Artha Investiture

[foxandwarlock]

What kind of a scale do people out there use when dealing with Invested items? I know the book indicates 5 is a lot (in the example of the Dread Lord) but what's the difference between 1 and 2 or 1 and 3 for example? Do you have specific attributes you give to types of items when they hit certain points or is it fluid like the rest of BW?

I'm Investing Fate in an item and I'm finding that I feel like I have to go right to 5 points since its the only scale I have to work with. Is 5 near the top of what should really go into an item? Or is that really where the "special" nature of the item should begin?

[luke]

I'm working on hard and fast rules for investiture for the new artha rules.

So far it comes down to: Each point allows the player to deflect some calamity.

Once I get Enchanting ironed out, investiture will play a bigger role in making shit cool.

-L

[foxandwarlock]

Okay, not to kick a dead, resolved horse.

But: "Each point allows the player to deflect some calamity."

Is that to infer that once deflected that the Fate point is un-Invested (i.e. used up)? Or are you referring to the level of calamity that can be avoided based on the level of Investiture?

[luke]

Well, this is the book-keeping problem.

I want each point to only be used once. But I want to keep an overall record of how many points are invested for the purposes of enchantment.

-L

[foxandwarlock]

Okay, cool. That's equally neat but different from the explanation published in the book. Its not like we have a ton of Investiture Artha flying around so the book-keeping thing is not a big deal. Thanks L.

[eruditus]

I think its interesting that in my games, thus far, no one has really tried to do this.

Although, arguably, I am certain only a small number of my players read the rules.

Do many players invest Artha like this?

[foxandwarlock]

Well, as my GM says, weird stuff happens at the table. I had originally envisioned Investing in a bronze war mask that had belonged to my character in a previous life but before it could make an appearance, I picked up a shield during a siege and painted my god's symbol on it.

And then, as the the dice would have it, it started actually saving my ass - I rolled well, it never rolled 1's, my armor saves never rolled 1's. And then it was handed off to someone else (during an emergency) and the dice actually saved his ass - everyone that swung at him MISSED from the moment he took the shield. Our GM rolls in the open so it wasn't like he was fudging it.

So the shield has kind of started writing its own "legacy" - it felt right to Invest in it. What the God of the Dawn wants, he gets, I guess :twisted:

[Wuxing]

And then, as the the dice would have it, it started actually saving my ass - I rolled well, it never rolled 1's, my armor saves never rolled 1's. And then it was handed off to someone else (during an emergency) and the dice actually saved his ass - everyone that swung at him MISSED from the moment he took the shield. Our GM rolls in the open so it wasn't like he was fudging it.
of the Dawn wants, he gets, I guess :twisted:

Yeah. This is the kind of stuff you just don't write. It just happens. If you can catch it as it happens and then incorporate it you just walk away with a, "Damn that was some cool ass shit" feeling. I personally love feeling that way. :D

[eruditus]

Very cool!

These are the only magic items worth their salt.

Equipment is meant to be used, abused and tossed aside when the need arises (or you wind up drowning as you try swimming with your backpack). But those signature items that always seem to find their way through the campaign often become icons and take on stories of their own.

[Kaare Berg]

My group uses investment a lot.

The ranger has his bow.
His apprentice has a royal sword and an assassin's dagger
The knight has his family sword

The investment is there so that this equipment which they love won't be arbitrary (read: by me) destroyed, lost, or stolen when they have their gentle behinds handed to them (a sad occurence that happens often).

How does this work, well the ranger in question took a persona complication to avoid being squished by a stone-troll and ended up dangling of a cliff. When he scrambled up with some help of his friends he found his bow dangling of a little rock outcropping, somehow having landed there when he fell.

IMO there is little need to quantify the artha expenditure. As Luke pointed out to me in one of my first actual play posts, one artha isn't a significant sacrifice. So for one artha you don't get much, the bow might not be broken, but nor can you just pick it up. The more artha you invest in it, the more convinient will its retun be and bigger events will the item survive.

IMO saying one artha = one calamity reduces the fluid nature of the current rules and you do not want to end up in situation where you have to say "sorry foxandwarlock, but your Shield of Dawn survives the pounding, that's one calamity, but it breaks on the cobblestones after it falls of the town-wall and thats another calamity."

I know, I know. If you only invested one artha you haven't invested much. But you invested something else too, your imagination. And I think it so much better to say: "the Shield of Dawn survives the ferocious pounding, but at the last minute it slips of your arm and falls off the town wall. You can see it shining on the cobblestones, but you have to get down there to save it. And to do that you have to defeat the foe who now lifts his sword in mad glee . . . ".

Argh!, Now I've gone and done it again. This was going to be a little I like the investment rule post, and turned into a rant. Sorry.