What's the most munchkin character you can build?

[Deadmanwalking]

The list is there as an example of existing NeverNever NPC's and their Conviction scores.
As guidline for stating other NPC's.

Sure, but it's sample of high-powered ones is very limited, and, IMO, a bit low Conviction.

Even with Superb Conviction, its trivial easy for an Focused Summoner to Summon and Bind it.
(Superb +5, +4 best possible dice roll = +9 without Fate Points).
Asses two Aspects for the Containment Ritual and you have nothing to fear.

True enough. Not precisely a problem, though. Binding's the hard part, and WAY more difficult than you're allowing for. Complexity 26+ to ensure it even on Mediocre Conviction (at least, if they use all their Consequences). Now, I'd suspect that more impressive creatures are more willing to burn all their Consequences to avoid being bound. In fact, that's explicit in the rules (with named characters actually using their Consequences and all). Also, if their Consequences are filled, you need to give them some downtime after Binding them...or those'll still be filled when you use them and any hit that gets through their Stress will take them out.

Sword OK, Gun would need special munition.
And if we use not an Fae as Parent but something other from the Nevernever it looks different.
And the Char. has two Enchanted Item Slots, an Lore of Superb and Thaumaturgy, so it would be prudent for the Char. to get an Enchanted Armor Item asap.
Better idea: Downgrade Thaumaturgy to Ritual: Summoning. Get an Extra Refinement for Enchanted Item Slots and let an dedicated summoned Item Crafter make your Magic Items.

Casually by anyone with an Sword? Even if we keep the Iron Catch. Not seeing it.

Um...they're as vulnerable to a sword as anyone with body armor...that's actually pretty vulnerable. Look at Harry.

On the whole, I dont see the problem with the Char. per se, but with the Summoning/Binding rules.
So my House-Rule is: More complex NPC's need a higher complexity (Summoning-)Ritual.
(And that would fit into the Summoning of the Erling. Harry got the Summoning Ritual from Peabody [well his book], but the Containment-Spell was Harrys [and would still be based on Conviction and be possible])

But Summoning doesn't need to be difficult, since summoned creatures can do whatever they like, it's Binding that needs to be difficult...and is.

Summary:
Even if you give all NeverNever NPC's an Superb Conviction, its still trivial easy for an Summoner to summon and bind them. There is no in-Game reason why

(click to show/hide)

Binder

had such whimps as cannon fodder.

I'll repeat: Summoning, easy. Binding, not easy. Since Summoning is basically the magical version of a Contacts roll, this seems appropriate. This also explains the thing with the Erlking being fairly simple: Hary was putting him in a circle and keeping him there...not binding him to service.

[JustinS]

I'll repeat: Summoning, easy. Binding, not easy. Since Summoning is basically the magical version of a Contacts roll, this seems appropriate. This also explains the thing with the Erlking being fairly simple: Hary was putting him in a circle and keeping him there...not binding him to service.

Also, if you are taking time to get the binding up, they have time to escape. Your creature can sit around, and assess you and your binding circle, probe it for weaknesses, meditate to gather focus, and then lash out with a handful of tags.

Remember the circle it took to hold Ivy... 

[Korwin]

@deadmanwalking:
You can Bind with multiple spells, not hard anymore...

In case the GM wants only one big binding ritual you need an bunch of tags anyhow (~10) those three or four extra tags for the higher conviction seem a little like thowing an lighter in an burning house...

@JustinS:
Examples? Discipline Assesment for extra Concentration, OK. Other than that?

[Edit:]
And its not as if an Big Hammer Ritual is short, the Creature should be able to tag those Aspects anyhow (if there are tagable there).

[Deadmanwalking]

@deadmanwalking:
You can Bind with multiple spells, not hard anymore...

In case the GM wants only one big binding ritual you need an bunch of tags anyhow (~10) those three or four extra tags for the higher conviction seem a little like thowing an lighter in an burning house...

