So with the release of AEG's Spycraft just around the corner I've been thinking about Spy Thriller RPGs. For a long while now I've been dying for a really good Spy Thriller RPG. I'm particularly fond of the Over-The-Top larger than life stuff that specializes in very human but extraordinarly strange villains such as the James Bond films and the original Avengers TV Show. When I look at the obvious love and care that has gone into Spycraft I weep that it's built on the d20 System and so will in all likelyhood completely exhaust and frustrate me to no end if I actually try to play it.
So naturally, I turned to the most flexible game I own. Sorcerer. But I haven't really had a lot of luck. What would you make a demon? How is Humanity defined? For fun I doodled some neat vehicle chase mechanics but so far nothing with substance. So I thought I'd turn to you guys.
Has anyone thought of doing this? Are the general themes of Spy Thrillers even compatible with those explored by Sorcerer?
Jesse
Well I hope Ron will forgive me for plugging another game in his forum, but if you're looking for a somewhat left of center romp that has the flexibility of the Sorcerer game system you might want to check out Clinton's Donjon Krawl over in the design forum. It uses the basic Sorcerer die mechanics to do traditional fantasy hack, but I can immediately see its applications to a Bond-esque game.
Rather than fix the post, I'll tell the truth. I had an idea, and as I wrote it, I had more. This is just stuck here to ask you to gloss over any seeming inconsistencies.
--
I'd been thinking a little on these lines for a cyberpunk game, but hey, sharing's what we're on the electronical interweb for, non?
Daemons come in three flavours:
Networks [Inconspicuous], Agents [Passing] and Objects.
Networks are daemons, see? They have Needs [be it favours, money, information, protection, goodness only knows what], Power [a variety of Hint that I think should be called Provide], and tell-tales, be it a hand signal, or a frequency, or a particular letter-drop. There are even rituals around them. Desires are easy enough, really. Do this, do that, start WWIII, make money from Columbian Drug Deals.
When a Network goes Conspicuous [Inspiration! Overt and Covert] it can be anything from a girl on a scooter dropping off a parcel to a rack of guys in neat uniforms fastroping out of a helicopter.
Agents are spies, a bit like you, only they're in situations. One works in the enemy's communication centre, another is a mole in the premier's cabinet, others, perhaps, are double agents, bound to more than one sorceror [this is another design note]. Needs and Desires
Objects are just that. Sorry, a bit dull.
Other things:
Provide is how good a Network is at getting you what you need. I'm not sure how it'd work, but it's likely somewhere around Hint in terms of effect, but more often useful.
Agents can become Double, or Triple agents, by being 'bound' by more than one Sorcerous spy.
Thinking on it, perhaps there's an equivalent to Networks in the form of Situations? They're perhaps a sort of realpolitik possessor that causes badness. So you could actually go and deal with a Situation by Containing it. Just a thought. So, oops, four flavours. There you go. Unless you make Parasite daemons something like [Inspiration] Conditioning be it physical or mental.
So, your sorcerous spies are more akin to Handlers [there's your name Jesse, if you want it].
Think Smiley's People, or perhaps James Earl Jones' character in Patriot Games and, hell, every spy fixer ever. Jack Ryan in Clear and Present Danger, M, rather than James Bond, and so on. Damn. I want to play.
drew[/b]
Before everyone goes bongo-overboard here with "Let's make demons and sorcerers into [insert idea here]," I hasten to point out that without the Humanity mechanic at the center of things, you aren't really playing Sorcerer anymore.
So, let's hear it...what are those Humanity ideas? How does the moral struggle relate to being a spy (or whatnot), how do the mechanics of power work in this instance? Which is, after all, what Sorcerer is founded on...heck, what it's all about.
Good point, Raven.
How about the new 'Alias' show, where a character loses a loved one? Or the 'On Her Majesty's Secret Service' where Bond marries, and then loses his wife (5 minutes later, ack, great scene)?
Humanity is, in a sense, Innocence. That's not quite the right word for it. It's the ability to do what you have to do without being falling apart. Without burning out. You lose points for the demands your Network makes on you, or when your life of espionage needs a sacrifice, eg, a death in the family. Or when you have to up and leave your wife of 20 years, who had no idea what you were.
Self-deception. That's it. It's the ability to be fine and dandy with multiple lives, and to lie to your girlfriend about your 'international sales' dayjob. When the lies start becoming glaringly obvious, your sense of self goes to shit.
Brr. I don't like Sorceror. Brr.
Joe.
Eloran and I designed a game a few years back called The Keys of Solomon. The premise was sort of "What if the Cold War wasn't about nuclear escalation? What if the arms race had isntead been a race to see which global power could obtain the most occult power?"
