it says they're Weapon:3.
-
These are warden swords, not Swords of the Cross, we are talking about right?
-
Yes, but I was answering Sanctaphrax's post about the Weapon rating for the SOTCs.