La Journée des Dupes

[Peter Nordstrand]

I've wanted to run a game using Day of Dupes from Sorcerer's Soul ever since I first read the scenario. I just couldn't quite figure out how to handle it. Finally, I think I have come up with a satisfying way to massacre Ron's scenario.

Please tell me what you think.

Important Note
My players will probably be reading this, so please don't discuss the R-map, its characters, or its specific backstory. Thank you.


Humanity
See Sorcerer's Soul page 82 for a definition.

Humanity in this setting is about conforming to certain social rules and expectations. A character's emotional and mental state matters little, as long as he acts in an honorable manner. Since humanity is a rather clear-cut list of expected behaviour, I imagine that it will be quite easy to determine when opportunities for loss or gain rolls occur.

Using Humanity as a Stat

• Acting with proper etiquette.
• Influencing others to appreciate your social standing.
• Convincing others to act honorably.
• Evaluating other people's honor, and their place within the social order.

Roll Humanity vs. your own Lore to gain a roll-over bonus when confronting, fighting, Punishing, and Banishing a demon.

Roll Lore vs. Humanity: successes become a bonus to Contact, Summon, and Bind rolls. (Rationale: You let your sorcerous knowledge and your personal desires overcome your sense of honor.)

When Humanity is Zero
A character with zero Humanity is unable to care about his honor. He is unable to respect the social order and the virtues of a gentleman. As a consequence he will eventually become a persona non grata, unwelcome and untrusted among his peers, in effect incapacitating his life as a gentleman. Players whose character reaches Humanity 0 gets to choose between one of the following alternatives (both taken from Sorcerer's Soul page 19):

1. The character is guaranteed to die the following session.

2. The player must rewrite the character from scratch. All scores drop by 1, and all Bindings are cancelled.

Demons
Demons in this setting have nothing to do with religious issues. "Demon" is just a game term, meaning something not of this world. It is about honor, not your soul. It is not so much about what demons are as what they do. Demons will ignore and defy social conventions; that's what they do. Three distinct types of demons can be defined: Underworld Entities, Metamorphosed Humans, and Objects.

Underworld Entities
Fiendish beings can be summoned from the vast networks of old quarries and tunnels that stretch underground. It doesn't't matter whether they are primordial beings living in hidden depths, or if the underground is just a gateway to a Stygian realm. Two types of Underworld Entities can be distinguished.

Humanoids: Deformed and disfigured, disconcertingly sub-human.[/list]

Beasts of the Underworld: Hellhounds, giants bats and rodents. Disease-ridden and flea infested, yet sometimes used as guardians.[/list]

Metamorphosed Humans
This has nothing to do with the human-demon transformation rules in Sorcerer's Soul.

A human being turned into demon, through the use of drugs, hypnotism, and torture. The procedure has various degrees of success from a predominantly human with a demon part (a Parasite or Possessor in game terms) to a complete transformation into a Passer demon. A demon's Power determines whether it is a Parasite (Power 1-3) or a Possessor (Power 4+). If a Possessor rolls more victories than the victim's Humanity, it becomes a Passer.

So are we talking about one entities with some kind of split personality or two entities where one inhabits the body of the other? Bah, the difference is academic!

Objects
Object demons are always ordinary objects invested with demonic power through the actions of a Sorcerer.


What do you think so far?

My next post will discuss Rituals, Descriptors and Telltales.


Cheers,

[Peter Nordstrand]

Let's start with Descriptors.

Stamina

Agile. You are fleet-footed and acrobatic.

Pain is Worldly. You readily ignore physical pain in order to achieve your goals. 

Swordsman.  You have learned the art of fencing. Pick a fencing style.

Wholesome Upbringing (recommended Stamina = 2 or 3). Loving parents and healthy food kept you in reasonably good shape.[/list]


Will

Calm and Collected. People respect your composed and dignified manner.

Flamboyant. You sweep people off their feet with your exuberance, confidence, and stylishness.

Hot-Tempered. You have discovered that anger is a surprisingly efficient social lubricant.

Lecherous. Your social life is managed by your sex drive.

Vengeful. You are out to rectify some wrongdoing.[/list]


Lore

Orderly (Lore 1-2). Many gentlemen are members of social clubs or military orders. The vast majority are well-known, and have worldly motivations. However, your order has a secret purpose, and they teach notable members how to defend themselves against demons. You have betrayed their trust by using your abilities for personal gain.

Apprentice (Lore 2-3). See Sorcerer page 30.

Artiste (Lore 4+). As Solitary Adept in Sorcerer.[/list]

[Peter Nordstrand]

Cover

Here's a few rather broad ideas. Players must specify and solidify these ideas. The list is by no means complete.

Military Man. You have made a military career. Specify your military rank, and what regiment you belong to. Aristocrats are often given high ranking positions within the army; often you have to pay for the honor. Lower ranking officers may be disendowed nobles or honorable gentlemen. Sometimes people are even promoted out of merit!

