(TFT) View from the Cheap Seats

["Ed Thorn" <prophesor@yahoo.com>]

I have no balance-derived objection to this option.  My only objections are
based on flavor, a concern which must be gauged for each campaign.  In my
own experience, we used very few continuing-cost spells, out of fear of the
vulnerability they create in the mage.  I know this is less of a concern in
some campaigns, but below a certain stats-plus-items-plus-party threshold,
every point must be squeezed until it screams.

In Dar Fannen's neck of the woods, this option might actually increase the
use of some spells, which variety I think would be a good thing.

I can see how that might be different above that threshold, or well beyond
it.

As for flavor, this would either require some skill (perhaps spell
knowledge) on the part of the recipient, or the retconning of existing
spells to include such transfer as an 'always was' option.  Consider the
Guild's position on this, though: it reveals in no uncertain terms just how
difficult it is to maintain a spell, a point they may prefer kept from the
mug- ah, th mundanes.

----- Original Message -----
From: <ErolB1@aol.com>
Subject: Re: (TFT) A Thought on the St Cost to Renew Spells

> In terms useful spells cast on non-wizards, even with a "share the St"
house
> rule, it makes sense for the non-wizards to sell the wizard into slavery
and
> spend the money on items that cost St to use :-)
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"