All discussion about real Cold War politics should effectively end now; I couldn't possibly extend it beyond that basic statement.
But the idea still interests me, and I think it's an idea ripe for a Sorcerer game. There's even a book out there with some of the same ideas; it's called The Beast That Was Max, and although I haven't read it yet, it seems to be very much in the Sorcerer vein.
- Scott
I'm an idiot, greyorm. Oops. I was writing that, trying to figure out what I was forgetting, and it was, of course, Humanity.
Doh.
I like your suggestion Joe, using Humanity as a means of tracking self deception and the like. How about calling it self?
It's your ability to remain who you are. Bond's got it high, but Col. Kurtz loses it all. Neat. So you forget your wife's name. You forget who you are. Hell, it would make Face/Off work, in a way. Eeeh. Icky kicker.
Speaking of which, what kind of things would they be?
Kickers clearly can't be missions, because that's what the Needs of Networks and the like become. Nastier ones, I suppose.
Alias [which we don't yet have in this country] would be 'Your father is a double agent, and now, so are you', from what I gather.
24 [which we also don't have in blighty, yet] would be "A terrorist organisation has your daughter, and is planning something big."
Hmm. I'm noticing, from these two anyway, quite an aspect of family. So the real them may well be
How close are you willing to come to losing your loved ones to protect them?
That's just harsh.
I wanna play! I wanna play!
drew
The spy idea is cool.
Make humanity TRUST
How much you trust your orgnaization... how much they trust you... how much you trust the ones you love... how much you trust how you percieve reality.
In other words...
Add in equal parts The Prisoner to your Bond and Averngers coctail. If you want to be nasty, throw in some Naked Lunch
Play the paranoia up in spades, add surealistic element to the adventures (tap a bit of that wonky Aeon Flux animated series for loopy character convolutions and complications).
Can the characters trust their bosses? Each other? Their Demons? Their idealogy? Reality itself?
Or do they end up living out their lives on a nice island somewhere, patrolled by wierd floating capture ballons...
Quote from: erithromycin
I like your suggestion Joe, using Humanity as a means of tracking self deception and the like. How about calling it self?
It's your ability to remain who you are. Bond's got it high, but Col. Kurtz loses it all. Neat. So you forget your wife's name. You forget who you are. Hell, it would make Face/Off work, in a way. Eeeh. Icky kicker.
Yup, it's quite like the madness track for 'Self' in Unknown Armies. You lose points when you realise that a lie you told yourself just isn't working anymore. 'True Lies' has a nice example of that too, though it's not exactly a keen pschologically observant movie.
(Humanity 0 - The Prisoner? Oooooh)
Quote
Speaking of which, what kind of things would they be?
How close are you willing to come to losing your loved ones to protect them?
Yup, it'd be good to ground Kickers in relatively everyday life. You just fell in love, you just got married, you just found out your wife is cheating on you, etc.
Or... Kickers question loyalty. You just found out that your boss may work for Department 6. In a sense, there's no point in playing a completely loyal spy. Most tension in spy movies comes from the tension between loyalty/disloyalty.
Joe.
If Humanity 0 was the prisoner then we'd all be in trouble.
Perhaps Trust isn't quite the right thing, but it's closer than Self.
[Inspiration! Ooh! Ron, can we have a lightbulb smiley?]
What's the opposite of Paranoia?
Security!
How safe you feel. Effectively, the smaller your Humanity, the more paranoid you are. It fits too. The more Networks you're involved in, the more likely you are to see things that are round the corner, people watching you, lose track of where you are in the world, get closer to retiring, or, more worryingly, retired. The smaller your security the more you attempt to shore it up, by dealing with situations that might come to involve you, by rolling up [banishing] rival networks, by destroying agents, by getting closer and closer to being a loose cannon.
Well, I like it.
The real doohickey though, is that there's another use for Security.
Would it be fair to render it almost as a stat, one which you used to cope with situations? The higher your Security, the more confident you are in your own abilities. Bond has it in spades [probably, to be honest in double figures]. The Prisoner has it at, ooh, one, two? George Smiley might not have any any more, and as he gets back into the game he regains it.
So there's a new idea.
I like the Kickers thing, but here's a suggestion.
Situations aren't Kickers [though I do like the idea of making them daemons, because it amuses me to Contain them].
I don't know why I mentioned that there.
Right. Kickers.
Yes. Some sort of thing, that, as Ron put it, changes the situation.
You're a spy, with a double life. What if one of them ceases to be?
