Page 30 says: “If you have a blank bond left over from character creation you can assign a name to it or write a new bond in its place whenever you like.”
Does this mean that it is not advisable for a character to have more Bonds than the number on the character sheet? (6 for the Bard, 3 for the Wizard, 4 for everyone else)
I believe so. The fact that the Bard can have so many bonds is one of its advantages.
precisely
Yeah, it does make sense, he is the best at social situations.
I was wondering it about it because I started a campaign with a rotating party: we have 8 players, maybe 10 soon, with very different schedules; when some of them (3 to 6) are free, we get together and play a single adventure. So the party composition changes every session.
I’m worried that some sessions will feature characters with little to no connections. If that makes the game less fun, I may increase the number of bonds by 1 or 2.
How many bonds you have is essentially a stat. I’m facing a similar problem. My tenative plan is to allow everyone to have extra bonds, but they can only “activate” during a given session as the starting total.
The game is designed for max 5 players (1 GM and 4 PC), so its expected that some rules seem strange if you play in more.
Alan De Smet has a great idea there. Houserule it that you can have a much larger pool of bonds with your group at large, but may only have the class’ prescribed amount ‘active’ during play. It’s a very elegant solution to a rotating player or character roster.
Rafael Rocha ?