Ordained. You are (or were) a clergyman of some prominence. Note that this does not keep you from being a swashbuckler, duelist, and adventurer. You may have been a member of some monastic order. It is up to you whether you have ever actually administered the sacraments, or not.

Dilettante. You are a affluent man who has cultivated one or more areas of interest, but without real commitment or knowledge. You are likely to have few real responsibilities in life, which probably makes you the younger son of a wealthy nobleman. What are your interest(s)? Art? Fashion? Or just socializing with the crème de la crème?
[/list]

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Peter,

That Humanity description just isn't working for me. Consider, for instance, the main characters in Dangerous Liaisons ... they'd be rolling Humanity gains, wouldn't they? But they are horrible, rotten people.

Humanity isn't supposed to be an academic exercise, in play - you need to be able to connect with it yourself, especially as GM. For example, in my necromancy game, Humanity centered on being able to let the dead go, as an influence on oneself. A non-sorcerer NPC killer, for instance, had low Humanity due to the fact that her victims obsessed and haunted her psychologically, even though this was not expressed in demonic terms. I could act as GM in that game, and play that character, because I myself think that "whether you let the dead go" is a powerful and important issue that we face, and that sometimes we should indeed let them go. And maybe sometimes we shouldn't - hence, story conflict is possible.

Do you, personally, find that kind of personal resonance in your description of Humanity, in the first post in this thread? I'm skeptical.

Best,
Ron

[Peter Nordstrand]

Hi Ron,

Thank you for replying.

Are you reading me right? I have not defined Humanity in this thread. You have, in Day of Dupes. Humanity is defined as Honor, exactly as you have described it.

Honor in this context is tightly bound up with the social rank of gentleman; anyone below this rank is not expected to be honorable, whereas anyone in it (which goes all the way up to the King), is held rigidly accountable.

A gentleman's virtues are the following:

• respect social order, with the highest loyalty to one's king

• never tolerate being insulted or mocked

• never offer violence or discourtesy toward a woman of gentle rank

• keep your word (really)

• keep secrets (really)

• pay debts when you can; until you do so, give favors freely to the person owed

• always do your utmost with great courage and ingenuity

• advance yourself upward in social rank as far and as hard as you can

Granted, I do say that the Humanity definition in Day of Dupes is about conforming to certain social rules and expectations. But that is just me reflecting on, and trying to find, a common denominator to the virtues listed above. Yes, Honor equals the listed virtues, but I needed to know what else these virtues have in common. Once I realized that they were just a set of rather rigid rules of behaviour, I was able to figure out how to use Humanity as a stat, what Sorcery is, and how rituals work. (I haven't had the time to post all of it yet, though, but I will.)

Is the Humanity description still not working for you?


Cheers,

/Peter

[Ron Edwards]

No. You completely missed the ethical common denominator underlying the features I listed in the book.

Best,
Ron

[Peter Nordstrand]

Peter: No. You are completely misuderstanding me.

Ron: No. You have missed the point.

Peter: No You have.

Ron: No. You

Peter: No You

[Ron Edwards]

I'm beginning to think it's a Nordic thing ... disagreement always means, "islands, longswords, at dawn."

Peter - the "no" is heuristic. I'd rather have you say, "H'm, Ron must be onto something, so let me warp my brain back around in a funny shape that might accord with it, and see what he thinks of that."

Trust me. This isn't an attack. It's a door. You don't have to accept what might lie beyond it, but at least, try to go through it.

If social conformity isn't the primary feature of the features I listed in the text for that setting, what would it be? I can't just tell you. That is not communication.

Best,
Ron

[Peter Nordstrand]

Longswords? Damn. I was aiming at "polite, deadly sarcasm."

I am angry, but not at you. Something is not being communicated here and it annoys me tremendously. Give me a minute to sort this out.



Nous vous prions d'agréer l'expression de nos salutations distinguées,

M. Peter Nordstrand

[Peter Nordstrand]

Okay. I have calmed down. Let's take this step by step.

So, what are you saying? The main characters of Dangerous Liaisons are erotic predators, acting ethically questionable. Also, they are not social conformists. On the contrary: Their society condemns them. Would they still be rolling Humanity gains, given that Humanity=Honor? Sure. I haven't seen this movie in years, the details are fuzzy, but I can accept that. ... Hm ... "Never tolerate being insulted or mocked" ... It seems that Glenn Close's character could be gaining Humanity time and time again throughout the movie.

However, I never said that Honor=Social Conformity. I meant this: [social rules & expectations[honor]]. Never mind.

The NPC from your necromancy game didn't loose Humanity on account of being a cold-hearted killer, but because she was all too human. The people she killed was still with her, figuratively speaking. Sounds like a powerful story. Naturally, if you had defined Humanity as "never take a life" the killer NPC would have been pretty lame, at best.