Well, the more important and powerful a creature is the more likely it is to use it's Consequences. So the Scarecrow might use all of it's (making it a Complexity 30 or so ritual), while a Hellhound uses none (making it a Complexity 10 or so ritual). That's a large difference. Or, using the 'multiple rituals' model, one or two Rituals vs. five or six.

[Edit:]
And its not as if an Big Hammer Ritual is short, the Creature should be able to tag those Aspects anyhow (if there are tagable there).

Indeed. And it can make Declarations that they exist, as well as Assessments (and old, powerful, creatures should do precisely that). Either way it's got a good chance to break the hell out unless that's one hell of a binding circle (say, another Complexity 15 spell or so, if you want to be really safe).

Also, you're ignoring the potential diplomatic issues with this strategy. If you go around doing this to powerful, intelligent, entities, your former minions and/or their friends and associates will likely be annoyed and do something violent and unpleasant to you. Summoning up Fetches in Scarecrow's league is likely to arouse Mab's personal interest (they're her elite assassins), while summoning and binding Elder Gruffs is likely to annoy their elder brother. Neither of these are healthy for you. And the results are likely to be similar for summoning similarly powerful entities.

And thaqt, too, fits the books perfectly. It wasn't primarily summoning the Erlking that was  bad for Harry...it was the long-term consequences of doing so (ie: he wants to hunt Harry down and kill him).

[JustinS]

@deadmanwalking:
You can Bind with multiple spells, not hard anymore...

In case the GM wants only one big binding ritual you need an bunch of tags anyhow (~10) those three or four extra tags for the higher conviction seem a little like thowing an lighter in an burning house...

@JustinS:
Examples? Discipline Assesment for extra Concentration, OK. Other than that?

[Edit:]
And its not as if an Big Hammer Ritual is short, the Creature should be able to tag those Aspects anyhow (if there are tagable there).

off the top of my head, with no actual situation to work off of...

Lore assessments of the actual spell. Rapport assessments of the wizard in question. Possible craft declarations of the wizard having messed up his circle. Lore declarations of the wizard having used a crow feather instead of a raven...
Also, if you are going to force your way out, you may be able to add in the complementary skill might bonuses from levels of strength powers. Also, may have some fate points if they got spent against you from the summon if they invoked any of your aspects.

Not to mention the social attack of 'let me out, you can trust me even though I've never given my word'.

[Korwin]

Well, the more important and powerful a creature is the more likely it is to use it's Consequences. So the Scarecrow might use all of it's (making it a Complexity 30 or so ritual), while a Hellhound uses none (making it a Complexity 10 or so ritual). That's a large difference. Or, using the 'multiple rituals' model, one or two Rituals vs. five or six.

And how does the Wizard know before he tries to bind the creature, how many Consequences it will take? That sound very metagamy to me. Shouldnt the Wizard plan for the worst?

Indeed. And it can make Declarations that they exist, as well as Assessments (and old, powerful, creatures should do precisely that). Either way it's got a good chance to break the hell out unless that's one hell of a binding circle (say, another Complexity 15 spell or so, if you want to be really safe).

Complexity 15 Containment spell. We are talking about two Assessments...

Also, you're ignoring the potential diplomatic issues with this strategy. If you go around doing this to powerful, intelligent, entities, your former minions and/or their friends and associates will likely be annoyed and do something violent and unpleasant to you. Summoning up Fetches in Scarecrow's league is likely to arouse Mab's personal interest (they're her elite assassins), while summoning and binding Elder Gruffs is likely to annoy their elder brother. Neither of these are healthy for you. And the results are likely to be similar for summoning similarly powerful entities.

Back to the sample summoned creature: Magical Constructs - no diplomatic issues?

off the top of my head, with no actual situation to work off of...

