Rollover & Intimidation Questions

[Michael S. Miller]

I ran our first session of Sorcerer on Sunday. Actual play post later in the week. Someone had the great idea of running a mock combat bewfore we started, to work out our understanding of the system. That worked well, and I later found answers to some questionable decisions I had made by reading old threads. But I couldn't find stuff on these two issues:

QUESTION 1: In combat, when dishing out damage can victories that contribute to damage this round also be applied as bonus dice in the next round (assuming the next round's action capitalizes on the advantage), or is that double-dipping? I think it's NOT double-dipping, but I just wanted to double-check.

QUESTION 2: We tripped up a little over a sorcerer using his action to intimidate a foe. This seems possible, but since There's No Mind Control In Sorcerer, I think I got things a little backward. For example, there's a group of thugs with guns, their boss, and a sorcerer. The sorcerer declares his action to be "I point my gun at the boss's head and tell the thugs to drop their guns or else I'll shoot him" I can see two ways of this working out:

1) If the sorcerer wins the roll, the thugs let their weapons clatter to the floor and stand there all meek and cowardly. This seems like what happens when a sorcerer orders a demon around, which seems to lessen the importance of a sorcerer's ability to order any demon around (i.e., if they can order anybody around, why is it so special for them to order demons?)

This is what I did at the table, but now think is the wrong way to do it. This is more like the FVLMINATA influence system than Sorcerer.

2) The victories of the intimidation are applied as penalties to the thugs' attack roll. Since dice are already on the table, these would be bonuses to the defender of this attack (assuming they had not yet acted). However, if the victories of the intimidation outnumber the dice of the thugs' action, then they drop their guns, otherwise they just hesitate a bit, and thus don't shoot as well.

This makes intimidation work like a Fists attack without the 1 Lasting Penalty. Plus, the intimidator can use those victories as bonus dice next round. I'm pretty sure that this is the right way to work it, right?

Gotta keep reminding myself: Everything is bonus/penalty dice (except for Demonic Abilities).

[Ron Edwards]

Hiya,

Yay, questions about Sorcerer mechanics!

QUESTION 1: In combat, when dishing out damage can victories that contribute to damage this round also be applied as bonus dice in the next round (assuming the next round's action capitalizes on the advantage), or is that double-dipping? I think it's NOT double-dipping, but I just wanted to double-check.

You might be missing that the damage system is doing this already. They are, effectively, penalty dice - which are bonus dice from the attacker's roll flipped over to the other character.

They can act as bonus dice for the attacker as well, but I would specify that they would only apply to actions that are different from merely attacking the opponent again. In that case, using them both as penalties to the defender and as bonuses for the attacker's second attack would be double-dipping.

QUESTION 2: We tripped up a little over a sorcerer using his action to intimidate a foe. This seems possible, but since There's No Mind Control In Sorcerer, I think I got things a little backward. For example, there's a group of thugs with guns, their boss, and a sorcerer. The sorcerer declares his action to be "I point my gun at the boss's head and tell the thugs to drop their guns or else I'll shoot him" I can see two ways of this working out:

1) If the sorcerer wins the roll, the thugs let their weapons clatter to the floor and stand there all meek and cowardly. This seems like what happens when a sorcerer orders a demon around, which seems to lessen the importance of a sorcerer's ability to order any demon around (i.e., if they can order anybody around, why is it so special for them to order demons?)

This is what I did at the table, but now think is the wrong way to do it. This is more like the FVLMINATA influence system than Sorcerer.

2) The victories of the intimidation are applied as penalties to the thugs' attack roll. Since dice are already on the table, these would be bonuses to the defender of this attack (assuming they had not yet acted). However, if the victories of the intimidation outnumber the dice of the thugs' action, then they drop their guns, otherwise they just hesitate a bit, and thus don't shoot as well.

This makes intimidation work like a Fists attack without the 1 Lasting Penalty. Plus, the intimidator can use those victories as bonus dice next round. I'm pretty sure that this is the right way to work it, right?

Pretty much correct, but do keep in mind that the circumstances and actual nature of the conflict might dictate a longer effect.

Situation 1: I try to convince her that her father's alive before her axe cleaves my head in two.

Success = she believes me. So unless there's some overwhelming reason why she ought to change her mind (I was flatly and obviously lying, e.g.), she goes on believing me, or at least being willing not to cleave my head in two while she checks it out.

Situation 2: I try to appeal to her (presumably) long-repressed sexual urges with my charming smile, before her axe cleaves my head in two.

Success = penalties to her next attack roll, because the GM has a strong commitment to the character's integrity as conceived. Rolls in Sorcerer are not the same as rolls in InSpectres: they cannot change an NPC from X to Y, just because the player proposed a clever conflict for a particular roll.

Does that help?

Best,
Ron

[Michael S. Miller]

Pretty much correct, but do keep in mind that the circumstances and actual nature of the conflict might dictate a longer effect.

Situation 1: I try to convince her that her father's alive before her axe cleaves my head in two.

Success = she believes me. So unless there's some overwhelming reason why she ought to change her mind (I was flatly and obviously lying, e.g.), she goes on believing me, or at least being willing not to cleave my head in two while she checks it out.

Situation 2: I try to appeal to her (presumably) long-repressed sexual urges with my charming smile, before her axe cleaves my head in two.

Success = penalties to her next attack roll, because the GM has a strong commitment to the character's integrity as conceived. Rolls in Sorcerer are not the same as rolls in InSpectres: they cannot change an NPC from X to Y, just because the player proposed a clever conflict for a particular roll.

Does that help?

Yes it does indeed help. Thanks for making the contrast with InSpectres (and games of its ilk). Reading so many games ends up conflating some concepts in my head. Sometimes I trying so hard to get out of my players' way so that they can author the story, I forget that I have to take a stand on certain things. I've got to remind myself that it's called "Playing Bass" not "Listen to the other folks jam."  Thanks again.