Assorted questions

[nadia.skylark]

Plus, I'm not sure that Red Court even have spirits that you could suck in.

True. I more meant that, given the number of people the Red Court has murdered there, there should be a lot of ghosts.

As to the compels, another point is that the "oathbreaker" power as you wrote it is revolving around who they broke the oath to, which I don't think is accurate to the series (it's specifically fae that hold you to your oath like that; making a general promise on your power and then breaking it reflects on you regardless of who you're acting against); plus, it seems just killing the dude you broke oath against would remove the penalties entirely -- would it also remove the rebate?

Good point!

How about this?:

Oathbroken [+1]
Available only to spellcasters. You broke an oath made upon your power. As a result:
-you suffer a -1 penalty to all discipline rolls made for spellcasting.
-this upgrades to -2 against the both the person you broke your oath to and to people related to your broken oath (ie, If you promised person A on your power that you would stay with their daughter for a week and keep her safe, but then broke your oath to them and the daughter got turned into a vampire, then this penalty applies to both of them); also take a -1 conviction penalty against such people
upgrade: Faerie Oathbroken [+1]
The person you broke your oath to was actually a faerie. As such:
-you suffer a -1 penalty to any action that opposes the person you broke your oath to when they're in the same area as you.
-every time you try to work against them (when they're in the area, as above) and succeed, you must roll discipline (with the -1 penalty) against the result as if you were defending against an attack. Failure results in mental stress.
-increase all penalties by 1 for every additional time you break a promise to the person you broke your original oath to (subsequent promises need not be sworn on your power) (increase refresh rebate for this?)
upgrade: Murderous Oathbroken [+1]
You murdered the person to whom you broke your oath, hoping to escape the consequences. It didn't work. As such:
-a magical mark is on you, showing what you've done. Whenever dealing with someone in the magical community, you operate at -1 to all social skills. You can try to hide it, but as per "Marked by Power" this should be difficult and not last long.
Note: Some or all of these power rebates should not be taken unless you expect to regularly encounter the person to whom you've sworn your oath. Also, if you're a Denarian, you can't take these. The Fallen deals with the problem.

[Taran]

Since you don’t seem to like the idea of a block, I think it would work better to make oathbreaker act as a threshold.  This would require you to add more power to spells.  Even a 2 or 3 shift threshold would be a huge inconvenience.  And a threshold makes sense thematically as a broken promise creates a barrier to trust and a barrier to your power that must be rebuilt. 

[Mr. Death]

The thing about the -1 penalties is, in the long run, they're kind of toothless.

Breaking an oath against a Faerie means the faerie owns your ass. It does not mean it's only slightly more difficult for you to interact with them socially. It means they can assert direct control over you, more or less without a contest. The power you've written simply does not reflect that. An aspect that you could compel would.

I seriously think just having an appropriate aspect and a compel is both much simpler and much more in line with what we see in the books.

Not everything is appropriate as a power.

[nadia.skylark]

Since you don’t seem to like the idea of a block,

Did I miss you suggesting using a block somewhere? If so, I apologize.

I think it would work better to make oathbreaker act as a threshold.  This would require you to add more power to spells.  Even a 2 or 3 shift threshold would be a huge inconvenience.  And a threshold makes sense thematically as a broken promise creates a barrier to trust and a barrier to your power that must be rebuilt.

That's a good idea.

Breaking an oath against a Faerie means the faerie owns your ass. It does not mean it's only slightly more difficult for you to interact with them socially. It means they can assert direct control over you, more or less without a contest. The power you've written simply does not reflect that. An aspect that you could compel would.

1) They can't always assert direct control over you without contest. Harry was able to fight against Lea most of the time. That's why I represented it as mental attacks.

2) You can also use compels, in the same way you can still compel a loop garou even though it gets a power rebate.

[Mr. Death]

1) They can't always assert direct control over you without contest. Harry was able to fight against Lea most of the time. That's why I represented it as mental attacks.

He was able to outmaneuver her. I do not recall any point in the books where she moves to assert control and Harry resists it.