Lore assessments of the actual spell. Rapport assessments of the wizard in question. Possible craft declarations of the wizard having messed up his circle. Lore declarations of the wizard having used a crow feather instead of a raven...
Also, if you are going to force your way out, you may be able to add in the complementary skill might bonuses from levels of strength powers. Also, may have some fate points if they got spent against you from the summon if they invoked any of your aspects.

Not to mention the social attack of 'let me out, you can trust me even though I've never given my word'.

The wizards gain an Fate point every time a declarations is made against him, right?
So he can and should make an declaration right back. Seems like an no win situation.
For Assesments: The wizard should have the upper hand, because he controls the place and time of the Ritual. So he should go to the trouble of making clear there are no objects on the floor he can tripp over...
And how about preparing the room? Scene Aspect: Cleaned room, nothing to use against me. (Not shure how that would work exactly.)


From the other Thread (so we can discuss in one place):

Potentially. It depends on how you read and look at the rules. Even assuming that's the case, your new minion will then immediately need time to recover or be pretty much useless until it does. Also, see the other thread for reasons why this is usually a bad idea. Two words: Diplomatic Repercussions.

How so, the minion can choose every time to take no consequences, and be bound.
And if you use one big ritual for binding, the creature can still choose to take consequences and would be useless for you until recovered.

Though now that I think about it, there's also the whole 'literal genie' problem, where your new minion is ordered to protect you from the demon, and immediately kills you since then the demon can't. That's a bit of an over-the-top example, but the kind of thing that's likely to be a much bigger problem for powerful creatures than the less powerful.

Thats on of the reasons we want long term binding.

But lets drop the matter of uber-powerfull summons for the moment. Does nobody see a problem with summoning an Army?
100 hundred magical constructs on the powerlevel of an Hellhound? (little more of 8 hours nonstop summoning and binding).
Its not as problematic as the mass summoning of Powerfull Things and workable. But its hard on the overpowered mark.

@Deadmanwalking: If

(click to show/hide)

Binder

had his creatures allready summoned, how did he call them?
If its so easy to call them through the NeverNever (and he couldnt open a door into the NeverNever by the rules), then

Not a lot, but some (he can't keep 22 Hellhounds around all the time).

And I'd argue that nothing

(click to show/hide)

Binder

does proves Summoning takes that little time (I'd make it quite a bit longer, personally). I, also personally, assumed his Summonings were of entire groups, and all conducted offscreen, all he did onscreen was yell the equivalent of "Here, boy!" at already summoned critters.

he can keep them around 24/7.





Sorry to say it, but at the moment I get the feeling of: Srew the player over for abusing rules that shouln't be there.

At the moment every creature is Summonable, Containable and Bindable (with Superb Conviction or lower, probably the Conviction could go even higher).
I could see an House Rule that the Binding Spell disrupts the Containment spell. So you would need one big powerfull Binding spell.
But then nothing would be bindable. The wizard cant know this creature isnt going to use Consequenses.

[Deadmanwalking]

And how does the Wizard know before he tries to bind the creature, how many Consequences it will take? That sound very metagamy to me. Shouldnt the Wizard plan for the worst?

Less powerful creatures trying less hard to resist? That’s not really metagamey. And careful Wizards with the time and energy to do so should indeed plan for the worst. Notice how I phrased that?

Complexity 15 Containment spell. We are talking about two Assessments...

True enough, for a dedicated summoner.

Back to the sample summoned creature: Magical Constructs - no diplomatic issues?

Unless you take the time and energy to make a complicated magical AI, Constructs ARE summoning. Even if you do the AI thing (which I'd actually rule to take ALOT longer), there's the potential of it going rogue, or the Wardens coming down on you for creating  a sentient being and mistreating it. And if you aren't mistreating it and it serves you willingly...well, what makes it different from any other allied NPC?

The wizards gain an Fate point every time a declarations is made against him, right?
So he can and should make an declaration right back. Seems like an no win situation.

