Freedom on the Seas (Gaelcon Post #2)

[cthulahoops]

Hi,

This is the report for my second Gaelcon game, the first being over on the Universalis forum (http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=13218).  Back in April when I was thinking about games for Gaelcon I posted about Pirate sorcerers on this thread:  http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=10876.  I got lots of great feedback, but didn't develop the idea further at the time.  I did, however, agree to run a game based on the idea at Gaelcon.

The scenario as submitted is at http://www.redbrick.dcu.ie/~cthulhu/freedom.zip.  It's written to be read by the risk of convention scenario writing, the GM who doesn't know the game.

To summarise, I followed the con demo model given in In Utero.  Four PCs who are a relationship map.   Samuel , a well off young man who finds himself trapped by his commitments and goes on a treasure hunt, finding a demon chest to finance his piracy.  Katherine, the governer's daughter and Samuel's abandoned fiance.  She summons a dashing pirate to lead her on a life of adventure.  Richard is Samuel's younger brother, who's become a privateer and has a letter of marque.   Charles is Katherine's younger brother who's suffered from a lack of self worth and a life of demon induced day dreams.  He's serving on Richard's ship.

The initial setup is that Samuel's ship is sinking and the other two ships arrive on the scene.  Oh, and Charles has just heard himself being publicly called a liability to the ship.

The game ran three tables at Gaelcon, mine, one with a GM who knows Sorcerer, and one who doesn't.  I'll just comment on mine.

In brief:  Samuel decided to spring an ambush and try and capture Katherine's ship, but got cut to ribbons by Captain Black Deed.  Richard's ship closed in, and the three male PCs ganged up to capture Black Deed.  Katherine claimed to be a prisoner, and managed to plead lenancy for her friend but abandoned the rest of the crew.  The chest approached Charles in search of a less imprisoned master, and Lanoria told Charles not to accept the chest.  The game ended with unsuccessful banishing of Black Deed by Richard, Samuel and Katherine and of the Chest by Charles.  All four returned home.

All in all the scenario worked very well.   I was pleased when after the banishings the players seemed to decide they had reached a satisfactory end point and didn't need any more.

I remembered to call for quite a few humanity rolls.  When Charles decided to banish the chest I gave him a gain for doing it himself (rather than getting Lanoria to deal with the problem), and a check for making a commitment to Lanoria.  It would have been a second gain had the ritual succeeded.

I got a bit confused about demon damage.  I've just check the book now and I see that you can banish a demon just by inflicting lots of damage.  During play I ruled that damage would only put a demon out of commission for a while and that they'd find a way back.  I think Black Deed would have been wrapped in chains and dumped overboard and never mind the ritual otherwise.  It seems that it's often going to be easier to hack passers to pieces than banish them, and that banishing is better for the nasty inconspicuous and parasite types that are hard to hit.  I also ruled that the failed banishing rolls meant that the demons got away, to return for possible revenge later.

I'm sure I had more comments and I'll post them later.

Adam.

[Ron Edwards]

Hello,

The rule is actually:

If a currently Bound demon is killed by physical means, it is dead. Not Banished.

If a currently un-Bound demon is killed by physical means, it is Banished.

That might alter some of your thinking on the topic.

Best,
Ron

[cthulahoops]

If a currently Bound demon is killed by physical means, it is dead. Not Banished.

If a currently un-Bound demon is killed by physical means, it is Banished.

Sorry, I did read that, I just wasn't clear in my post.

It doesn't seem to make much difference though.  I think most of the time when a character or player decides to get rid of a demon they aren't too worried about whether it's dead or banished.  In fact, dead is even better.

It seems odd that a demon is made more vulnerable by a binding.

Thanks,
Adam.

[Ron Edwards]

Hello,

I think most of the time when a character or player decides to get rid of a demon they aren't too worried about whether it's dead or banished. In fact, dead is even better.

(speaking gently) I think you ought to play a lot more Sorcerer before reaching any such conclusion.

1. In some circumstances, killing a demon is much easier than Banishing it; in others, the ease is reversed.

2. Binding throws a wrench into the situation as well, especially since Banishing does not cancel or remove Binding.

3. A Banished demon may be re-Summoned.

It seems odd that a demon is made more vulnerable by a binding.

Consider that death is something that only happens to real things, and that Binding anchors a demon into reality.

Best,
Ron