I think you've hit on something curious about aspects that occasionally niggles at my mind, which is that the more comfortable someone gets with their character, the fewer aspects they really feel they need to capture what's essential about their character. The image in my mind is that each aspect wears a groove when its used, and after a while, the deep grooves create the important shape.
Someday I'm going to fiddle with an option that trades off potency with flexibility, and make the mechanical payout of aspects an inverse to the number of them. This also is a nod back to some stuff we did early on with very few, very potent aspects which eventually got replaced with less potent but more ubiquitous ones. If I could put both options back on the table, that would kind of rock.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-07-10 04:01 pm (UTC)Someday I'm going to fiddle with an option that trades off potency with flexibility, and make the mechanical payout of aspects an inverse to the number of them. This also is a nod back to some stuff we did early on with very few, very potent aspects which eventually got replaced with less potent but more ubiquitous ones. If I could put both options back on the table, that would kind of rock.