No. No he doesn’t. He’d get a Fate Point if the enemy burned a Fate Point to use one of his Aspects…but if the enemy uses Tags he gets jack and shit. And you can make Declarations without burning fate Points on them, too.

For Assesments: The wizard should have the upper hand, because he controls the place and time of the Ritual. So he should go to the trouble of making clear there are no objects on the floor he can tripp over...
And how about preparing the room? Scene Aspect: Cleaned room, nothing to use against me. (Not shure how that would work exactly.)

It…really wouldn’t. Except inasmuch as he could make it one of his own Assessments or Declarations to enhance the summoning circle.

From the other Thread (so we can discuss in one place):How so, the minion can choose every time to take no consequences, and be bound.

Sure, but will they do that? Many proud and powerful ones wouldn’t, they’d fight to the bitter end.

And if you use one big ritual for binding, the creature can still choose to take consequences and would be useless for you until recovered.
Thats on of the reasons we want long term binding.

Oh, indeed. But that makes this a tactic requiring A LOT of prep time. Wizards can do almost anything if you give them prep time…but their enemies are aware of this, and seldom give them such time.

But lets drop the matter of uber-powerfull summons for the moment. Does nobody see a problem with summoning an Army?
100 hundred magical constructs on the powerlevel of an Hellhound? (little more of 8 hours nonstop summoning and binding).
Its not as problematic as the mass summoning of Powerfull Things and workable. But its hard on the overpowered mark.

No, it’s not. You can easily play a general in this game and not be overpowered, because you can’t keep your soldiers with you 24/7 and when they aren’t there, they’re useless to you. Additionally, there’s the potential problems with having a supernatural army. Major players start seeing you as a threat, and various people start worrying that you’ll draw attention to the magical community. Neither of these are good for you.

@Deadmanwalking: If

(click to show/hide)

Binder

had his creatures allready summoned, how did he call them?

Okay, to be clear, he already has them bound. He the n spends a Complexity 4 or so spell summoning them, with no need for any Focus Items or circle (since they come pre-bound). Those are what likely take the time, not the summoning itself.

If its so easy to call them through the NeverNever (and he couldnt open a door into the NeverNever by the rules), then he can keep them around 24/7.

Sure could. And? He’s planned, prepped, and put effort into his little army, and ne guy with a gun can still snuff him like a candle. He deserves something out of it.

Sorry to say it, but at the moment I get the feeling of: Srew the player over for abusing rules that shouln't be there.

No, that’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying characters don’t operate in a vacuum, and their actions provoke appropriate responses in NPCs. A PC with Superb Resources and Filthy Lucre might be able to get, say, a helicopter gunship and the mercenaries to use it effectively, but if he does so in an obvious way, the Police are going to come down on him like a ton of bricks. Same deal with summoning, you can get a lot of help and power, but you need to be careful of the consequences. Contacts can probably do the same sort of thing at high ratings.

At the moment every creature is Summonable, Containable and Bindable (with Superb Conviction or lower, probably the Conviction could go even higher).
I could see an House Rule that the Binding Spell disrupts the Containment spell. So you would need one big powerfull Binding spell.
But then nothing would be bindable. The wizard cant know this creature isnt going to use Consequenses.

Huh? How would that make the creature unbindable? He’d just need to take all it’s Consequences into account.

[Korwin]

Unless you take the time and energy to make a complicated magical AI, Constructs ARE summoning.

Can you rephrase that? Not shure I understand that... Constructs are summoning?

Even if you do the AI thing (which I'd actually rule to take ALOT longer), there's the potential of it going rogue,

Alot longer = House Rule?
Potential of going rogue. How if its bound?

or the Wardens coming down on you for creating  a sentient being and mistreating it.

Why would they? Its not human.

And if you aren't mistreating it and it serves you willingly... well, what makes it different from any other allied NPC?

The Power of the NPC?

