On how specific beats generic

I’ve blogged about treating abilities as exceptions already, just want to quickly go back to say that it doesn’t need to be a straightforward contradiction of the ‘you cannot do it’ vs ‘you can do it’ kind. For instance, generic rules can give you some numbers, while specific ones will tell what they mean exactly. Something like when in TSoY, The Pool, Time of the Ancient or any other game that involves stakes, the general rules will say when you succeed and when you fail, and the concrete consequences are determined by your current situation—but on a different level.

Just to illustrate it with something from the fantasy heartbreaker that seems to be my main effort right now (the system is all but finished btw, I just need to describe some setting bits and start playtesting): the general rules state that being on Power Level 2 for a hero means having 2 first-level powers and 4 zero-level powers. Brawler’s powers are battle manœuvers, and the numbers mean how much of them are readied at the start of a new battle—the fighter can still ready them again after use, but it will take some actions to do so. Sage’s powers are mystic abilities, and the numbers mean how many of them the sage possesses. Zealot’s powers are daily allowance of divine invocations, the type of which—aura, presence, wrath, etc—is determined at the time of use, some of invocations grant them the right to use a couple of other classes’ powers. Mage’s powers are spells memorised for this particular encounter. Ace’s powers are skill uses—whatever is not chosen for this encounter, cannot be used (due to lack of instruments or other hindrances).

I have the feeling that I’ve seen that implemented in one of the games I’ve read, but can’t remember exactly where. Maybe it’s just my paranoia…

Advertisement