Also bear in mind that Lea has a separate deal, with Harry's mother, that she has to respect when dealing with Harry.

Recall when Mab -- who has no such deal with Harry's mother -- demonstrates that she owns Harry's debt, and physically makes his body do things, and he describes it as something he has no defense or resistance against.

My left palm slammed down onto the table. I watched, startled,
as I gripped the letter opener in my right hand, slasher-movie style.
In a panic, I tried to hold back my hand, to drop the opener, but my
arms were running on automatic, like they were someone else's.

...

I slammed the letter opener down onto the back of my own hand,
hard. My desk is a cheap one. The steel bit cleanly through the
meat between my thumb and forefinger and sank into the desk,
pinning me there. Pain washed up my arm even as blood started
oozing out of the wound. I tried to fight it down, but I was panicked,
in no condition to exert a lot of control. A whimper slipped out of
me. I tried to pull the steel away, to get it out of my hand, but my
arm simply twisted, wrenching the letter opener counterclockwise.

There's no contest there. Mab simply wills it and Harry's body obeys, with nothing he can do to stop it.

2) You can also use compels, in the same way you can still compel a loop garou even though it gets a power rebate.

The rebate and all the messy penalties are not necessary, and do not accurately reflect the effect breaking a promise on your power is supposed to have based on the books.

[Taran]

I don't think a Power for Oathbreaking is necessary.  It's story a element.

If I were running a game where a player made an Oath, it might be a result of:

A social Take Out or Consequence where the victor of the conflict dictated the result of their victory.  "If you break your Oath, you will suffer a 3 shift threshold against all spellcasting.  It will last until the Consequence is healed (probably finding a way to rectify what you did to break the Oath, which would justify allowing time to heal the consequence). 

Or a deal that was just hand-waived:  You agreed to do xyz.   If you don't do it, you will be considered to have broken an Oath and suffer penalties of xyz until the debt is repaid.  I might still use an aspect to keep track of the Oath/debt and use it for compels but I wouldn't have to.

I don't think Killing the subject should erase the broken Oath.  In fact, the Oath could have been "On my Power I will not injure or kill the person with whom I make this Oath."   In this case, killing them triggers the loss of power.  In fact, I think killing a person you owe a debt to should probably exacerbate the problem.

[nadia.skylark]

He was able to outmaneuver her. I do not recall any point in the books where she moves to assert control and Harry resists it.

I had interpreted the scene where he dumped ghost dust on her to be him resisting her attempt to control him, but I could be wrong.

Recall when Mab -- who has no such deal with Harry's mother -- demonstrates that she owns Harry's debt, and physically makes his body do things, and he describes it as something he has no defense or resistance against.

Yeah, but Mab is an order of magnitude more powerful than Lea.

I don't think a Power for Oathbreaking is necessary.  It's story a element.

If I were running a game where a player made an Oath, it might be a result of:

A social Take Out or Consequence where the victor of the conflict dictated the result of their victory.  "If you break your Oath, you will suffer a 3 shift threshold against all spellcasting.  It will last until the Consequence is healed (probably finding a way to rectify what you did to break the Oath, which would justify allowing time to heal the consequence). 

Or a deal that was just hand-waived:  You agreed to do xyz.   If you don't do it, you will be considered to have broken an Oath and suffer penalties of xyz until the debt is repaid.  I might still use an aspect to keep track of the Oath/debt and use it for compels but I wouldn't have to.

Good point.

Next question: What powers do you think a praying mantis-type theriothrope should have?

[narphoenix]

I'm stealing this thread for a second to ask a question of my own:

What level of limitation would you apply to one that does not actually STOP someone from using a power, just radically incentivizes against using it? I'm thinking of a scenario in which someone has powers whose uses end up being too costly for them to use often, which I would mechanically represent by automatically creating an aspect for the GM to tag against the person for free later every time they draw on the power for an exchange.

[Sanctaphrax]

Next question: What powers do you think a praying mantis-type theriothrope should have?