That's been Bond's kicker since the first film, just about. He has had no personal life [ooh! What if that's a Network too?] until he got married, and then, well, she died.
You, as a spy, are the connection between two worlds that don't belong together. [how sorcerer is that?].
What happens when they cross?
There's your kickers.
drew
Woops, hang on... I'm suddenly confused...
Let me go back a reread...
Ok... I was confused there for a sec, I there are in fact two (or more) semi-divergent ideas rocking around in here.
jburneko's
QuoteI'm particularly fond of the Over-The-Top larger than life stuff that specializes in very human but extraordinarly strange villains such as the James Bond films and the original Avengers TV Show.
and
erithromycin's
QuoteI'd been thinking a little on these lines for a cyberpunk game, but hey, sharing's what we're on the electronical interweb for, non?
Daemons come in three flavours:
Networks [Inconspicuous], Agents [Passing] and Objects
I initialy read this post, and thought "ah, supernatural secret agents! cool, more secret than MI6, more dangerous than the KGP, better financed than the CIA...and with a demon for a partner."
I was thinking occult espionage.
The idea of making situations and organizations into demons abstracts things a bit too much for me... I have trouble relating to demons if they arn't at least somewhat personal. I was also still keyed into my 'historical sorcerer' thing using a WWII occult intelligence agancy as the jumping off point (mix in HELLBOY with that Avengers, Bond, and Prisoner).
So are we talking about spys with demons or making the normal mundane elements of a spy's life INTO demons? 'Real' supernatural creatures, or metaphorical ones?
Oh. I'm getting carried away with my Daemons are things thing, rather than the usual daemons are daemons thing.
Yes, the hellboy approach is cool, hell I love the guy myself, and there's Hellblazer and all that other stuff too.
That's cool, but it's not odd enough for me.
When I play/run sorcerer, my daemons are rarely daemons. They're networks, and the like. They function in the same way, because what ron has given us is a set of rules that characterise interactions between people and entities with powers between those of people and gods. The classical, etymogical, original definition of daemons.
For me, sorcerer is about dealing with powers greater and more dangerous than ourselves. That's why _what_ daemons are intrigues me, and why I play with the concept so often.
There's no reason why occult espionage wouldn't work [though it might tread on ground daemon cops does], what I'm really after is turning spying into a scary place full of monsters.
I mean, come on. What's more terrifying? Facing down a KGB assassin with an animated garrote in an alleyway, or standing alone, in a dark room talking to a mirrored wall, trying to justify your actions and hoping that the hissing noise in your ears isn't poison gas, but residual tinnitus, knowing that if you do get out of this alive your employer's going to send you back into danger, and meanwhile, you've got to earn a bonus so you can get Samantha's braces because the medical plan doesn't cover them, but there was that offer in Prague that you didn't tell Section about, and all you'd need to do is put that box somewhere in the Compound, and you could take Margaret on holiday, for the first time since your honeymoon, or, if it came down to it, pay for the divorce, and we all know what happens if you can't pay for the divorce, just look at Jorgenson and his wife, when it turned out he was taking those Red List missions just to get away from the arguments, and when the enemy forcibly debriefed him it looked like he was trying to kill himself so she'd get death benefits, but Section got hold of it and reclassified that ambush in Caracas as suicide, and she didn't get anything, not even the house, and I wonder if I've got time to get some flowers and stick them by the plaque or if I should get the flowers anyway and give them to Margaret, and "Yes Section, I was aware of the risk but as the mission profile stated civilian casualties were acceptable, as long as the operation itself was not compromised", and I wonder who was in the Superbowl, I used to love football.
Ahem.
Yes, I'm talking about turning the "normal mundane elements of a spy's life INTO demons".
Metaphorical monsters tend to be scarier.
drew
I like the "metaphorical monsters" spy idea. Networks, contacts, gadgets...very, very cool. I'd prefer that over the "occult spy" thing myself (& I generally like occult-y stuff). Nice use of the Sorcerer rules without being limited to the idea of demons as literal demons.
Covers may prove an issue.
Unless it's simply a measure of how good you are at being someone else?
Oh. Wait. I've just had a genius idea.
Your 'Covers' on ops are Parasites. They provide a modicum of Cover themselves, but have needs and desires of their own. The better researched and backgrounded an Identity is [with documents, dossiers, and the like], the more likely it is to be something you can cope with. Anyway, that seems to be the bulk of it.
Though you could throw in the Pact stuff from Sword, because a lot of it would probably help, especially with regard to other networks.
So, Jesse, in answer your questions:
Yes, I, at least, have thought of doing this, but only a little. All this is what happens when you give this forum a ball to run with.
