Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaira
The WoW approach railroads your character very much into a "character class" model, where either you get magical training or you don't, and that "fixes" your character.
|
Which, I've always had teh impression was pretty much a deliberate choice on Steve Perrin's part when he created the WoW rules.
Quote:
|
I'm unclear if a character without magical training could get it in play, for example; maybe that's something I'll get from the BRP rules when they (finally) turn up.
|
The brief paragraph in the play test document I have about "non-mages" with spells doesn't make it clear. Instinctively, I'd adapt some of the stuff about Magicians learning new spells etc. to cover a non-mage learning more - but I've not really though beyond that (other than probably requiring an stint as a Wizard's Apprentice...).
Quote:
|
I'm just brainstorming, really. When playing RQ I always liked the fact that, in principle, your character was capable of anything, but just needed to develop the skills - there were never any overt rules-imposed blocks on what your character could & couldn't do (no one saying your hamfisted sword-wielding barbarian couldn't _eventually_ learn how to pick locks, for example). I think I'm trying to keep that feel in my game.
|
Well, one can easily ignore the limits on non-mages if one wants... Plus I've not seen anything in the play test draft that would make using the RQIII Magic book systems with BRP remotely difficult.
Cheers,
Nick Middleton