No. No he doesn’t. He’d get a Fate Point if the enemy burned a Fate Point to use one of his Aspects…but if the enemy uses Tags he gets jack and shit. And you can make Declarations without burning fate Points on them, too.

Got confused, thought Declarations need an Fate point. Whats the difference between an Assessment and an Declaration again?

It…really wouldn’t. Except inasmuch as he could make it one of his own Assessments or Declarations to enhance the summoning circle.

Wouldnt it be an Aspect the Summoned Creature needs to buy of with an Fate point? (ToDo: Need to reread the Aspect chapter...)

Oh, indeed. But that makes this a tactic requiring A LOT of prep time. Wizards can do almost anything if you give them prep time…but their enemies are aware of this, and seldom give them such time.

Not shure we are talking about the same. I'm talking about a wizard who uses one work day (8 hours) per month to gain 100 NPC's as followers. He does that regulary. If he need more he has 100 followers who protect him while he summons more.
Hellhounds are a little obvious but not all summoned creatures are.

Major players start seeing you as a threat, and various people start worrying that you’ll draw attention to the magical community. Neither of these are good for you.

Finally an use for the "Marked by Power" Power

Okay, to be clear, he already has them bound. He the n spends a Complexity 4 or so spell summoning them, with no need for any Focus Items or circle (since they come pre-bound). Those are what likely take the time, not the summoning itself.

Nice thinking. Need to remember this.

No, that’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying characters don’t operate in a vacuum, and their actions provoke appropriate responses in NPCs.

While I see this for summoning actual existing creatures. I have (as stated multiple times) a problem with Magical Constructs.

But since you (sort of) used an HR to limit Magical Constructs, we are on the same page. Our House Rules are different, but we agree that AI Magical Constructs need an limitation. Do you agree?

[Deadmanwalking]

Can you rephrase that? Not shure I understand that... Constructs are summoning?

Indeed. The vast majority of constructs are a spirit summoned to inhabit a constructed body.  AIs are a different matter but, well, see below.

Alot longer = House Rule?

Not really. There are never any rules at all listed to deal with making magical AIs (beyond a statement in OW on p. 31 that it requires a large investment of magical power). The type of Construct Work that uses the Summoning rules is the kind that is summoning. AIs aren’t ever even implied to use the same.

Potential of going rogue. How if its bound?

It could break the binding. In fact, the GM can always break any binding by giving the bound creature a Major Milestone…breaking it’s binding by removing the Extreme Consequence.

Why would they? Its not human.

See the first book, and Morgan getting antsy about Harry putting Toot-toot in a circle, or how worried he was about the Wardens not taking him summoning up Chancy well. It’s not technically a violation, but Wardens can still very much get on your case about it. And humane ones will do so.

The Power of the NPC?

True enough. But on the other hand, a PC could make friends with Thor in a bar, and get an even nastier friend. If the GM lets him.

Got confused, thought Declarations need an Fate point. Whats the difference between an Assessment and an Declaration again?

An Assessment is figuring out a fact or Aspect the GM’s already decided on, a Declaration is making up a fact and having it be true. The GM can veto Declarations, of course, but if the GM’s the one making them…

Wouldnt it be an Aspect the Summoned Creature needs to buy of with an Fate point? (ToDo: Need to reread the Aspect chapter...)

That’s…not quite how that works. Though I suppose you could try and Compel them with it…

Not shure we are talking about the same. I'm talking about a wizard who uses one work day (8 hours) per month to gain 100 NPC's as followers. He does that regulary. If he need more he has 100 followers who protect him while he summons more.

Hellhounds are a little obvious but not all summoned creatures are.

Sure. He can do that. And you could also play a Marcone type with that many mundane (but skilled) thugs more cheaply and easily.

Finally an use for the "Marked by Power" Power

Indeed. Though the social skill bonus is nice as well.

Nice thinking. Need to remember this.

Happy to oblige.

While I see this for summoning actual existing creatures. I have (as stated multiple times) a problem with Magical Constructs.