Yes, the general themes of Spy Thrillers are compatible with Sorcerer, as long as you look in the right places, at the Human costs of this kind of life.
In fact, most things are probably compatible with Sorcerer. You just have to find the daemons. That's perhaps the most important thing I've seen in Sorcerer. Ron's given us, as I said, a set of rules for the interactions between people and entities more powerful than themselves. All you need to do then is find out what those entities are.
That's half the fun, so yeah, Jeff, it is nice. After all daemons are a metaphor. Might as well use them as such, eh?
Anyway, to go back to your initial point Jesse, what are your neat chase mechanics?
What kind of spy game were you thinking of running?
What do you think? Is what we've been discussing here capable of meeting your needs [because I sure as hell want to use it], or do you want something lighter?
Oh. Hang on. I'll go reread your post.
Ok. Well, maybe you could make their bases daemons? I think if you wanted to do an almost cartoony game like that you could use Sword, and then most everything falls into place.
Daemons are henchmen, gadgets, and glamorous assistants. You banish henchmen by defeating them in combat, gadgets require a demonstration for you to bind them, and you sleep with the bond girls to get them to change sides. Sometimes it doesn't work. Humanity would then be almost redundant. Hmm. Perhaps you could use it to represent confidence? A bit like Will, I suppose, but there's likely enough gap. Especially if you could add it to key rolls.
I'm going to stop now. I've got a game to write for tonight. Hmm. Unless I make them play Handlers.
drew
To each his own.
It just seems like using the sorcerer/demon thing to represent spy situations with no supernatural element... well, it just seems like a redundant convulution. I mean, if you want ALL the above mentioned spy elemtents in a pure spy game... it seems like any number of existing espionage friendly games would do the job without needing to bend the definitions of the game over backwards to fit.
Yes, I can cut up a Picasso and paste it together so it makes a neat collage... but is it worth it?
If you are talking about adapting the MECHANICS of sorcerer to another kind of game entirely, well no problem. The die mechanics works quite well. But I hardly think trying to warp the demon rules to fit abstract and unrelated situations is... well... to be frank... even required.
Simply, I don't think the demon metaphore- especialy as framed by Ron- is entirely relevent. Do you bind a gadget? Not a good fit. Banish an enemy agent? Again, it seems like a stretch. It makes a fair metaphore, but in actual play it just seems like it would be a pain in the ass.
To use the mechanics for an over-the-top Bond style spygame, a quick and dirty rename & conversion might be in order:
Scores
Action: physical stuff; fighting, skiing, sky diving.
Cool: Confidence, Witty one-liners, seduction, lieing, seeing through lies
FX: stunts. Ability to sieze the scene and do crazy stuff
Derived Scores
Rank: equal to best score; represents what kind of gadgets, how much influence, and what kind of help the agent can draw on.
Secrets: starts at 1. If Secrets ever rises above Rank, you get Shiped of to The Island. You gain Secrets when you do TOO well.
Cypher: just how SECRET are you? Like cover, but never really rolled. It starts equal to your best score, but tends to get worse as you get more famous. Occasionaly getting plastic surgery or faking your own death helps increase it.
Don't even worry about the demons. Everything that this could cover is just an element of actual play, not relegated to rules. If you want a darker style spy game, then just screw the players over more often. It's all about tone.
Also, I hate redundancy.
Anyhow, as I said, to each.. etc.
Well, for me, one of Sorcerer's strengths is that it doesn't have to be supernatural. Demons can be electronic gadgets, or psychic powers, or the aspects of a spy's life that causes the spy to lose Humanity (which is whatever you define it has). I love supernatural stuff, but I also think RPGs have become so full of the supernatural, a break would be nice.
Sure, you could run a spy game using all sorts of mechanics--d20, GURPS, Story Engine, Theatrix. Hell, if you still have them (or can dig them up somewhere), Top Secret or James Bond. The reason to do it with Sorcerer is to run a game in which the aspects of the spy's life (a web of contacts, cool gadgets, a sidekick, etc) are both a benefit & a hindrance, in that they help you out, but cause you to lose what's most important to you--your Humanity. (Plus, I dig Sorcerer's mechanics.)
Well, we could easily adapt Sorcerer to describe the life of someone with a body dysmorphic disorder. All the horrors of eating disorders, or steroid abuse, or plastic surgery run amok... and it is a HORROR to witness (I've seen it nearly kill a close friend)... but why do it?
I could run a special forces combat game using sorcerer; things like guns and special training, and The Corps would be demons... but it's such a stretch.
