[Realm] Character Types (semi-poll)

[Bill Masek]

Chris,

If Dreamers are bound by the conflict between creation and destruction instead of good and evil, then you could have a dreamer who goes around slaughtering people and destroying cities who never really worries about the creation/destruction issues.  As long as he creates many fires as he unmakes flesh he can easily stay in the happy medium. 

This also changes the way Chimera should work.  Since they are at the most negative end of the Dreamer scale, they should follow the same rules.  So instead of beings of fear, hate and evil they should be beings of nothingness.  They do not care about good or evil.  They simply exist to unmake.  One day you have a town, the next you don't.  Where once a great empire sprawled across the lands, now it never existed.

While there is nothing wrong with the conflict between creation and destruction, it seems like a different angle then you have been taking before.  Are you sure this conflict fits with the thematics of your game and the kind of play you want?

Best,
        Bill

[sayter]

hmmm. A very valid point...it's certainly a tough call, due to the highly philosophical nature of the debate, as it were.

I think I see what you mean, however. Additionally, I think simple Good and Evil are FAR easier for the average gamer to grasp. To avoid alienating players (especially given the lack of humans in the game world) it may make sense to keep it simple instead of going for grandiose concepts that may never bear fruit as intended.

You are my savior :) hehe.

[sayter]

Using Good/Evil will also still be quite open to interpretation anyhow (like Creation /Destruction) since everyone views good and evil in very different ways anyhow.

This will force some "forcing" in some regards, since I will need to define without doubt what constitutes an Evil and a Good action in terms of play. Obviously killing would be considered evil, unless said creature was itself evil and its death prevented the death of countless others. Healing would be considered inherently good, unless of course they heal said evil thing so that it CAN kill tons more people.

The question is...how to make it an unavoidable aspect of being a Dreamer, and affect them adequately?

Should a Sway check be made only upon moral issues? Or should it be made with every single use of their power, based on how that particular power would be interpreted by the Fabric?> or by the mortal world? or both?

Better yet, is there a way to MELD the evil/good with the create/destroy ? All things I will have to contemplate. I am approaching the section of the book which details dreamers and their reality, so the time has definitely come to finalize the concepts. I'll type up the details when I have a chance and start a new post with the information present for close and anal-retentive scrutiny :)

[Bill Masek]

Chris,

Here is one option for determining whether or not an action is "good" or "evil".

You have 3 types of good.  These goods are:  Personal, society, world.  Personal good is the least of these goods, society in the middle and the world the greatest.  Actions which purely benefit of these goods cause no sway.  Only if one of these goods is put at risk or sacrificed for another does sway occur.

To gain positive sway you would need to sacrifice personal good for either your society or the world as a whole OR your society for the world as a whole.

To gain negative sway you would have to sacrifice either the world as a whole or your society for personal good OR the world as a whole for your society.

This is based on a similar model shown to me by Dr. Edwards in one of his biology classes.  His model didn't refer to good or evil, rather 'shifting in' and 'shifting out'.  St. Thomas Aquinas gives a very similar model in the Summa Theologica which uses the same moral language shown here.  (Although a bit more in depth.)

Best,
        Bill

[sayter]

ooooooh. Now THAT I like. It brings up an interesting conflict.

Dreamer wants to hide his powers from the masses so as not to attract chimera, or jealous sparks, etc. But when he DOES use his powers he needs to sacrifice himself or others, which could very easily poison how others view him, substantially. This provides a very cool backdrop....I like it.

[Ramidel]

Just to wake up my old point about mixing moralities, though...positive sway is still bad if you have too much of it, and there's still a necessity to start screwing the greater goods if you have been too much of a high-minded idealist lately.

"I've been saving the world and society at the expense of myself...time to poison my spouse (society) with my power so I can inherit her wealth and get myself a younger companion (personal)...it's just to keep me centered, yeah, that's it!" Perhaps this is a caricature, but again we see Dreamers forced to play the True Neutral. Is this an intentional consequence?

Also, what I could see happening is a deliberate screwing of one's own society for both one's own sake and the world's, "playing both sides against the middle," with the result that your Sway stays in equilibrium while you yourself keep gaining more and more personal benefit and your society keeps going more and more to hell in a handbasket. Again, this may be an intentional design decision, which drives Dreamers into the role of the Illuminati (You petty mortals don't matter, it's the fate of the world we're concerned with!), but if so, it needs to be expressed and the ramifications laid out.