So .... well?

Do you, personally, find that kind of personal resonance in your description of Humanity, in the first post in this thread?

No.

But ... a gentleman's virtues can, and probably will, contradict each other. How will a player characters handle being mocked and insulted by a gentlewoman? Will he keep a secret even though it disturbs the social order? That is hot. And when Honor meets other demands, such as love or kinship or whatever, things will get really interesting. Is it really Honor that you want? That resonates with me.

... wait a minute ... I need to rethink the whole Using Humanity as a Stat thing; it doesn't resonate ... and demons ... Peste!


Yours,

/Peter

[Ron Edwards]

Keep going, you're getting there.

The Dangerous Liaisons reference isn't working for purposes of the discussion, so let's abandon it. My interpretation differs from yours a great deal and there's point in wrestling over that text.

Let's consider the list itself ... OK, two things for an example, the difference between always keep a secret and respect the social order. The difference in emphasis is the key. It doesn't say "always preserve the social order."

I like to think in terms of the contrast between these values and Victorian ones, because people often confuse them. Victorian values include the notion that nothing is truly secret - sensitive information needs to be shared, and utilized in covert ways without ruffling too many feathers. These values are totally different; a secret is sacred stuff, and as I imply above, one is well within one's honor to lie to the king about one's or someone else's secret. Stay nice and respectful to the king, do not actually do anything that endangers him (that's the loyalty part), lie effectively, preserve the secret, and honor is totally satisfied; you get a Humanity gain roll.

If the king finds out about it later, and if he knows you were protecting a secret, and if the king decides not to punish you, he gets a Humanity gain roll. Interesting, eh? You didn't disrespect him, after all. You "only" lied to him.

Think of D'Artagnan preserving the secret of the queen's affair with the Duke of Buckingham, with the whole adventure-scenario of the necklace. High Humanity! Even though the whole thing was aiding in the king's cuckolding. By the values I'm talking about, D'Artagnan was being exceptionally loyal to the king, not disloyal. We should all say in unison now, with accents, "How French." Exactly.

Making any more sense?

Also, everything you said about the interesting moments of contradiction among parts of the list is correct - but those are exceptional moments, not the standard. The standard is how they're all alike and interplay at once, most of the time. The double-dog contradictory moments are traumatic by comparison.

Best,
Ron

[Peter Nordstrand]

Can you hear the sound of head against wall? That's me.

You almost managed to convince me that there is something Humanity in Day of Dupes that I don't get. That's outright bizarre. Listen, the Humanity definition is absolutely clear. I do not have trouble understanding it or its finer points. Frankly, you are projecting things onto me that that simply isn't there. If you want to know about honor, ask d'Artagnan the elder. He put is quite eloquently.

Who can be expected to be honorable? Let's see what M. d'Artagnan tells his son:

sustain worthily your name of gentleman, which has been worthily borne by your ancestors for five hundred years

Why be honorable?

both for your own sake and the sake of those who belong to you. By the latter I mean your relatives and friends.

What is honor, then?

Endure nothing from anyone except Monsieur the Cardinal and the king. It is by his courage, please observe, by his courage alone, that a gentleman can make his way nowadays. Whoever hesitates for a second perhaps allows the bait to escape which during that exact second fortune held out to him. You are young. You ought to be brave for two reasons:  the first is that you are a Gascon, and the second is that you are my son. Never fear quarrels, but seek adventures. I have taught you how to handle a sword; you have thews of iron, a wrist of steel. Fight on all occasions. Fight the more for duels being forbidden, since consequently there is twice as much courage in fighting. I have nothing to give you, my son, but fifteen crowns, my horse, and the counsels you have just heard. Your mother will add to them a recipe for a certain balsam, which she had from a Bohemian and which has the miraculous virtue of curing all wounds that do not reach the heart. Take advantage of all, and live happily and long.

Naturally, there is more to honor than what M. dArtagnan tells us, but he covers a lot in a few sentences.

Let's talk about Cyrano de Bergerac. He has three prominent features: His nose, his eloquence, and his honor. His honor is the reason why M. de Bergerac and his beloved Roxane never lives happily ever after. Remove honor from the equation, and the story becomes meaningless.

But what am I doing? I'd rather have you say, "H'm, Peter claims to get the Humanity definition. Something else must be going on here. Let me warp my brain back around in a funny shape that might accord with it, and see what he thinks of that."

[Ron Edwards]

Sorry about the head-banging. All of this was about getting you to say a particular thing, without me simply adding it to the thread like a dirty shirt into your laundry.

I am now happy because you said it. I didn't see it in the earlier post, but it's right there in your last one. For what it's worth, we agree perfectly about what "it" is.

My only suggestion now is to add that elder D'Artagnan quote to the Humanity section of your one-sheet, with maybe a bit of extra text as you see fit, in place of your current text, which I do not think conveys the same content.

Best,
Ron