Addressed above.

But since you (sort of) used an HR to limit Magical Constructs, we are on the same page. Our House Rules are different, but we agree that AI Magical Constructs need an limitation. Do you agree?

They do indeed, but I’m not convinced that’s a house rule any more than statting up a Rakshasa is (since neither are in the rules as written).

[Korwin]

Not really. There are never any rules at all listed to deal with making magical Ais (beyond a statement in OW on p. 31 that it requires a large investment of magical power). The type of Construct Work that uses the Summoning rules is the kind that is summoning. AIs aren’t ever even implied to use the same.

I would argue, they are implied because AI rules are missing.

You need to have an rule if you want to use an AI Construct. (or use an existing rule [Summoning and Binding] but then they get overpowered)
So since there is no rule you need to make on = House Rule.

And as for rules for Rakshasha, there are rules. Its called Character Generation... 

It could break the binding. In fact, the GM can always break any binding by giving the bound creature a Major Milestone…breaking it’s binding by removing the Extreme Consequence.

You are asuming the Creature has an Extreme Consequence and that the Consequence is: Bound.
I see two problems with it:
1. It could be bound without an Extreme Consequence.
2. IF it had the Extreme Consequence "Bound" it would be bound until it got an Major Milestone... That could be a long time. (And no need to shift power into duration).

See the first book, and Morgan getting antsy about Harry putting Toot-toot in a circle, or how worried he was about the Wardens not taking him summoning up Chancy well. It’s not technically a violation, but Wardens can still very much get on your case about it. And humane ones will do so.

But Harry was under the Doom of Damocles and still got away. And what has humane to do with it? Will Wardens kill you if you hit an hound/cat whatever?

True enough. But on the other hand, a PC could make friends with Thor in a bar, and get an even nastier friend. If the GM lets him.

That could be read as, you dont let PC's be Summoner?
Or if you have an Summoner in the party, the non-Summoner gets Thor as an buddy?

I hope that was a joke...

[Deadmanwalking]

I would argue, they are implied because AI rules are missing.

You need to have an rule if you want to use an AI Construct. (or use an existing rule [Summoning and Binding] but then they get overpowered)
So since there is no rule you need to make on = House Rule.

And as for rules for Rakshasha, there are rules. Its called Character Generation... 

I disagree. A lack of rules for something doesn't necessarily imply that it works just like something else. It can, but it doesn't have to, and saying it doesn't isn't really a House Rule.

You are asuming the Creature has an Extreme Consequence and that the Consequence is: Bound.
I see two problems with it:
1. It could be bound without an Extreme Consequence.
2. IF it had the Extreme Consequence "Bound" it would be bound until it got an Major Milestone... That could be a long time. (And no need to shift power into duration).

True, though I'd be inclined to see Extreme Consequences as a fairly normal way to bind things.

But Harry was under the Doom of Damocles and still got away. And what has humane to do with it? Will Wardens kill you if you hit an hound/cat whatever?

Probably not, but a nice Warden who sees someone mistreating their Golem might well decide to do something about it. Kill them? Maybe, maybe not. Work magic to free the golem? Quite a bit more likely.

That could be read as, you dont let PC's be Summoner?
Or if you have an Summoner in the party, the non-Summoner gets Thor as an buddy?

I hope that was a joke...

Sorta. Though I'd likely let a PC do precisely that. Having powerful allies doesn't make PCs invulnrable, and I've never been shy about allowing it, nor should you be. I mean, look at Harry. He's personal friends with a Senior Council Member (as well as something like two dozen werewolves, the Summer Lady and Knight, and quite a few other people)...has that stopped him from getting in trouble?

[Korwin]

I disagree. A lack of rules for something doesn't necessarily imply that it works just like something else. It can, but it doesn't have to, and saying it doesn't isn't really a House Rule.

