Plus hair is apparently capable of causing damage, so maybe that could be cut off to be transferred.
It is very hard to weaponize true love.
Not to mention that, while rare, a WCV could learn to feed from more than one emotion. If you have true love, and they switch to feeding off of fear, requiring True Courage as a catch, how likely are you to have it?You can't switch The Catch. Either the vampire in question would retain their 'hereditary' Catch (but be able to dual-feed), or the vampire would gain a second Catch (worth the larger of the two refreshes, which is still zero) and be affected equally by both all of the time.
If a PC encounters a Black Court Vampire, he can learn its catch and use it against it.
If a PC encounters a Fairy, he can learn its catch and use it against it.
If a PC encounters a Loup de Garou (not sure of the spelling there), he can learn its catch and use it against it.
If a PC encounters a White Court Vampire, he can learn its catch and ... what? Gain an emotional state? Falling in True Love (or gaining any of the other emotional states) isn't the same as going to a store and buying an iron pipe, or picking up some garlic, or melting down the family silver.
A PC can ID the beastie and research its weakness, but when it comes to the White Court the PC can't exploit the weakness. Not in a meaningful way.
It's like the low cost of a wizard's constitution. Living for centuries is a powerful advantage, but it didn't have much of an impact in the game. That's why it's worth 0 points. I see the White Court weakness the same way - a weakness that the PCs can't exploit is the same as not having a weakness.
Richard
If you pay attention to the values of catches in Our World, you'll notice that many of them are worth a point less than the rules for The Catch say they should be worth. It's probably just a design mistake.I would say that the rules in Your Story are primarily for PCs, whereas in Our World, the NPCs of equivalent power get less potent versions of the PC rules. So NPCs outside of Plot Devices are mooks there to suck it up.
If you want to be charitable to the designers, it might be because True Love is essentially a plot device. The GM has total control over its availability. If you look at it that way, it makes sense.
Many of the same points I would have made, except 2 points.
1) I'm not sure how easy it would be to find the White Court weakness. They seem to play that really close to the chest. Harry only knows because of an extremely close relationship with one. Its not unreasonable to assume that most people outside the Court are in the dark about it.
And a minor correction, 2) You can't just go out and get the Loup Garou weakness. It has to be inherited silver, not just any silver will do.
P.S. I don't remember the exact details of the times they used true love infused Items, but weren't all those times when either the user or the Vampire was directly connected to the love in the item? If so, it would be silly to say that it was the item. No third party could grab up that item and use it effectively.
I think there was a scene in one of the books where Thomas mentions that one of his relatives picked up an old wedding ring at used good store and was branded by it. Of course, how do tell what might have True Love attached to it? It's next to impossible.This is were magic and the sight come into play. I really doubt they couldn't detect true love. Even normal people should be able to detect true love. Most people have met a couple that is truly in love. A pair that just seems to fit together like two half of a whole. Finding a couple like that shouldn't to hard. Then it just becomes a matter of weaponizing their tokens of affection. That part is a bit harder, but it's entirely doable.
Turning to White Court, I am having difficulties seeing how it can be used as offensive weapon. A "bang, the vampire goes down" scene just isn't coming to me. Even if you got people in True Love grappling and hugging the vampire then the vampire can still smack one hard enough to get away (it would hurt the vampire, but that's better than dying and with inhuman speed they are gone). Once the lovers are know to the White Court, well, True Love doesn't do anything against a sniper. Or even a White Court vampire smashing a club over your head - as the blood spray doesn't get them. Less violently, there's always a century old vampire deciding to break a couple up - I'm sure they have their ways.If true love only counted as a catch when it was a person's love and not an item that carried that love I'd agree with you. But a character taking an autographed bat that a wife had given to her husband as an anniversary gift they could mess up a white court vampire pretty well. And it would be to hard for a character to get such an item. Its just a few contact and burglary rolls away.