[sayter]

The dreamers are the greatest weapon against the machinations of the Chimera. However, they were once mortals themselves and will still have those they love among that world.

the purpose of sway is not to force one to stay "true neutral" , but rather, for them to fight the chimera in the way they deem as most effective....or to allow themselves to fall victim to such creatures in order to gain more personal power. They are jsut like mortals in this regard. Their decisions are no more grand, nor more important on the personal level.

On the global scale however, their fall from grace, as it were, could cause the suffering of untold thousands should they become a tool of the Chimera.Conversely, if they become laced with the pure energies of good they may rejoin the Fabric which grants them there power, thus ceasing to exist and unable to contribute to the good fight anymore.

the Sway of an individual stands to grant them additional power in their favored way of fighting against the blackness of the chimera. Staying neutral may be "ideal" , but it also provides thm no benefits and therefore limits the effects of their power. Thus, while there is little danger in being neutral, it also means that they are essentially "weak" as compared to their brethren.

[Bill Masek]

Ramidel,

I believe that one of the reasons Chris the Sayter implemented Sway is to create the kind of moral ambiguity that you seem to dislike.  Humans, by their very nature, are neither purely good nor evil.  We shift back and forth between self intrest, nepotism, mutualism and altruism.  We need to in order to survive and increase our own fitness potential.

Dreamers, on the other hand, do not suffer from many of the "minor" issues we do.  They are above them.  They do not benefit from exploiting their fellow man.  What ever resource they could gain they can not simply conjure up themselves.  Like wise they have no need for the reciprocity that altruistic activities create.

A Dreamer's true struggle is to remain human.  The nature of their magic draws them into something... other.  They shift and change based on their magic.  If they shift to far either way they loose their humanity.  This strikes me as a cool conflict.

Mortal Heroes, on the other hand, strive to be more then human.  Because they have less power they strive for the kinds of extreams that Dreamers dare not touch.  By becoming an ideal they inspire people to become more then they are.

At this moment it seems like Mortal Heroes only benefit from the positive extream.  However, it would be a very valid design decision for Chris the Sayter to allow Moral Heroes gain similar benefits from the other extream.  People can be just as driven by selfserving goals, fear or hate as they are by love and devotion.

I would argue that the deep moral conflict in this game is its strongest point.  Dreamers are naturally drawn to extreams and must struggle to stay human.  Mortal heroes are naturally drawn to normal human morality and must struggle to reach extreams.  This creates a plethora of opportunities of unique internal and external conflict.

Best,
       Bill

[sayter]

jeez bill. You even baffle me with your responses sometimes :) Thats pretty much how I envisioned it going...I just wasnt sure if i had conveyed in my posts that message. But it seems that you have grasped it perfectly.

I will say one thing though...do you ahve ANY idea how hard it is to write the ideas down on paper in a form that fits the book? Trying not to make it sound like a damn science and psychology manual is a trying task. I have the "setting" section basically done as far as dreamers are concerned. there is some redundancy in it still, at this point, seeing as its in first draft, but i will post it probably tomorrow or friday....ill need to host it on my site methinks, since its 16 pages and posting that will be a pain in the arse.

Heck, I could even combine all the info i have thus far into a single document for perusal, although I dont yet think its ready for that yet. I am still working out conflicts between the nations to fit the "current" time frame based on recent alterations from posts on this board. The world doesnt yet feel "alive" enough for my tastes. I had three of the five major nations allied...two of which were basically completely in order despite a 30 year war...bad. one of the enemy nations basically "vanished" (large plot potential here, but i left the "whys" blank and only gave seeds/hooks. Metaplot beyond system=bad). One empire is neutral, playing both sides (the woman oriented nation i posted about earlier in a diff post). The other kingdoms were isolated from everyone else...which just doesnt work with so much untamed wilderness beyond the borders of civilized areas.

but thats a whole different post :)

[Bill Masek]

Chris,

Don't worry about your game looking like a Science or Psychology document.  We can disguise it as philosophy or religions ;p.

