Jimcrimson/DKareProblemPC
Dragon Kings are Problem PC's.
Jimcrimson here are some thoughts about how to fix them.
I understand why DK’s with essence of 2 can get path 3 and essence of 3 can get path 5 - it makes them more viable. But it seems off. I feel like essence, virtues and path ratings are more intertwined than that.
The rules as written seem ok for occasional NPC DKs, but PC and close ally/recurring enemy NPC’s seem to need more interrelations between these stats.
What if favored/racial paths work as written, but other paths require path rating to be no more than essence and requires a favored virtue of at least path rating -1.So,as an example, if Growing Wood is not a favored path then learning step 3 requires essence 3 and temperance 2. if it is favored, then step 3 requires essence 2. I think that this lets them “keep up” in the short term, while still giving a better “alien” feel. It also gives Dragon Kings a good reason to get essence 4 and 5. it also explains why there society falls apart as they stop trying to further enlighten their essence.
What if A DK also needs to have at least 2 paths bumped up against the hard cap before he can raise his essence. Now a DK needs Essence and Virtue to raise his Path and needs Path (and thereby Virtue) to raise his essence. This sounds like the Dragon King fluff, no?
I guess my final problem is - how many virtues can a DK get to 6? all 4 seems wrong. 6 tends to make most creatures act crazy (sometimes that is a good thing). having all 4 become six could put a creature into some kind of paradox loop. for example I can see a character with compassion and valor both at 6 being required to attack and required to not attack a particular enemy.
maybe we can fix this. what of a DK of essence 5 or less can have a maximum of 1 virtue at 5 (or less), 1 at 4(or less), and the final 2 at 3(or less). He could have 2 at 4 and 2 at 3, but the above is the max. when this DK has a essence of 6 he maxes out at, one 6, one 5, one 4 and 1 three. This always leaves a hierarchy so he will not have a strong likelihood of "paradox".