But making rules for AI Construct is definitly a House rule. And you did that. You didnt say I dont allow AI Constructs because there are no rules for them...

True, though I'd be inclined to see Extreme Consequences as a fairly normal way to bind things.

But then you wouldnt need shifts for extra duration.

Probably not, but a nice Warden who sees someone mistreating their Golem might well decide to do something about it. Kill them? Maybe, maybe not. Work magic to free the golem? Quite a bit more likely.

Sounds like an Ex-Warden to me. Or an recipe for Civil War. Next you tell me an Warden tries to free cars from the oppression of their recless drivers?
An Warden that attacks an Wizard for something thats not an violation of an Law of Magic (and freeing an Golem is definitivly an attack)...
If that Warden is an PC and he tries to free an Stone Hound from Martha Liberty, what would you say to him?

Sorta. Though I'd likely let a PC do precisely that. Having powerful allies doesn't make PCs invulnrable, and I've never been shy about allowing it, nor should you be. I mean, look at Harry. He's personal friends with a Senior Council Member (as well as something like two dozen werewolves, the Summer Lady and Knight, and quite a few other people)...has that stopped him from getting in trouble?

We were talking about NPC followers. (like Marcones goos). Got to Summoned NPC's are likely more powerfull. Got to meeting Thor and are now by distant NPC's who might do some favors from time to time.
At this point, we are talking in circles and I think we should stop. We have both our standpoint, nobody is likely to change his mind...

[Deadmanwalking]

But making rules for AI Construct is definitly a House rule. And you did that. You didnt say I dont allow AI Constructs because there are no rules for them...

Uh…not allowing things just because there aren’t specifically rules for them is actually explicitly against the rules. Saying “Yes” is actually right in there.

But then you wouldnt need shifts for extra duration.

True, but the lack of assured duration balances out with that pretty well.

Sounds like an Ex-Warden to me. Or an recipe for Civil War. Next you tell me an Warden tries to free cars from the oppression of their recless drivers?

An Warden that attacks an Wizard for something thats not an violation of an Law of Magic (and freeing an Golem is definitivly an attack)...

Wardens are given very broad powers in how they pursue their duties. Morgan tried to kill Harry (albeit indirectly) and got off without much of any punishment at all. He had backing, but so will others doing this sort of thing. Violating free will IS against a Law of Magic…and while it’s technically a grey area doing it to non-humans, it’s up to the individual Warden how to deal with grey areas.

If that Warden is an PC and he tries to free an Stone Hound from Martha Liberty, what would you say to him?

Well, the Ward Hounds aren’t mistreated, and that’s a false comparison anyway. It’s like bringing up attacking Listens-to-Wind as an example of why attacking any Wizard is suicide. The Senior Council are rather obviously people you should tread lightly around. Also, BTW, it’s Ancient Mai, not Martha Liberty who does the hounds.

We were talking about NPC followers. (like Marcones goos). Got to Summoned NPC's are likely more powerfull. Got to meeting Thor and are now by distant NPC's who might do some favors from time to time.

At this point, we are talking in circles and I think we should stop. We have both our standpoint, nobody is likely to change his mind...

Um, all those are potential NPC relationships, and useful ones at that. There is indeed a distinction between friends and minions, but having 20-30 werewolves a phone call away blurs it quite a bit.

[Korwin]

Uh…not allowing things just because there aren’t specifically rules for them is actually explicitly against the rules. Saying “Yes” is actually right in there.

I'm not saying you should not allow it. But the moment you need to invent rules you have a House Rule. No problem with an House Rule. You should only be honest about it: Yeah the rules are unclear about that, this is how I rule it.
So you could say: The rules say you should make houserules when needed, but its still an House Rule.

Wardens are given very broad powers in how they pursue their duties. Morgan tried to kill Harry (albeit indirectly) and got off without much of any punishment at all. He had backing, but so will others doing this sort of thing. Violating free will IS against a Law of Magic…and while it’s technically a grey area doing it to non-humans, it’s up to the individual Warden how to deal with grey areas.

