Old and New Pow gain methods

[Tywyll]

I noticed that in new BRP, you only get a POW gain roll if your chance of success in a Pow vs Pow contest is less than 50%, whereas in old RQ2&3 you got one every time you overcame a target's resistance.

So, why the change? Was the old method too generous? Is there a probably playing it the old way? If I switch over, will there be a downside I'm not seeing?

What are people's personal experience of the old and the new ways of handling it?

I'm running a fantasy campaign and I'm finding that unless the casters go after other casters directly, there is little chance they'll improve their POW, without facing steadily increasingly potent enemy casters.

[Harshax]

I found that characters who did not bother to learn attack spells (pow vs. pow), were much maligned by the POW gain routine. My house rule was that you could also qualify for a POW gain by successfully resisting magic.

I don't see what would happen if you changed the rule to what you're more familiar with, but then again, the best recommendation is to 'play as is' until you're sure you want to change it.

[NickMiddleton]

I noticed that in new BRP, you only get a POW gain roll if your chance of success in a Pow vs Pow contest is less than 50%, whereas in old RQ2&3 you got one every time you overcame a target's resistance.

So, why the change? Was the old method too generous? Is there a probably playing it the old way? If I switch over, will there be a downside I'm not seeing?

It's mostly a question of logic, and heading off a bit of munchkin power gaming. If ANY POW vs. POW roll will do, what's to stop the PC from spending a quiet week casting Disruption (or the equivalent) on worms, squirrels and the occasional rat? The rule simply insists that for there to be chance of gain, there must have been a substantive chance of failure...

This is mostly just an extension of the RQII rule (where you got no POW gain roll if your chance of success was greater than 95%).

What are people's personal experience of the old and the new ways of handling it?

Funnily enough, I've had a house rule that's basically the same as the new BRP rule for a long time, so I can't really contrast the two - but I can say that I've been largely happy with the BRP like house rule I've been using.

I'm running a fantasy campaign and I'm finding that unless the casters go after other casters directly, there is little chance they'll improve their POW, without facing steadily increasingly potent enemy casters.

One of the reasons for my house rule is that I was never fond of the "personal stat inflation" that the RQII/III rule caused, but others will no doubt have a different view.

Cheers,

Nick

[frogspawner]

If ANY POW vs. POW roll will do, what's to stop the PC from spending a quiet week casting Disruption (or the equivalent) on worms, squirrels and the occasional rat?

The requirement for it to be in a crisis situation. That should be enough to limit it, even if you widen it to allow POW gains for defensive resistance too.

[soltakss]

Only giving a POW gain roll if your chance of success is below 50% seems a bit harsh.

I wouldn't use it.

If you had sword attack 70% then you would get a tick if you used it, so why not for POW?

I can see the munchkin argument, but that has never applied in my games. But there again I like people getting more POW as I prefer higher powered games.

[GianniVacca]

I think POW gains are only legitimate in settings where POW is also lost, e.g., in older versions of RQ you had to sacrifice POW to get Rune spells, hence the interest of being able to re-gain lost POW through POW gains.

But in settings where PCs never lose any POW, why should there be POW gains?

[NickMiddleton]

I think POW gains are only legitimate in settings where POW is also lost, e.g., in older versions of RQ you had to sacrifice POW to get Rune spells, hence the interest of being able to re-gain lost POW through POW gains.

But in settings where PCs never lose any POW, why should there be POW gains?

Becuase it makes sense that someone can exercise the will and refine their attunement to the magical flow of the universe and thus increase their chracterisitc POW in the same way they can train and imporve their STR or DEX?

I certainly agree that I don't think POW should shoot up the way it could in RQII when it can't be lost in a similarly profligate fashion (which is why I've long used rules simlar to the new BRP's) - but on the other hadn it does make sense to me that a character should have SOME faciilty to improve their POW.

Cheers,

Nick

[Nightshade]

I think that often Power did advance too fast under the old system; on the other hand, I think that you probably should be able to train it, or get advancement from resisting spells. The sword skill argument doesn't seem really parallel, because Power does a lot more things than just improve success (this is particularly true in environments where Power can be sacrificed for permanent or quasi-permanent benefits).

[RMS]

I always allowed POW gain checks for anyone attacking or defending with POW v. POW for spells in old RQ2/3, and would do so again. The same was true of fighting in spirit combat (though I don't honestly remember the official rule for when you got a POW gain check here). It basically boiled down to giving the PCs a POW gain check after each adventure, so 2-3 times per year (typical number of "adventures" per year) everyone got a POW gain check, in addition to one on the high holy day. With any reasonable level of POW this still doesn't end up with that much POW gain (1-2 points per year), which promptly got spent on divine magic. Without that, POW would just float up to the 18-19 level and sit. It's capped so it's not like it's going to grow off the chart, even if there's nothing to spend it on.

[Nightshade]

The problem is that being even in the 18-19 range meant that you were pretty much immune to magical attack from mediocre opponents. Also, while 2-4 points might be okay for character who only adventure a few times a year, there's nothing to require that to be the case; with relatively continuous adventuring, it wasn't hard to see people racking up 12 points of sacrificed power in a year, and that got to be a bit much.