Seriously though, just get it written now and don't worry about what it looks like.  Like most rough drafts, it will mostlikely need to be torn appart and rewritten.  But that's OK, because it is so much easier to revise something then write it in the first place.

Also, don't worry about putting all of my musings in your game.  Many of them were conclusions that I came up with while reading the various pieces of this post.  Other people will come up with their own.  Feel free to use what you need, but don't feel that you need to stuff every bit in there.  And if you need to dub down the language I'll be more then happy to help.



By the way, are you going to allow Mortal Heroes to benefit from the negative extream as well as the positive?  There are a bunch of pros and cons to this.  MHs in many ways represent Free Will and evil is just as much a part of Free Will as good.  People can be just as inspired by selfishness, fear and greed as they can by love and devotion.  On the other hand, your ubervillians are evil.

On the other hand, does it make sense for someone who strives to embody what they ARE to make war on them?  Does this fit the Evil vs Not-Evil theme of the game?  Why don't they just work together?

On the original hand, the difference is people are accepting and propagating evil themselves.  When they choose the dark path it is still their Choice.  Chimeras are the opposite of that.  So its not the Good that empowers the MHs, but sort of a manifestation of free will, whether they do this through good or evil is not the point.  This would help propagate the moral ambiguity of your game.  This conflict is both more intricate and more intriguing then the simple Evil vs Not-Evil conflict.

Back to the other hand, it is also more thematically complicated.  Evil vs Not-Evil is already a step away from Good vs Evil.  Also, do you really want evil and debased player characters in the game?

Both sides have their strengths and weaknesses.  I would playtest it both ways if I were you and see what happens.  Personally I am leaning towards allowing Mortal Heroes to embody evil as well as good. 

Best,
       Bill

[sayter]

I want mortal heroes to be effecetd by evil as much as good. You dont need to be a good guy to be a hero.

Take Warhammer , for instance. Champions of Chaos are heroes to their people, even if they do like to butcher children and use their body parts as drumsticks.

As such, I fully intend MH's to be evil, OR good (although obviously I want to dissuade people palying evil characters as much as possible..since that isnt as fun, and it really dumbs down the entire concept of the moral issues. Someone who has no morals has absolutely nothing to deal with on a character level except for who to kill or backstab next.

So, aside from the loquaciousness here, yes MH's will be fully capable of being good OR evil. Its definitely a matter of choice for them. Do they strive to aid their people and expand beyond the borders of the civilized world and drive back the coming darkness....or work on the other end of the spectrum and expand to inflict pain and terror, ruling as a despot and showing no mercy to anyone?

The only real issue here is "Where do Evil Mortals Fit" when it comes to the Chimera? I mean, they are able to corrupt the Dreamers who are foolish enough to let themselves reach a negative sway. They feed off the terror and pains of mortals...so would they really have any need to "use" a mortal for their own advantage? Would the evil character in question simply be a convenient tool for them to spread their taint (with the mortal not even knowing that he is a pawn)...and to be destroyed later once he has served his purpose?

I see the Chimera as a Lovecraftian horror, with absolutely no real interest in the sentient races which are not among their own number. The mortal real exists as cattle to them, and is worth little else. Would the MH with an evil side be likely to worship such evil entities, or would it suit them better to be completely self-servign individuals?

ie: should the mortals sway deal with Virtues, Black/White, or some other factor?

[Bill Masek]

Chris,

The way I see it, Mortal Heroes, for Good or Evil, are embodiments of Free Will.  That is the one thing that the Chimera can not understand.  Evil they get, and consume.  Good is simply a void of evil.  If there is no evil somewhere they put evil there.  Then they feast.

If Mortal Heroes are empowered by belief and devotion then you can say that it does not matter where that devotion comes from.  Sure, the side effect might feed the Chimera.  If a Mortal Hero inspires greedy and self-serving ends then the Chimera will be able to feed on the suffering those whom follow him cause to the people they hurt.  But the people who he inspired are immune because of their devotion.

Now, this might anger the Chimera.  Here is this big buffet of evil and they can only nibble at the appetisers.  But if they kill the Mortal Hero who inspires the evil, these people will loose their devotion and their evil will once again be easy to consume.

If you take this rout then players can feel free to be evil.  They won't loose any power or options.  However, they will have a big metaphorical bullseye on their forheads.  This would make evil Mortal Heroes less desirable to play.  And should someone decide to play then, their story would be less one of extream greed and excess then it would be one of survival.

