Creating a Djinn

[InFerrumVeritas]

Djinn
I'm working on creating a djinn.  I would like this to be a blend of what is in the Quaran and the western wish granting genie that we're all familiar with.  Of course, this being the Dresdenverse, I also want some scary bargaining built in.

Here's what I'm thinking:

Limited to Channeling one element outside of the Nevernever. [-??? see below]
Breath Weapon (whatever element the djinn channels).  Uses Discipline. [-2]
Gaseous Form. [-3]
Wizard’s Constitution (also applying to mental consequences). [+0]
Supernatural Mental Toughness (only applies to spellcasting) granting 4 additional stress boxes. [-3]
True Shapeshifting [-4]

Within the Nevernever, may cast any thaumaturgical or evocation effect with evocation’s methods and speed. [-6, -8?]

Wishes. 
   The djinn may perform any thaumaturgical or evocation effect with evocation’s methods and speed when doing so in the service of a mortal. 
   When doing so, the djinn may add its Lore bonus to both the power and control of the spell.
   Alternatively, the djinn may grant the mortal an enchanted item.  The enchanted item has a number of shifts equal to twice the djinn’s Lore, which are split between uses and strength.  Once all of the items uses are expended, it may not be recharged. 
   Finally, the mortal may use this as an excuse to spend refresh on Supernatural powers, forfeiting any bonus he receives from being a Pure Mortal.
   If the djinn ever grants more than three wishes to any mortal, the djinn must serve that mortal for the remainder of the mortal’s life.  If pressed into service this way, the djinn no longer receives his Lore bonus on spellcasting and may not grant enchanted items. 
   Djinn may refuse to grant a particular wish, but may not break a bargain once struck (such as a bargain for exactly three wishes in exchange for something on the mortal’s part). 

I like, more or less, how this works.  But I have no idea how to cost it.  Obviously I don't intend to have the custom power that Wishes would turn into be available to players, so it's not strictly necessary to do so.  I still would like to.

[Sanctaphrax]

Wishes as written won't work as a Power. Too exploitable.

Unlimited evothaum is worth about 2 Refresh.

Toughness should not be allowed to affect spellcasting costs.

For Wishes, I suggest using Aspect invocations or spellcasting with the Limitation custom Power.

[InFerrumVeritas]

Wishes as written won't work as a Power. Too exploitable.

Unlimited evothaum is worth about 2 Refresh.

Toughness should not be allowed to affect spellcasting costs.

For Wishes, I suggest using Aspect invocations or spellcasting with the Limitation custom Power.

I want toughness to represent additional spells/scene.  I don't really care about it affecting anything else.  I was thinking -3 is reasonable for this. 

The layout is how I want the wishes to work.  I just don't know the best way to write it as a power.  I know it would be exploitable if a player wanted to play a djinn, and for that alone I'm thinking that I should make it prohibitively expensive.

[Sanctaphrax]

Okay, I guess 3 Refresh for 4 extra spells isn't so terrible.

Making something expensive doesn't solve exploitability, really. The issue here is that the right way to use your proposed wish power is kind of dumb.

That right way, incidentally, is to get a compliant mortal to order you to do whatever you want.

That obviously isn't the intent, but there's really no point writing all that rules text if you're going to adjudicate informally anyway.

[InFerrumVeritas]

Okay, I guess 3 Refresh for 4 extra spells isn't so terrible.

Making something expensive doesn't solve exploitability, really. The issue here is that the right way to use your proposed wish power is kind of dumb.

That right way, incidentally, is to get a compliant mortal to order you to do whatever you want.

That obviously isn't the intent, but there's really no point writing all that rules text if you're going to adjudicate informally anyway.

From the djinn's standpoint, and narratively, that is what it would want.  The idea is that it would trick mortals into allowing it to essentially run free.  This is a trope based in many different pieces of fiction.  You may think it's dumb from a game standpoint, but certainly not from a narrative one.

[Chrono]

This is a really cool concept for a djinn. I hope you don't mind if I steal it.

[InFerrumVeritas]

This is a really cool concept for a djinn. I hope you don't mind if I steal it.

Thabk you, and absolutely not.  I wanted a justification for why djinn granted wishes, so I went with "because their power is otherwise limited in the mortal world."

[amberpup]

Wow... and here I was just thinking about adding "I Dream of Jeannie" to my game. Of course, my version of Jeannie was going to be a little nuts after being lost on the shelves in a certain little shop on Times Squares since the 1920s.