If true love only counted as a catch when it was a person's love and not an item that carried that love I'd agree with you. But a character taking an autographed bat that a wife had given to her husband as an anniversary gift they could mess up a white court vampire pretty well. And it would be to hard for a character to get such an item. Its just a few contact and burglary rolls away.The Problem here would be to verify said Bat as a token of True Love before you start pounding on the WCV.
The Problem here would be to verify said Bat as a token of True Love before you start pounding on the WCV.How do you verify a blessed item? As for a whether most relationships count as true love, I'm pretty sure a very large percentage of all relationships at any given time should count. Otherwise why are the white courts trying to make people love each other less if true love is already rare?
As far as we know True Love is not the standard for relationships. "mostly true love" maybe, but thats not enough to hurt a WCV.
You make some good points Jaroslav. Ones that I would be making, but after the first page I started getting afraid people would think me argumentative.Glad I could help. :) And don't worry to much about being seen as argumentative. As long as you don't start making personal attacks or ignoring people no one here is going to think of you as argumentative. Remember we're all friends here. ;D
If true love only counted as a catch when it was a person's love and not an item that carried that love I'd agree with you. But a character taking an autographed bat that a wife had given to her husband as an anniversary gift they could mess up a white court vampire pretty well. And it would be to hard for a character to get such an item. Its just a few contact and burglary rolls away.
Here's a guide I used when running games: If it's possible then the players will think of a way of doing it.
It's possible that someone could find out the White Court secrets, so some will eventually do it. It might take a while. It might take several sessions and visits to obscure Lore Masters, but the PCs will eventually find out.
As for weaponizing love, here's what was in Blood Rites on the matter. "Lara’s got a circular scar on the palm of her left hand where she picked up the wrong wedding ring. My cousin Madeline picked up a rose that had been a gift between lovers, and the thorns poisoned her so badly she was in bed for a week." It seems all to easy to take that same ring and put it on and punch a WCV with it.
It stands to reason that this limitation would apply to the symbolic representations of that love as well. Every sunrise is a new beginning, washing away magical energies, so you would have a finite number of days after the couple stopped constantly reinforcing the power of the symbol, before it stopped working.I don't think that's correct. If it were holy effects would also wear off, and they aren't mentioned to do so. I think that as long as an item was saturated in love it will say saturated in love until something desecrates that love in some way.
First a wizard would have to search for True Love.But in Proven Guilty Harry was able to find areas of intense fear were the fetches were feeding. And in Dead Beat Mortimer was able to search all of Chicago for necromantic energy. So a spell to to find strong sites of love wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility. And magic isn't even needed to find an item that is likely to be wrapped in love. All you need for that is a good contacts roll. Then you just use magic to see if the rumors are true.
Would this involve walking around with his Sight up until he spots it? I think not (not if he wants to stay sane) so it would have to be a spell... A seeking spell when he lacks any connection to the target... One that would have to cross threshold after threshold... Just thinking about those multiple thresholds, the number of shifts needed is staggering.
Then, once he's found a couple in True Love, he has to find an expression of that love that can be used for a weapon. The odds are very low.Here are a few examples of gifts that can be turned into weapons of the top of my head. Golf clubs, kitchen ware for those couples that love to cook, a classic car if your partner is into that kind of thing, actual weapons if they re a collector, musical instruments, and the list goes on. True not all of these items make the best weapons but many them are at least serviceable.
Say he does find that Baseball Bat of Love. After the first blow with it the White Court Vampire takes off at inhuman speed (maybe with a consequence) and later has someone deal with the bat of doom...That can apply to any catch. The fact that a character can potentially avoid the catch does not invalidate it.