Best,
        Bill

[sayter]

Interesting. I rather like that angle.

Additionally, the Chimera might see him as a very valuable tool, in a sense.

They can nibble only on the appetizers....but say that hero then ammasses a huge army. They let this foolish evil hero charge into battle with his men...and then spring the trap on those not protected...perhaps one of his closest comrades somehow gets possessed by a Fear chimera...and strikes down the hero. Suddenly there is a veritable SMORGASBORG of things to destroy...not jsut ONE army...but TWO.

Very cool. This adds a very nice Judas (or maybe even a Pontius Pilate) angle to the whole thing. Judas the betrayer...striking down the hero (wihch coudl very easily happen to the Good heros too) or the Chimera as Pontisu...turning a blind eye and seeing what happens. Perhaps a poor analogy, but you get the idea.

I'll run with this, and develop it a tad more. It certainly fleshes out the mortal hero aspect for the evil side. Initially I had Good and Evil simply getting different "powers" (a la Paladins/Dark Paladins) , but that was just too damn basic.

[Archer]

You seem to be going down a nice thread here, and it is quite interesting, but have you considered the alternative that the Evil Mortal Hero might have the potential (and possible desire) to oppose Dreamers directly, much as the Good MH has the potential to join in Battle against the big bads?

Instead of the Evil HM being a pawn or antagonist to the Chimera, than could be an ally. Perhaps their powers keep them from becoming nightmares directly (almost necessary or they won't be playing their characters for long). Chimera could view these heroic mortals as comrades, or at least useful tools.
To that end, the hero's powers would now function against Dreamers, not Nightmares etc. They would be a natural opponent to a Good Hero, and a Supernatural opponent to a Dreamer.

This would still use sway, but it would be QUITE different from Dreamers Sway. You would likely decide early on if you are good or bad, and would thereafter only pay attention to that side of the scale. A Heroic Mortal would NEED to get to one end of the scale or the other to gain power and influence their followers, as Bill stated already. This is obviously quite different from the juggling act the Dreamers must pursue.

From a GM or even player perspective, I sure wouldn't want an Evil HM in a mixed campaign, but if you were to make Nightmares playable, they and Evil Mortal Heroes would be a good addition to an Evil based game.

As an aside regarding Dreamer numbers... if they start dwindling, wouldn't void just spawn more of them?

[Archer]

Going back to the discussion regarding cults/priapts (please excuse my lack of familiarity with your terminology)... have you considered replacing it with a Conviction/Belief/Moral Compass type trait? Replacing it with a list of X number of beliefs they can choose from (or make their own) could cover the same game mechanic.

As it stands, if you had such small groups with such common beliefs they would be a pretty tight unit, and why would you even want to associate with Dreamers outside your cult on a regular basis when you had such like minded people to be with?  THAT would be your group of player characters, but few groups of players would all want to be the same priapt as it seems to define them quite a bit, and people like feeling that their characters are unique.

Therefore, changing the mechanic to a more personal one of belief structure, and getting rid of cults as a mechanic (but not entirely), might make sense.

The cults could then refer to the group of player characters and THEIR underlying beliefs, desires and/or goals, which are discussed by the group of Players at character creation, and in that way would very much give focus to a game.

Also, there is nothing wrong with a GM creating this aspect (preferably with Player input) to give focus to a game. "You belong to a priapt that believes so and so and are fighting for such and such. Now go make a character!"

You can even reuse some of your descriptions and names for famous priapts that have come before, that the players can model theirs upon.

It may be interesting, as [RANT] I find too many games promote an unhealthy level of character (not Player) Independence - this is a GAME after all, to be enjoyed by all, and playing a character that has no reason for being in the 'group', and would realistically leave it in a second is 1) almost impossible to manage as a GM 2) just plain silly for the average game of your type (there are exceptions - some games pit the characters against each other!) and 3) often ruins the mood entirely as the player goads his unwilling character into the game, or even worse the GM does it for him somehow. In my experience, bad GM's either let you make your character in a void, and then scramble to make excuses to get and keep the group together, or on the opposite end simply hand you a filled in Character sheet and tell you that this is your character.. [/RANT]