Or a Mafia game. The people you control, your contacts, sources, and crooked cops are your demons. Your Lore is your Respect. But again, too far out there.
Just because it is possible to kink the Sorcerer mojo to fit another kind of mojo all thogether.. well, is it worth it? It just seems like a mental exercise rather than anything worth playing. If my GM told me that my character's new laser watch was somehow going to dehumanize my character, I'd tell him to stick it up his ass. The whole idea of humanity loss in the spy game scheme is a bad fit anyway unless you define Humanity as something very out of the box. And once you've radicaly redefined everything out of sorts... well, why not just play another game entirely?
Sure, I can see how you could adopt sorcerer to describe intelligence networks... but really, why bother? How would that actualy function in game play? You roll your lore (or whatever) to try and compell your network to do... what?
Beyond that, exactly what kind of spy stories are you looking to tell?
This thread started with a clear ideal: cinematic, over the top, Bond-Avengers spy action adventure. Not spy-horror as it seems to have drifted into. (and why must sorcerer always be about horror and degredation? This is coming from me. The guy who loves to riff off on the sicko stiff. Sometimes even for me, it just gets to be too much. Why can't a spy game be about action and adventure and intresting character conflict, and not about personal disintagration and horror? er... rant over)
So for Bond-style spy adventure- the basic game mechanics of Sorcerer would work fine. The sorcerer/demon relationship rules seem inapropriate to the genera. Like jacking up a porshe and slaping 14" mud tires on it... they are still wheels, it will still roll... but just look at it! It is possible to just try too hard.
But even if you are talking about more realistic spy stuf... anyone have any idea just how mind-numbingly boring 99.99999999% of all spy stuff actualy is? Most of the career intelligence officers I've met are 40ish, ex-military, and completely normal.
What is the baseline for this discussion?
Quote from: Bailywolf
Just because it is possible to kink the Sorcerer mojo to fit another kind of mojo all thogether.. well, is it worth it?
Yes. Just use a mojo filter.
Quote
And once you've radicaly redefined everything out of sorts... well, why not just play another game entirely?
Because Sorcerer is good for letting you play with things greater than yourself.
Quote
Sure, I can see how you could adopt sorcerer to describe intelligence networks... but really, why bother? How would that actualy function in game play? You roll your lore (or whatever) to try and compell your network to do... what?
Provide you with airline tickets, gadgets, assistants, cover, backup, or to get out of missions, avoid betrayal from their end.
Quote
Beyond that, exactly what kind of spy stories are you looking to tell?
Scary ones.
Quote
This thread started with a clear ideal: cinematic, over the top, Bond-Avengers spy action adventure. Not spy-horror as it seems to have drifted into.
Did you miss the part where I suggested how you could go back to that?
Quote
(and why must sorcerer always be about horror and degredation? This is coming from me. The guy who loves to riff off on the sicko stiff. Sometimes even for me, it just gets to be too much. Why can't a spy game be about action and adventure and intresting character conflict, and not about personal disintagration and horror? er... rant over)
Because the question was asked in the sorcerer forum. That's why. Who, by the way, is to say that there can't be character conflict and action and adventure, with personal disintegration and horror nothing more than a part of the game. I'm not saying you have to role Lore [or equivalent, though I like
Tradecraft myself all the time, but that when you are dealing with the big ramification stuff, like recruiting moles, double-crossing. The really scary bits.
Quote
So for Bond-style spy adventure- the basic game mechanics of Sorcerer would work fine. The sorcerer/demon relationship rules seem inapropriate to the genera. Like jacking up a porshe and slaping 14" mud tires on it... they are still wheels, it will still roll... but just look at it! It is possible to just try too hard.
We were asked for ideas about what daemons might be though. So adapting it was the question that was asked.
Quote
But even if you are talking about more realistic spy stuf... anyone have any idea just how mind-numbingly boring 99.99999999% of all spy stuff actualy is? Most of the career intelligence officers I've met are 40ish, ex-military, and completely normal.
Yes, yes I do. Most Intelligence work is dull. The politics and personalities behind it however, aren't, and I think Sorcerer covers that well. Your mileage may vary.
Quote
What is the baseline for this discussion?
What it was at the start. How would those who post to this forum adapt Sorcerer to cover spy thrillers. I made a suggestion, and you don't like it. I'm cool with that. Let's not throw the whole thing away though, eh?
I mean, come on. Does sorcerer always have to involve magic? No.
But does sorcery always have to have risks? Hell yeah.
Come on. Let's stretch this toy.
drew[/quote]
What Drew said.
