(TFT) World Shift (S)

[David Michael Grouchy II <david_michael_grouchy_ii@hotmail.com>]

> Interesting question. In the church tradition, inanimate objects are
> sanctified once- the altar, the temple, the cup, etc.... Although
> baptized once, people are continually blessed thereafter. We fight
> against the blessings, inanimate objects don't. :-)

Aidan,

     This perspective appeals to me.  I`m willing to see Achilles as just
wearing an iron chest piece or some iron flesh item.  And Jed Mnoren as just
casting a spell.  One that he only teaches to his children.  Something like
this could work.


IQ 13

World Shift (S)

     Used to travel between worlds.  The traveler may move in one of two
directions dividing out parts of ITL, or adding in parts.  A character can
Word Shift once and enter a world where all Bloodtrees are divided out and not
part of the new world they have shifted to.  Shift again dividing out the
Wizard`s Guild, and again dividing out the Farmhand as a Job.  A character who
brings some Molotovs with them to a world without Molotovs may constitute a
major technological advantage.  Costs 2 to cast and 4 turns uninterrupted,
plus one per world traversed, and finally 2 and another 4 turns to land in a
world.



     So having a game system where every enchantment is an item, and every
ability is either a spell or a talent works fine for me.  It is consistently
useful and makes sense.  It may even be intended this way who knows.  But
indulge me for a moment while I speculate on the nature of the Limiting
Enchantment.

     So why have anyone ever be ``anointed`` or ``dipped in the waters.``
Unless it is a Limiting built into the enchantment item, or it can be a
limiting rule that governs a gate between worlds.  But this just raises the
question, why have a Limiting spell at all.  Does anyone use it.  Do any of
the readers here.  Didn`t Steve Jackson turn his back on the idea that a
Limiting can be an advantage when he sees that Champions pays character points
back to characters with shortcomings and disadvantages.

     Could it be that Limiting still serves a use as a safety feature.  At
best.  Enchanting Bound Demons against minors, Flying carpets against people
with less than IQ 14, even Lens of translation against unsupervised use.  But
the intent of the question still remains, doesn`t it.  Why would someone spend
more money, and take more time, to put such limiting on everything.

     Well, if there is anyone vaguely interested I have a tentative scenario
for this.  Imagine we World Shift to a Cidri where it is the social custom
that _ everything _ is enchanted with a Limiting Spell.  Lets Shift to a world
even more strict where there is also a Law enforcing this custom.

     In this world, the wizards in charge, the ones who teach someone an
enchantment spell so they can open up shop and start selling Stone Flesh
rings, say.  Will always teach the Stone Flesh enchantment as though it works
except against elders of the Wizards Guild.

     This does two things.  It allows elders to blast through their
apprentices customers if they have too, and if an elder ever makes a stone
flesh ring for themselves they may just leave off the limiting.  This amazes
their assistants, and even causes their enemies to scratch their heads saying
``that`s not possible.``   And ``how did he finish so fast?``

     I don`t know if anyone remembers, but except for a characters starting
spells, learning new spells used to be a huge ordeal that requires finding
someone who knows it, making them willing to teach it, and spending enough
time with them to learn it.  Under the old tradition of Wizards who jealously
guard their secrets it is quite easy for a spell to go extinct and out of the
campaign.

     The current trend is that all the spells are available with the
convenience of a trip to the mall.  Everything is usually in stock.  No one
has to show a license to authorize the purchase.  And the purchase does not
automatically put you at war with another chain of stores.

     And this may be best, as the players get enough grief from their GMs and
fellow players as it is.  Unless.  Unless its the players who are setting
themselves up as the gods on some unmagicd world.  So what part of ITL do we
have to divide out so missing from the world is the entire book of Wizard and
Advanced Wizard.

     My recommendation is to not upset our players and no one change their
world.  But if you ever do allow some form of world shifting, to proceed from
the standpoint that the characters starting world already had Limiting divided
out of it.  And if they ever shift to a world that brings Limiting back in,
the players may very well find a Mount Olympus with Zeus and the others.
Where the few lone great wizards of the world are just former employees who
escaped with just the one spell they were taught.  They are cautiously seeking
each other out to maybe learn that second spell.  But they will never teach a
Hero.  Cause the one who did is still chained to a rock with a vulture eating
out his liver and a potion of youth delivered to his lips every year.

     I leave it as an exercise for the reader if that spell is or is not
Literacy.


David Michael Grouchy II

_________________________________________________________________
Get more from your digital life.  Find out how.
http://www.windowslive.com/default.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Home2_082008
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"