Venture-Agent, Online—VTT
|
Frequently, fusion seals that are found in SFS scenarios, often because they would be useful in the scenario, not just as random treasure. Has there been any consideration of a Society campaign rule that would allow fusion seals to take effect in less than the normal 24 hours, rendering them usable?
|
Venture-Agent, Online—VTT
|
I know there have been threads about why fusion seals don't work out well. I have posted in some of them, before. I just started this thread because I did not think I'd ever seen anything about changing them in campaign rules.
I figured that, while there is no reason to buy a fusion seal, at least they can work as something you find, in a normal game. The 1-shot and turn in all the loot structure of society scenarios takes that limited utility away from them, so I figured an SFS specific change might make sense.
EDIT: Looking through, again, I do see that someone asked the same question, toward the end of one of the threads.
Contributor
|
Until I see a SF designer or SFS developer say otherwise, this is the interpretation I'm going with when I GM. On the rare occasions when I get to play, I leave it up to the GM to make the call (but in those times when they express frustration, I do keep that link handy to share in case it interests them).
|
|
Until I see a SF designer or SFS developer say otherwise, this is the interpretation I'm going with when I GM. On the rare occasions when I get to play, I leave it up to the GM to make the call (but in those times when they express frustration, I do keep that link handy to share in case it interests them).
That is reaaaally stretching the rule. I don't think thursty's post right after that would make a lot of sense if that was the intent of the seals.
|
Contributor
|
IMHO, the quote from the book, if interpreted that way, seems to "fix" what the intent of fusion seals are. Otherwise (if my 4am memory isn't faulty, you might have been one of the folks who suggested the following?), it's cheaper/easier to just get a full weapon fusion and have a PC with Engineering/Mysticism move them around (although more expensive if done repeatedly).
I admit that fusion seals were part of the core rules I sort of glossed-over when it first came out, and then I took the 24-hour thing for granted as a "feature" until Shawn's post, after which I studied that part of the rules more in-depth and came to agree that it might just be a "bug" so to speak.
I won't deny that it's a stretch, but when rules are murky or poorly written/edited, I try to err on the side that enables players to have fun at my tables. As always, YMMV! :)
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
Thurston isn't eager to get in the designer's way by changing the apparent rule, but yeah, the apparent rule ("seals need 24 hours before they work") is dumb and goes against the seeming goal of seals.
However, it's entirely possible that it is what was intended. If you look in Armory you'll see a lot of armor upgrades that once you use their 1/day ability, lock up that slot on the armor from being used again for 24 hours.
Someone doesn't want us using 1/day abilities more than once per day by throwing money at it. Cheap enough to buy, but for some reason you shouldn't buy them twice. Kinda like the old Quick Runner's Shirt.
---
With that said, when I'm GMing a scenario, a fusion seal pops up and it seems like it was intended to be used (Save the Renkrodas), I'll assume the writer thought it was possible and I allow the players to use it.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
Renkrodas was the one where it seemed like the seal was just itching to be used but nope.. author didn't intend it that way (same thread as linked above)
Yeah, I didn't know that when I was running it, so I went with what looked like obvious authorial intent at the time.
It's kinda like catching an obvious error in stats, like human chained rogues expressly causing low light and then trying to sneak attack. Do you apply the rules rigorously so the whole scene doesn't work as intended, or do you do what seemed to be intent of the author?