Sorcerer doesn't just allow for variations on the "baseline", it encourages it. The rulebook screams for radical interpretations of what Demons are & whay Humanity means, as defined by the group. I see no reason to only stick with "demons are snarly, scaly monsters summoned through occult rituals" & "Humanity is empathy or sanity". To define Demons as Contacts, Networks, Gadgets, & such isn't really pushing the envelope that far, I don't think. Neither is defining Humanity as "Trust in other people & yourself". Because the main book defines neither Demons nor Humanity--it's left to the group.
And Sorcerer doesn't have to be "scary". I see the spy stuff that Drew's been proposing as being along the lines of Alias, The Prisoner, & maybe Mission: Impossible, none of which are scary (except maybe some parts of The Prisoner). You're still dealing with Humanity loss (because that's what the game is all about) & forces that threaten to overwhelm the character--but throw in loads of ass-kicking action & snappy dialogue, & it's not "scary" at all. But it is Sorcerer. As you said, to each their own...& while I love occult conspiracy stuff & surreal horror, I'd find a "spies summoning nasty hellspawn" to be fairly unengaging (depending, of course, on the GM's enthusiasm, for it & the color of the game). I get tired of PCs with nifty super-powers & supernatural effects. Sometimes it's fun to just go for straight drama or romance (or comedy). (Like, say, a Sorcerer narrative in which the PCs are Elizabethan playwrights & the "demons" are their muses, completely non-supernatural--just women or men who inspire the writers & also threaten to overwhelm them in one way or another.)
I'll concede the match. All told, I'm a bit old-school when it comes to my role playing. Take things too far off baseline, and I sort of shrug and move on to things more familiar.
I liked the old Bond game a lot. One of the first games I played in regularly was run with the Bond system. We played a group of freelance inteligence operatives formerly with the major inteligence services (one CIA, one MI6, one KGB), but now working for a private foundation (run by a really wierd guy- think of him as a just-this-side-of-evil Bond villian with the world's best intrests in mind... but a Machavellian sense for politics). It was a blast, and we covered most of the issues tossed about here-in... but as elements of play rather than as matter for rule judgement.
'yall continue to have fun in here, though.
That's fine Baily. Please don't think I want to convert anyone who doesn't want it, because I don't. If everybody thought like me I'd have no ideas to steal.
I was thinking about Ronin [1998] today though.
Now, here's the way it works, I think -
Sam Robert De Niro - His network is one he's stepped away from, what's left of his former employers, the CIA/NSA or somesuch. What we see in the film is an example of a Pact, I think.
Vincent Jean Reno - His network is another he's stepped away from, French Intelligence probably. He doesn't use it in the film though, instead turning to an ally who was once part of the same network. If that's possibly a Network of former Network members that could be quite cool.
Deirdre Natascha McElhone - She's the only one with a Network, one she contacts through her Handler Seamus. He is a 'Sorcerer' too, but he's a manifestation of a shared Network. Perhaps orders passed from him through the Network, and then onto lower types, but here they go directly.
Gregor Stellan Skarsgard - He's the tech guy, so possibly has a Gadget with Hint or somesuch. He also makes a Pact, but that's a key part of the story, and may have taken place before the 'game'/movie. He's also got a Passer, but they don't get revealed until the end.
Larry Skipp Sudduth - He's the Driver. He tunes the car in the movie, so that's probably a Summon [using his Tradecraft to know what it needs to be capable of], a Bind [using his Cover, mechanic, or rolling successes in that over]. His Daemon is a Gadget, but only because the car seems capable of things normal cars are not.
Spence Sean Bean - Is the one they drop, the wannabe, probably with no Tradecraft. He's never explained, so may be a red herring.
The opposition is a single Sorcerer [Jan Triska, credited as The Dapper Gent]. He's got a handful of bodyguards [Passing], and he too makes a Pact with the Russians.
The Russians have no Sorcerers in the film, but do seem to have a couple of Passers. They're a big old shadowy old one, with a huge Power. That's why the Pacts with them are story driving. These big shadowy ones probably also have the power to talk to each other, but you'd have to have seen the film to get that, and I've no wish to spoil it for anyone.
So, in this hugely exciting film, we've maybe got three uses of the 'Daemon' part of the game during the actual story. They drive the plot though, as you should [hopefully] be able to figure out if you've seen it.
Stacks of combat though, I suppose. So Sword would likely be important.
That sort of thing seems close to what you were saying Baily. They're mechanical, because it makes it interesting.
Though if one were running a straight sorcerer game, I'd want to know what was in the box. Oh, and I think we can just lose the Situation thing. That was really a joke, I suppose. Though Possessors could make a game based on Telefon[1977] a real, and terrifying possibility.