No, when you consider the amount of time and effort to get something with True Love that you can use as a weapon you'd be better off ignoring the catch. It would be far less effort to get a mini gun, mount it on a jeep, and unleash massive damage on the vampire. Or grenades, or some C4, or just multiple PCs unloading with shotguns.Not really. An antique set of golf clubs ,or any other such item, given as an anniversary gift would be much easier to get a hold of and you wouldn't have to answer any awkward questions from the police. Or to put it another way. I've have seen many more objects wrapped in true love in my life than mini-guns or grenades.
Here are a few examples of gifts that can be turned into weapons of the top of my head. Golf clubs, kitchen ware for those couples that love to cook, a classic car if your partner is into that kind of thing, actual weapons if they re a collector, musical instruments, and the list goes on. True not all of these items make the best weapons but many them are at least serviceable.The item in question has to be a "Token of Love"... I'm sorry, but Golf clubs, Kitchen Ware, or Baseball Bats are not likely to be Tokens of romantic Love. Sure, they do exist, but I'd say its far more likely that less weaponly... weaponal?... weaponish?... (yes, those are now valid words :P) Items are used in displaying romantic love.
The item in question has to be a "Token of Love"... I'm sorry, but Golf clubs, Kitchen Ware, or Baseball Bats are not likely to be Tokens of romantic Love. Sure, they do exist, but I'd say its far more likely that less weaponly... weaponal?... weaponish?... (yes, those are now valid words :P) Items are used in displaying romantic love.
think, the scarf Thomas gets, he had to be careful not to touch it, while he could still hold other things that he received from... uhhh.. blast mind blank.Justine
I don't think that's correct. If it were holy effects would also wear off, and they aren't mentioned to do so. I think that as long as an item was saturated in love it will say saturated in love until something desecrates that love in some way.
But in Proven Guilty Harry was able to find areas of intense fear were the fetches were feeding. And in Dead Beat Mortimer was able to search all of Chicago for necromantic energy. So a spell to find strong sites of love wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility.
And magic isn't even needed to find an item that is likely to be wrapped in love. All you need for that is a good contacts roll. Then you just use magic to see if the rumors are true.
Here are a few examples of gifts that can be turned into weapons of the top of my head. Golf clubs, kitchen ware for those couples that love to cook, a classic car if your partner is into that kind of thing, actual weapons if they re a collector, musical instruments, and the list goes on. True not all of these items make the best weapons but many them are at least serviceable.
That can apply to any catch. The fact that a character can potentially avoid the catch does not invalidate it.
Not really. An antique set of golf clubs ,or any other such item, given as an anniversary gift would be much easier to get a hold of and you wouldn't have to answer any awkward questions from the police. Or to put it another way. I've have seen many more objects wrapped in true love in my life than mini-guns or grenades.
I don't think that's correct. If it were holy effects would also wear off, and they aren't mentioned to do so. I think that as long as an item was saturated in love it will say saturated in love until something desecrates that love in some way.
+1 would be reasonable if it were something easily obtainable. But Tsunami has a point. You don't just make it. It's the time part that reduces the value of it.I'd argue the opposite. Hope is probably the most abundant thing on the planet. Without hope, plenty of people would lose any and all will just to open their eyes each morning. Faith is entirely arguable but it's definately in between Hope and Love in terms of abundance.
True Love *is* exceptionally rare. And it takes a good deal of time for the feelings required for it to actually develop. Not to mention, a certain amount of maturity is required for it. Those teenagers, yeah, that's not love. 99.9999% sure that it's not, despite what said teenagers say/feel. Though in a few years it *might* be.
Because it can take *years* to develop the connection that would be counted as true love, and that it takes a relationship to build up to it, The Catch is +0. If you're character starts a session completely single, (s)he is not going to fall deeply in love with another character and that said character isn't going to fall deeply in love with the PC. Not immediately. Love at first sight? That's called Lust at first sight. I wouldn't say it's unobtainable, but its certainly not easily obtainable.
As for the other clans of the White Court: Hope and Faith. I'd say those are even more exceptionally rare than Love.
