Inconspicuous demons and cloak

[Tim Alexander]

Hey all,

This one is mostly for Ron, but I figured most people would be interested in the response. In another thread you said:

As written, the only ability which does not count toward its Lore total is the "passive Cloak" of inconspicuous demons. I now greatly regret this rule, but that's what's in the text, anyway.

Would you mind expanding on this? Why the regrets? Do you wish the other types had a freebie, or do you wish none of them did? In either case (or in whatever case) why? Is it just a niggling point of inconsistency in application, or something you've found as a hindrance in play?

-Tim

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Tim,

It's a consistency & elegance thing. I made rules more complex when the system made it unnecessary to do so.

Here's how I should have done it: required Inconspicuous demons to take the Cloak ability and had it count toward their Lore totals. So it'd just be a specification of a demon Type with no alteration or exception to any existing rules and their relationships, unlike the current text.

Oh well. In theory, the in-game effect is to permit Inconspicuous demons a bit more oomph than others, as they effectively get a free ability. But it hasn't been an issue in play.

Best,
Ron

P.S. For reference purposes, the thread Tim's referring to is Sorcerer main book questions.

[Tim Alexander]

Hey Ron,

Thanks for the info. It's more or less what I expected to hear. Mostly I was concerned that maybe you had found a long term game effect. I certainly appreciate the desire for the consistency and elegance though.

-Tim