Sorcerer is hard (understanding currency)

[Adam Biltcliffe]

So the Sorcerer rulebook is, um, pretty densely packed with information and not really that great (at least, for me) of explaining the logic that ties everything together. I think (thanks to Soul and to lots of AP threads and the Art-Deco Melodrama example) I've got a pretty good idea of how the game's supposed to work in the large, but the dice-mechanical details are still making me worry.

Particularly, the passage on currency on page 75 seems to imply that all the formulas elsewhere in the book seem to stem from the simple "dice = victories = penalties = bonuses" equation. I thought I understood this equation in terms of "victories from one action roll over into bonus dice on a related action", but I'm not sure if there's some more detailed principle at work here.

Being more specific:

Right over the page, there's some rules about using Boost, which are supposedly just an application of the currency principles (and so, by implication, shouldn't involve anything new). But the Boost rules say, among other things, that you can't Boost a stat over twice your natural maximum without incurring penalties - where does that come from? Or is the double-your-stat maximum an example of a constraint made up by the GM and the example given here is how the GM then uses the currency equation to deal with the mechanical consequences of defying that constraint?

Elsewhere in the rules there are for examples of stuff which uses a whole chain of linked rules - for example, the human-demon mating rules in Sex & Sorcery, where the participants roll Stamina vs Stamina followed by Will vs Power and then Humanity vs Power and some other stuff too. Is the idea to take away from here just that once you've decided what the relevant conflicts are (humanity vs power to determine whether the child is human or demon, for example), the currency makes it obvious how victories on one roll relate to bonuses to another? Or is there some underlying principle I'm missing here such that one could use it to say "of course human-demon sex is represented by exactly that sequence of rolls, how could it be otherwise?"

Also regarding currency, I've seen it mentioned several times that when you have to roll a stat of 0, you roll one die and give the other guy an extra die too. Is this a rule that I've just missed when reading the book, or is it supposed to be a consequence of the currency equation that it's ok to add one die to each side because they cancel out, and this gives you some dice to roll? That seems intuitively totally weird to me because it would make it equally acceptable to roll 1009 dice vs 1000 dice instead of 10 vs 1, and I don't think that makes mathematical sense.

I really want to play this game, but so far the prospect still seems daunting, so any advice would be very much appreciated.

adam

[faerieloch]

Right over the page, there's some rules about using Boost, which are supposedly just an application of the currency principles (and so, by implication, shouldn't involve anything new). But the Boost rules say, among other things, that you can't Boost a stat over twice your natural maximum without incurring penalties - where does that come from? Or is the double-your-stat maximum an example of a constraint made up by the GM and the example given here is how the GM then uses the currency equation to deal with the mechanical consequences of defying that constraint?

Well, in this case, it represents the over-the-top toll which acting beyond your abilities takes you, your lack of control in doing unfamiliar actions.  For example, you might now have amazing stamina, but you're not used to that so you accidentally break things, overshoot your targets, etc. 

Elsewhere in the rules there are for examples of stuff which uses a whole chain of linked rules - for example, the human-demon mating rules in Sex & Sorcery, where the participants roll Stamina vs Stamina followed by Will vs Power and then Humanity vs Power and some other stuff too. Is the idea to take away from here just that once you've decided what the relevant conflicts are (humanity vs power to determine whether the child is human or demon, for example), the currency makes it obvious how victories on one roll relate to bonuses to another? Or is there some underlying principle I'm missing here such that one could use it to say "of course human-demon sex is represented by exactly that sequence of rolls, how could it be otherwise?"

This particular situation hasn't come up in my game, but the way I see it is that a demon is naturally more powerful than a human, so to mate with a demon, a human would have to stand up to the physical requirements (stamina v. stamina), and then exert their will over the demon to stay roughly in control (or at least to cease to become a plaything), etc.  The sequence of rolls can be justified in that way, but in terms of currency, the victories that carry over could be thought of as once you've won once, it's that much easier to do again.  Or, once you have control, it's that much easier to keep it.

Also regarding currency, I've seen it mentioned several times that when you have to roll a stat of 0, you roll one die and give the other guy an extra die too. Is this a rule that I've just missed when reading the book, or is it supposed to be a consequence of the currency equation that it's ok to add one die to each side because they cancel out, and this gives you some dice to roll? That seems intuitively totally weird to me because it would make it equally acceptable to roll 1009 dice vs 1000 dice instead of 10 vs 1, and I don't think that makes mathematical sense.

Well, in this case, I find it more a chance for the player to roll *something* because there's always that miniscule chance you'll win, against all odds.  Adding one die to the other side keeps the relationship the same.  Mathematically, adding the same number to both sides of an equation doesn't change the relationship but I don't know how it works out statistically on die rolls.

[Adam Biltcliffe]

Well, in this case, it represents the over-the-top toll which acting beyond your abilities takes you, your lack of control in doing unfamiliar actions. For example, you might now have amazing stamina, but you're not used to that so you accidentally break things, overshoot your targets, etc.

Oh, I'm fine with the idea that you're penalised for being Boosted too much. What I was querying was the assertion (on page 75) that "the "rules" given in the following section for Boosting Stamina are not special cases". I see how the currency principle gives you "one additional stat die past your limit translates to one penalty", but not how you arrive at the limit in the first place.