The real fear doesn't come from the actions that are sorcerous, but the consequences.
drew
Wow, this is really great feedback people. I agree with Raven's initial post that this whole thing hinges on how you define Humanity. And I really like the subsequent development of Humanity as 'self' or 'identity' or some such. Oh, and I am interested in 'metaphorical demons' not occult spy thriller.
I had originally thought of defining Humanity as National Loyalty but then I was stuck for a demon definition particularly since I was going down the Object Demon as gagets line of thinking. How does using a gadget wreck your sense of National Loyalty? The problem I was having initially is defining the key interaction of Sorcerer has Humanity then when Sorcerer turns to external power source, Demon, Humanity is lost. What about gagetry and networks costs you?
The 'self' and 'identity' stuff really helps along these lines but it makes the game kind of heavy, I think. Has anyone got a 'lighter' definition for these things?
Jesse
Quote from: jburneko
The 'self' and 'identity' stuff really helps along these lines but it makes the game kind of heavy, I think. Has anyone got a 'lighter' definition for these things?
I don't think the self/identity thing has to be *that* heavy (we don't need spies who cry every night), but it does seem to be a constant theme running through the source material mentioned. I mentioned before how almost every spy show/movie I could think of dealt with the issue of loyalty and self-deception, and the tension between a normal life and a life of espionage. In Bond, it's relatively casual - he gains points every time he boinks and is confident in what he does. In Alias, it's the setup for the entire show, and a crucial motivation for the protagonist.
I played in a Mage: Technocracy game for a few weeks. After just a couple of weeks, I realised that the GM wanted to push people into situations where their loyalty would be in question. I also realised I'd probably have a lot more fun if I played someone who strained against his loyalties, and had various crises of conscience. The only 'fun to be had' otherwise was basically modern-day Shadowrun. Lots of missions, lots of planning, but few moral issues. So sod that.
Humanity, no matter how one defines it *is* a heavy trait, IMHO. It's inclusion would seem to indicate the game should take on moral or ethical issues, or a certain level of 'depth'. Examining humanity is what a Sorceror game is about, and thus, the questions we ask about humanity become the premise of a game.
So if you wanted to go for a lighter game, with exciting missions, but little soul-searching, you could define it as 'Reputation', possibly, but that would seem to diminish the value of the stat. I dunno if players would care so much, or empathise so much with plain ol' 'Rep', y'know?
Joe.
Joe,
You may be right. I was trying to avoid the sulky spies stuff particularly after reading that long post above. However, you're right in that it may not need to get too heavy. I do want moral issues, I just want them to be kind of lightish and not too dark and depressing.
I think the struggle between personal life and obligation to job is probably the key to a good spy story so I will continue to think along these lines.
Jesse
Light moral issues? Sheesh. :)
They don't have to sulk, just be wary I think.
If Humanity were defined as your ability to treat it as a job, rather than a way of life, then that might do it for you. It becomes your ability to walk away from it. Intriguingly, that's the first definition here that gives Bond a low Humanity, and that's neat.
It keeps the players careful of getting in too deep, unless that's what they think they want. But when the job's really getting to them they're going to find it harder to get away, but easier to get ahead. After all, a really easy way to express losing out to a Network is a promotion. More to do, see, so closer to becoming a cog in their machine. The Company want their faceless grey men in black, after all.
How's that one sit Jesse?
We've got how many tones of game now? And all by changing Humanity alone. Ron, as they may still say in the NBA, "I love this game".
Erithromyacin,
That sounds good for Humanity; it all falls into place, then. Call it "Normality" or something? Yeah, Bond usually is down about two or three and pushing one. But what does zero represent? I suggest that a Spy that gets to zero either fades away into the annals of spy history (becomes totally absorbed by the network) or gives the ultimate sacrifice; he dies for his network. Make that the only way a spy can die. So, just when you think that Bond is down and out, he comes up with another gadget or somebody comes along to save the day (essentially he summons up help). Keeps things totally in genre.
Now, for sorcery. Call it Spying, or Espionage or something.
Contact - that's just perfect the way it is.
Summoning - call it Meeting. Described as finding somebody who can make the deal, or getting them to come to you.
Binding - call it Contracting, or Allying or something? How often are these sorts of things referred to in movies or literature as "deals with the devil"
Punishing - works OK the way it is. Perhaps a better term?
Contain - call it Interdiction. The ability to put somebody or some organization "on ice" for a while. I see lots of blackmail and power-plays here.
Banishing - call itTermination. Works whether it refers to firing an assistant, quitting an organization, or destroying opponent organizations. Note that a network like SPECTRE will be banished only to be summoned again by other spies later.