Probably nothing interesting. Thropes don't seem to have much going on.

What level of limitation would you apply to one that does not actually STOP someone from using a power, just radically incentivizes against using it? I'm thinking of a scenario in which someone has powers whose uses end up being too costly for them to use often, which I would mechanically represent by automatically creating an aspect for the GM to tag against the person for free later every time they draw on the power for an exchange.

Depends on the Power, honestly. It's a pretty crippling drawback in a direct conflict, but not too big a deal outside of one.

[narphoenix]

Depends on the Power, honestly. It's a pretty crippling drawback in a direct conflict, but not too big a deal outside of one.

I’d be attaching it to spellcasting powers, both slow and fast. I’m basically trying to represent a power that’s always available, but whose use has intangible but ruinous costs.

[Sanctaphrax]

I'd be inclined to offer a 50% refund on evocation and no refund on thaumaturgy.

Unfortunately, I suspect that such a limitation would encourage undesirable patterns of play among evokers. Would never be worth casting a maneuver with it, and you'd be strongly encouraged to go for a one-hit-kill in every fight.

[nadia.skylark]

How would you model the ability from The Name of the Wind to split your mind into pieces, and how much should it cost?

I'm thinking something like:
-you can split your mind into two, allowing you to take two actions at a time, provided that it is reasonable for you to do so (you still only have one body)
-this takes an action
-while your mind is split, you take a -1 penalty to everything you do
-each portion of your mind has its own mental stress track, but it is 1 shorter than your normal mental stress track
-when 1 portion of your mind is taken out, the other portions have to defend against a mental attack of X
-a concession of one portion of your mind is always represented as that portion merging back into the rest
-when handling mental attacks, you cannot split the effects of a single attack between different portions of your mind
-upgrade: you can split your mind one additional time; this can be taken multiple times, until you can split your mind a number of times equal to your Discipline

I'm not sure if this would work, or how much this should cost, or whether it's just plain overpowered, given the advantage it gives to spellcasters.

[Taran]

I’d use the rules for multiple attacks.  Role to hit, take the result of shifts and divide them among as many people as you are trying to hit.   Normally you need justification for this: spellcasting, automatic weapons etc...

I wouldn’t require any investment in refresh.  If you have an appropriate aspect, I’d just let you do it. 

This has a name in the book but I forget what it is.

Edit:  Spray attacks: pg 326

[nadia.skylark]

I’d use the rules for multiple attacks.  Role to hit, take the result of shifts and divide them among as many people as you are trying to hit.   Normally you need justification for this: spellcasting, automatic weapons etc...

I wouldn’t require any investment in refresh.  If you have an appropriate aspect, I’d just let you do it. 

This has a name in the book but I forget what it is.

Edit:  Spray attacks: pg 326

Would that cover things like being able to do things like read a book and solve a riddle simultaneously, or cast multiple different spells at once, or hide information from yourself in the event of interrogation or mental invasion?

[Taran]

Would that cover things like being able to do things like read a book and solve a riddle simultaneously,

If you read the page I quoted, you see what it covers.  It only covers attacks.   Stunts let you do tasks 1 or 2 shifts quicker. 

cast multiple different spells at once,

it lets you target multiple people with the same spell.  Doing multiple spells - like a block + aspect or block + damage is the realm of Thaumaturgy.  Enchanted items can already do that.  But if you'd want to do two separate types of damage, it would be fine probably.

As a GM, I already let maneuvers do damage.  I've actually let powerful maneuvers Take Out mooks.

I'd even let you do a block and damage or a block and a maneuver by splitting the shifts.  Maybe a -1 power.  It would be finicky with focus items and specializations, though.  It's kind of stretching the bounds of the game since you are supposed to choose: attack, block or maneuver.  But grappling lets you block and do damage.

or hide information from yourself in the event of interrogation or mental invasion?

That's just a conviction or discipline block.  Maybe An aspect as a justification.

If you want to do all that stuff together, I might just charge a few refresh 2 or 3.

For that refresh, it would let you do all the things I just mentioned.