Re: [HoE] Templars and Anti-Templars

[J23junior@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/30/99 7:26:11 PM Central Daylight Time, Draxus@aol.com 
writes:

<< Assuming I somehow got stuck with one, I'd require
 some kind of roll now and then to resist calling upon the reckoners power. 
 An AT should be a doomed character who will eventually succumb. Its just a
 matter of when. >>

  No ofense, but I really think that would be a bad idea.  If someone is 
going to play an anti-templar, they will probably do it for 1 of 2 reasons-  
roleplaying or power        (most people can't do both without looking like a 
munchkin).  If the player is taking an AT for roleplaying, they are playing 
heros who consantly walk the line between good and evil and try to be 
responsable while staying alive.  If you think that an AT in your group has 
it too easy, make up a senario that comes down to if your AT will use his 
powers (the entire group is about to be overrun by mutuants, and the 
syker/doomie is tapped out and everyone is out of ammo- of course your AT 
risks it).  However, if the player knows that their AT is doomed no matter 
what, why even try.  I wrote up an AT when I first read Last Crusaders who 
was basicly a philosopher-warrior, trying to create a Hegelian Synthesis of 
templars and anti-templars (a cookie at Gen-Con who can prove they know who 
Hegel is and what he said).  If I had known that my guy was going to go evil 
in only a matter of time, I would have never even tried. 
  As for the power players, they will probably tap the evil anyways- if not 
at the start then later when they want to be the group Bad-a*s.