Pact - like the Warsaw Pact. Works fine the way it is.
Anybody else starting to see the possibilities?
Mike
Hello Mike,
By Jove, I think you've done it!! That's pretty much the kind of thing I was looking for. The really neat thing is that it changes the whole feel of the Sorcerer game. Before, summoning demons was largely an author or even an actor stance thing because you were calling up some nether world entity.
But since this Spy variation is rooted in the real world with no hint of an occult realm it turns the rituals into hard core explicit Director Stance because it causes the player to directly introduce setting elements via the rituals. "Well, I'm going to Contact this Drug Cartell I know about..."
Very cool.
Jesse
Quote
Contact - that's just perfect the way it is.
Yeah, although we might want to add another action, Monitor, to cover surveillance and the like, which constitutes a non-reciprocal contact (unless you fail the roll, of course).
Quote
Summoning - call it Meeting. Described as finding somebody who can make the deal, or getting them to come to you.
Rendezvous? Interview?
QuoteBinding - call it Contracting, or Allying or something? How often are these sorts of things
"Turning" would be a candidate, although refers specifically to agents of other bodies. Recruiting would be the simplest, although I keep thinking there are intel terms for these things, dammit.
Quote
Punishing - works OK the way it is. Perhaps a better term?
Might want to break this one up by several degrees; interrogations of various degrees. Or make it cover things somewhat touched on by Contain, like having a specific agent carpeted, or demoted, or transferred.
Quote
Contain - call it Interdiction. The ability to put somebody or some organization "on ice" for a
I like that.
Quote
Banishing - call itTermination. Works whether it refers to firing an assistant, quitting an organization, or destroying opponent
Yeah, that too.
Gareth,
Rendezvous is perfect spy stuff, and indicates exactly the right thing. Turning is only good for enemies, though. Remember you might be "Binding" a member of the organization for which you work. Recruiting is good, and is military enough to sound like spy talk.
Yeah, Jesse, lots of directorial power. Need a secretary? Summon her from the pool, and make up a new part of the organization. Nifty. Actually this is all developing off of the SLA ideas generated previously.
Mike
Along the Director Stance thing I think this would also require a lot of retroactive reasoning. For example I'd want players to be able to Contact, Summon and even Bind in situations where they're cut off from the outside world and then retroactively explain it.
For example, if you're tied up in the villain's death trap I'd want the players to be able to Contact and Summon an Object 'Gadget' Demon to help them escape and retroactively explain how they got it.
Or perhaps they'd summon a Passer 'Agent' to burst in at the nick of time and explain that there was a prior arangement that if he wasn't out in an hour the agent should come looking for him or some such.
My next concern is that the base Sorcerer rules make Sorcerery really hard. You can't just go summoning up 'demons' left and right every other scene, you'll run out of Humanity WAY too fast. I'm not entirely sure if the basic Sorcerery rules will support the pace of a Spy Thriller. I could be wrong and only actual play will tell. What do you guys think of this issue?
Jesse
I don't think that it's that big a deal. Really, the only question I have is how do you get your "normalcy" or detachedness stat back? By banishing enemy demons, of course! So, when you're feeling like you're getting to close to being "retired" at zero, just make sure that you get out there and off some enemy agents. Remember that Jaws is just a demon summoned by one of the baddy sorcerers (Bond Villains), and that after you banish him, somebody will summon him again.
Also, the GM should give big RP dice bonuses for well described flashbacks like you mentioned above and other nifty spy goodness. Which gives all kindsa player incentive to play in genre as it is self rewarding. Neato!
Mike
Hey Mike,
You may be right. It's probably a non-issue it was just something I was considering. It's also important to remember that Humanity ("normalcy" or whatever, in this case) can be gained and lost through ACTION as well as through Sorcerery.
In the case of Bond, as someone else noted already, he probably gains Humanity whenever he seduces a woman because it's a purly selfish act. "Job be damned, I want to get laid."
In the case of The Avengers, they probably gain Humanity whenever they share on of those charming flirtatious moments as if to remind themselves that all this bad stuff is just a big game to them.
(Note: The Avengers is a text book example of why sex and family (which is really just an extension of sex) are so important to stories. Cool Villains, weird plots, and bizzare style aside the REAL reason we watch The Avengers is, "Damn it are Steed and Peel sleeping together or NOT!")
In more serious Spy stories such as the works of Tom Clancy, Jack Ryan probably gains Humanity whenever he prioritizes his family or even his own personal ethics over his job requirements.
Yeah, this will most definitely work.
Jesse