Thats Harrys (an law-breaking Wizard!) perspective talking here.
If Wardens could kill non-law violating Wizards without repercussions, only because they dont like his attitude...
Then some Warden would do that and we would have an Civil War within the White Council. They cant have unlimited power, otherwise every powerhungry would be Warlock would try to get into the outfit.

Well, the Ward Hounds aren’t mistreated, and that’s a false comparison anyway.

Well you brought the mistreadment of Golems on the table. And its all in the eye of the beholder...
I bet those golems dont have an 38,5 hour work week. They dont get paid. Must fight to the dead...

It’s like bringing up attacking Listens-to-Wind as an example of why attacking any Wizard is suicide. The Senior Council are rather obviously people you should tread lightly around.

Its dangerous, you dont do it if there isnt a clear law violation.
So the Senior Council is out of reach for the Wardens.
How about some random 400 years old Wizard, who is not on the senior Council?
(And who dont have the modern view of what is an abuse and what is normal.)

Also, BTW, it’s Ancient Mai, not Martha Liberty who does the hounds.

Yeah, got them confused.







Here another try of an Summoning Character, this one with more justification for the social side of Summoning and Binding.

High Aspect: Mortal General for the War Department of the Chinese Hell as described in this books
Trouble: Stupid Orders
Other Aspects: Demons under my Command

Marked by Power -1
Item of Power: Scepter of Command (Spear) +2
Human Form +1
(when using the Item, the Gerneral shows full body (glowing) Tatoos which proclaim his allegiance to the War Department)
Ritual: Summoning and Binding -2
Refinement x 2 -2 (4 Extra Focus Item Slots = 6 Item Slots) +5 Complexity +1 Controll
-------------
Total -1 Refresh
Refinement -1 (2 Focus Item Slots converted into 4 Enchanted Item Slots)
Physical Immunity (only against Mortal Magic) -3
Supernatural Recovery -4
Catch: Wood +3
-------------
Total -1 Refresh
Lawbreaker First (multiple times) -2

Total Refresh Cost of Char. -9


Summoned Item Crafter:
-3 Thaumaturgy +1 Item Crafting Power (Focus Items +2 Wards Complexity)
-21 Refinement
  +6 Item Frequency,
  +5 Item Power,
  +5 Wards Complexity
  +4 Wards Controll, +4 Transformation Complexity
  +3 Transformation Controll, +3 Divination Complexity
  +2 Divination Controll, +2 Summoning Complexity, +2 Summoning Controll, +2 Conjuration Complexity
  +1 Conjuration Controll, +1 Transportation Complexity, +1 Transportaion Controll, +1 Veils Complexity
-2 Inhuman Strenght
-2 Inhuman Thoughness
-2 Inhuman Recovery
+3 Catch: Wood

Skills:
Superb +5: Lore, Resourcess
Great +4: Discipline, Conviction


The General orders his Magic Items by this Demon (and his Home is warded by this Demon).
Tai Chi clothes of hellish Protection (Block +10 or Armor +5 / 7 uses per session).
Silk gloves of Sudden painfull Death (to hit with Guns, Damage +8 / 9 uses per session).
Kukri of Dimensional Rending (opens door into the NeverNever +6 effect / 11 uses per session).
Facemask of Skulking (Veil +8 / 9 uses per session)

Bodyguard/Guide in the NeverNever
-4 Supernatural Speed
-2 Supernatural Strenght
-4 Supernatural Recovery
+3 Catch: Wood
-8 Physical Immunity
Catch +2: Taoistic holy relicts
-1 Claws
-1 Flesh Mask


Skills:
Superb +5: Lore, Awareness
Great +4: Fists, Endurance

[Korwin]

BTW. the enchanted items should probably be all at item Power -1 since the general isnt the creator off them.