But thx for all the work you saved me.

[Sanctaphrax]

From the djinn's standpoint, and narratively, that is what it would want.  The idea is that it would trick mortals into allowing it to essentially run free.  This is a trope based in many different pieces of fiction.  You may think it's dumb from a game standpoint, but certainly not from a narrative one.

No, it's dumb from a narrative standpoint. Once a djinni gets one compliant mortal, he no longer cares much about wishes because he's at full power forever.

Except for the enchanted item thing, which has its own problems. A unlimited number of items really isn't a good idea.

[InFerrumVeritas]

No, it's dumb from a narrative standpoint. Once a djinni gets one compliant mortal, he no longer cares much about wishes because he's at full power forever.

Except for the enchanted item thing, which has its own problems. A unlimited number of items really isn't a good idea.

1: No, his power is limited.  He doesn't get the lore bonus.
2: He still has to have the mortal's permission for every spell and gives up his freedom/free will.  If the mortal asks him to do something he doesn't want to do, he still has to at tha point.  Basically, he'd be a slave (like they were to Solomon).  Even a slave who can trick his master doesn't want the master.

Thus, djinn would go around trying to trick different mortals into making wishes which actually serve the djinn's ends.  Or bargaining for the mortal's servitude after death, etc.  that is, how they work in folklore and even some western fiction.

[Silverblaze]

This is a semi-long post.  Skip to the end for a quick summary if you want.

A couple comments; not so much criticisms -

1. Extra spells per scene are already accomplished through mental consequences and mimicked by using enchanted items.  I feel extra boxes for spells only could be a bad idea.

1a) Here's why:  Players will want the ability to do that.  Players should not be able to have such a power.   As an NPC only power it works fine.  Many people are against NPC only powers however.  My group and I are fine with that idea however, so if your group can handle the "unfair" advantage the "bad guys" have then I guess it's fine.  It's just another way to get more spells for a bad guy/girl/thing (since you could in theory give this critter as much refresh as you need in order to make his/her enchanted items able to do the same things he/she/it does with spells.

2. I will hazard one thing about wishes.  Anyone who has played D&D knows two things for sure:

2a)Wishes are by definition way better on paper than in use.  The DM/Storyteller/Gm/whatever they want called... is supposed to use these wishes to screw you over to some extent.  Even if they work as intended and don't screw over the wishing character...game balance has just left the building.

2b) Lots of game time is taken up by people thinking up awesome wishes.  Meanwhile less plot is seen and less roleplaying is done.  Players are wildly offering suggestions for wishes or sitting quietly waiting and doing nothing whilst the wisher gets the spotlight.

These things are difficult to keep balanced. 

To sum up the post quickly: Be careful with this whole idea.  It could spell disaster just as well as it offers coll ideas and fun.

[Sanctaphrax]

1: No, his power is limited.  He doesn't get the lore bonus.
2: He still has to have the mortal's permission for every spell and gives up his freedom/free will.  If the mortal asks him to do something he doesn't want to do, he still has to at tha point.  Basically, he'd be a slave (like they were to Solomon).  Even a slave who can trick his master doesn't want the master.

Wrong.

The way you've written the Power, he only needs one open-ended wish to get +Lore and broad evothaum forever. This might not be your intent, but it's what you wrote.

And even if being a slave is mandatory for multiple wishes from one source, that just makes Djinn with slave High Concepts broken.

This is a semi-long post.  Skip to the end for a quick summary if you want.

A couple comments; not so much criticisms -

1. Extra spells per scene are already accomplished through mental consequences and mimicked by using enchanted items.  I feel extra boxes for spells only could be a bad idea.

1a) Here's why:  Players will want the ability to do that.  Players should not be able to have such a power.

Why not?

[Tedronai]

And even if being a slave is mandatory for multiple wishes from one source, that just makes Djinn with slave High Concepts broken.

That's a costing issue, and one that is rather easily fixed.
Pay for all beneficial Powers at full cost.  Apply Limitation rebate on a per game and per character basis (with multiple instances of Limitation applying to separate sets of powers as necessary for the Lore bonus vs free access dichotomy).
A Djinn with a slave High Concept has that fact factored into their Limitation rebate.  Bam.  Appropriately costed.

[Sanctaphrax]

That could work.

[Tedronai]

That's the whole point of the Limitation rewrite, isn't it?  Accomodating per-character/per-game costing?  Evaluating it on any other basis would just be silly.