Well, in this case, I find it more a chance for the player to roll *something* because there's always that miniscule chance you'll win, against all odds. Adding one die to the other side keeps the relationship the same. Mathematically, adding the same number to both sides of an equation doesn't change the relationship but I don't know how it works out statistically on die rolls.

I'm pretty sure it changes the odds. But what I originally asked was whether the "zero versus N becomes one versus N+1" principle was a rule from the book or just something that should be somehow "obvious" from the currency principles.

[jburneko]

I can answer the zero dice becomes a bonus for the opposition question.  Yes, it's from the currency.  The currency reads:

1 die = 1 penalty = 1 bonus

That means that a penalty for one character is the same as a bonus for another character and vice versa.  Yes, this changes the odds slightly but the currency is concerned with game design considerations and not necessarily litteral mathematic equivalence.

Jesse

[faerieloch]

Re: Boost.  I looked through my rulebook and it appears that this is an assertion made by Ron.  I'm not sure I understand it too well myself.  :)

--Nancy

[Ron Edwards]

Hello,

The double-Stamina as a limit concept is "next step Sorcerer" thinking.

The first step is the basic idea of "points." A die is a point. A point can be transferred around, but it never stops being a point, or worth any more or less than a point. Once you get that, you can move on to the next step.

Now, think of any score - someone's Stamina, someone's Cover, a demon's Power, a character's Humanity, whatever. That's their "official bank" of points, for any roll which requires that score.

Notice that the bank is always subject to two things: (1) bonuses and penalties from various previous rolls (like damage or victories); or (2) role-playing modifications as listed early in the book. But regardless of these adjustments, the bank for each score is a big deal - it's like a ... I don't know if this will help, but I always imagine it as the cut-out shape the character imposes into the imaginary game world and story.

So using the size of that bank as a basis for limits of all kinds, like the damage rules or the Boosting rules, is very easy. You can multiply it (1 x Stamina, 2 x Stamina), etc, as a modifier just like you would multiply dice (1 x 1 die, 2 x 1 die) to arrive at someone's score or a value for a number of opposing dice.

I was going to present some examples, but had a better idea. You come up with some, and that way I can see how well we're communicating.

Best,
Ron

[Adam Biltcliffe]

Hi Ron,

I think I'm getting what you're saying, but it's hard to come up with examples that aren't trivial generalisations of the damage or Boost rules. Here are a couple, but please do call me out on it if I'm being too narrow-minded:

A particularly bloody version of sorcery in which human sacrifices can be made to increase a demon's Power for one action. I'd borrow from the sacrifices-in-ritual rules and have each sacrifice give bonus dice to Power equal to the victim's Humanity, but cap the number of dice at, say twice or maybe three times the demon's intrinsic Power.

A conflict which occurs somewhere other than the sorcerer's location in the 'real' world, such as during some kind of astral projection or in the river you described in your modern necromancy game, in which some conscious effort is required to maintain a physical presence on top of doing anything else. So perhaps as soon as the total penalties on the sorcerer equal his or her Will, the connection is broken and the sorcerer vanishes from the scene.

Is this stuff written down anywhere in the Sorcerer book or someplace similar? Part of my initial "Sorcerer is hard" reaction was based on my impression that the system has a very strong underlying logic (which your explanation reaffirms), but parts of it don't seem to be explained anywhere and much of the rest is mentioned only briefly.

thanks,
adam

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Adam,

Your first example is a lot like the Token rules for necromancy in Sorcerer & Sword. Although it's not identical, that's OK - you're using the logic/principle correctly.

The second example is just right - a good use of the concept, and of the explicit rules.

I suggest that you're seeing them as trivial because they're easy, which is not the same thing.

No, this concept is not explicitly laid out at any point in the Sorcerer texts. Much to the frustration of some readers, the rules are sufficient to play well, but not absolutely dissected, or with every permutation laid out for you. This is the case for three reasons.

a) The system itself turned out to be stronger than my original understanding of it. [This is the case for the complex conflict rules, which I only really explain fully in Sex & Sorcery; I should never have called them "the combat system."]

b) The point of publishing the book was not to make every last little potential bit (or underlying logic) clear, but rather to give the reader something to use right here, right now. [This is the case for the score-as-limit idea.]

c) Different people bring different mental "fault lines" in their understanding of how role-playing works, or could work. What to you seems like a fundamental lack of clarity (this particular bit about double-Stamina) is simply an "of course" to another person. What might seem to you "of course," is someone else's horrible bugaboo can't-work hot-button.

Best,
Ron

[Adam Biltcliffe]

Ron,

Thanks for your explanation. It sounds like the sensible thing to do is just to start playing and see how the system works in practice. Which is almost certainly what anyone would have told me if I'd asked anyway, but I wanted to be sure that if I was running a game of Sorcerer for a group of new players I wouldn't screw it up due to some fundamental misunderstanding and hurt my chances of getting to play it properly.

It might be a while before I can get a group together and sort out a time to play, but when it happens, I'll let you know how it goes!

adam