I'd argue the opposite. Hope is probably the most abundant thing on the planet. Without hope, plenty of people would lose any and all will just to open their eyes each morning. Faith is entirely arguable but it's definately in between Hope and Love in terms of abundance.
I, on the other hand, think that emotions might be written over. That if a psychopath wears a wedding ring that was imprinted with True Love that his hate would overwrite the other emotion.This.
Do we want people playing White Court vampires for 1 less refresh cost? My answer is that I don't think we want that. I like that they come in at the power level they do. Compared to this, the rest of the argument is irrelevant.
As for anecdotal evidence of love not being common, I had still never claimed true love was common. My own assessment is that True Love is literally one in a million. But even that is a "Rare" class of people, which is worth +1 (according to the Catch pricing guidelines as written). Nobody has even attempted to argue that the number of people truely in love on this planet is 2. And that's what would be necessary to qualify it as +0. Heck, nobody has even claimed True Love is possessed by fewer than 50 people on Earth.
That is putting the entire argument backwards. If the powers they have are strong enough to be worth -7, then the powers on their own merits ought to be worth -7. It shouldn't be "We're not going to give you credit for powers that we overpriced to make up for the powers we underpriced".
I have no problem with WCV not being available below chest deep, but if the prices are wrong, the proper thing to do is alter the powers of the template, not lie about the worth of a catch. You could very easily increase the value of a catch and include Lasting Emotion or Incite at Range in the template to make it still worth +7.
And again, True Love is very rare. Of six married couples that I know personally, and fairly well, I'd say that none of them are in "True Love". EG: one couple basically only got married because it means less taxes to pay, and still bring that up years after being married, another ... is absolutely in a master/slave type relationship (if only emotionally), another would be fairly close, but they tend to not really value each others opinions on a good number of topics. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to demain or belittle them, but just trying to point out that while they may definitely love each other, it's not True Love. It's not that all consuming, all caring, unconditional love of an equal.
Oh, and I'd say if it isn't permanent, it isn't True Love. A relationship like that is built, and worked at, and firmly established. And yes, while it very difficult, it's difficult because you *must* except the other as your equal. How many people do that in general, let alone AT ALL. To be that strong, and get that far, it's already endured a lot, and would not fade. Not without a huge, live changing event (and no, cheating just means you weren't really in love).
The second argument is just demonstrably wrong though. In Blood RightsYou missed a very key point, which I've put in bold:(click to show/hide)
Oh, and I'd say if it isn't permanent, it isn't True Love. A relationship like that is built, and worked at, and firmly established. And yes, while it very difficult, it's difficult because you *must* except the other as your equal. How many people do that in general, let alone AT ALL. To be that strong, and get that far, it's already endured a lot, and would not fade. Not without a huge, live changing event (and no, cheating just means you weren't really in love).I think that if you can't come up with a "huge, life-changing event" that occured with regards to Harry and Susan's relationship, then you aren't really reading the books. :) The surprise was that Harry still experienced true love despite the very, very significant event that occured, especially given Harry's past history with such subjects.
The rule book seems to view channelling and ritual as true magic. So anyone who has either one also counts. There's an argument that anyone with sponsored magic also counts too.Any references?
“With regard to True Love, you commented that it needs to be self-sacrificial love… some folks have pointed out that you (generally) can’t get more self-sacrificial than a parent’s love for a child… are parents protected because of that love?”
Not necessarily, because it’s got to be reciprocated equally or it doesn’t work. While a parent’s love for a child can be something pure and selfless, the child doesn’t return the same kind of love. Children can’t. The nature of the relationship isn’t one of equals exchanging trust and affection, but of the greater protecting the lesser.
Magic can substitute if it compels. Love potions that don't compel, as described in the DFRPG, won't work because they don't compel. Make a magical effect that compels and you have a winner.
Because, as I already pointed out (and the novels support), its not a real emotion. Mind magic isn't really making them feel the emotion. Its just making them ACT as though they felt the emotion.
In a word, there are three things
that last forever: faith, hope, and love;
but the greatest of them all is love."
3) the only magic that comes close to imposing True Love is in the short story Love Hurts and it required(click to show/hide)
1) It was a lust potion, not a love potion.
Point three is the main one - Dresden doesn't do a detect True Love spell and he couldn't think of a spell non-black magic spell that would make someone love someone else.
Irrelevant, since the potion was an example of the ability of magic to alter will and behavior, not a limitation on the ability of magic. Your point ignores the point already made making it clear the rpg, by its very nature, exceeds the scope of the novels.
Which limits thaumaturgy as described by the rpg how? Let's count the unfounded assumptions in that quote (non-exhaustive list):
• Dresden had a sufficient amount of time to consider the matter.
• Dresden considered, and discounted, chains of spells and mixtures of spellcraft with nonmagical tactics -- or considered them and decided that such methods didn't fit into his definition of "spell" and discounted them for that reason.
• Dresden is unrivaled in the magical community and no one could come up with a better or more complete answer than he.
• Dresden is unrivaled in creativity as well.
The novels aren't the rpg. They don't even limit the rpg. In fact, the rpg's scope was deliberately left open-ended -- textually limited due to the absence of materials that would have otherwise gone in (and actually, I must say, needed to go in*) -- specifically because Jim Butcher didn't want future novels hemmed in or undermined by the rpg.
I've had real-life discussions with physicists and biologists arguing about whether or not something in nature was even possible. We ended the matter, if not the discussion, by checking the literature. A professor who I considered, and still do, so smart it's scary was completely ignorant of the right answer -- it was generally in his field but he just hadn't found out yet. Magic's intellectual size -- for lack of a better word -- isn't clear, but it seems like the secrets of the universe would be pretty freakn' big. On par with the rigor needed for just biology, at least. A field that big is bound to have murky elements for a guy who two specialties are burnination and pulling wacky spells out of his backside.
That in mind, not only are the novels no limit (for the umpteenth time) on the rpg -- they don't even contradict.
Still doesn't make the vulnerability worth bupkis, though. Still comes down to a +0 point Catch.
a) Any RPG played will immediately go beyond the scope of its novel source material.
He has Bob. Bob is unrivalled. When asked the right question Bob has the answer
You’re forgetting that he has Bob – a source of near infinite knowledge.
As an informational entity, it
is similar to the Archive, but much less powerful.
(Its direct knowledge of Faerie is mostly focused
on the Winter Court side of the equation. Also,
its understanding of the power of faith—and for
that matter, technology—is limited.)His creativity is why he lives when he fights out of his weight class. He routinely survives things that he label’s heavy weights – which is equal to two members of the Senior Council working together.
It’s an example how magic works in the Dresdenverse. All the magic in the game is based around how it works in the books.
These aren’t assumptions – if you’ve read the short story you will see that he spent days investigating before getting away.
He has Bob. Bob is unrivalled. When asked the right question Bob has the answer
We differ here. The designer has tried to make the game as close to the books as possible. He has also seen “the outline” – which plans out the entire 22 books and trilogy.
His creativity is why he lives when he fights out of his weight class. He routinely survives things that he label’s heavy weights. . .
You’re forgetting that he has Bob – a source of near infinite knowledge.
You feel that True Love is can easy be used as a weapon and thus should be worth more.
I’ve tried to cite the sources as evidence, you disagree that the books should be cited.
Why don’t we agree that in your game True Love can be used as a weapon and thus should be worth a bit more?
But the implication you mean by this point, that the opposite is also true, that its okay to ignore or flat out contradict the source material is just flat out wrong.
The problem is, the stated guidelines for pricing catches don't count how weaponizable something is. I mean you could define a catch as Rainbows or dishonesty. Things which are somewhat common, but very unweaponizable. But because everyone has access to dishonesty, it would be worth +2