So, anyone who knows me knows that I'm not really a big anime fan. But a couple of months ago a friend of mine suggested that I check out a show called "Big O", which I think is the most unfortunate title in the world especially for someone like me who (at least knowingly) harbors almost all the negative stereotypes concerning anime. This friend knows I really like the Batman cartoon and described "Big O" as Batman meets Robotech. Rolling my eyes at the mention of giant robots I decided to check it out.

Within four episodes the giant robot thing stopped bothering me because it occured to me that they were being used (thematically), well, exactly like Old Ones. They're a remenant of a forgotten civilization and really Do Not Belong Here. What I began to realize while watching is that "Big O" is a Sorcerer story. In fact it's the best 1:1 mapping between media for the game I've seen in a long time. I find myself going, "Those two just spotted each other's telltales", or "Now, THERE's a fellow low on Humanity" and so forth.

I've seen episodes 18 through 26 (so, I know how it ends) and episodes 1 through 7. What I like about it is that it demonstrates Humanity Loss without being a total bastard and demons that threaten Humanity without being totally evil and even down right sympathetic.

The way I see it Humanity is "personal identity." The central character Roger Smith, is a Sorcerer with two demons Big O (his starting demon) and an android named Dorothy (who he comes to bind over the course of the first two episodes). I particularly enjoyed the part where Dorothy is being used as a battery pack for one of the giant robots and while trying to save her Roger shouts "Just be who you are!" Engendering a personal identity in something that (by human standards) shouldn't have one.

This is where I come to the major point of my post. Dorothy is an incredibly sympathic character. Sympathetic to the point that my girlfriend considers her a better romantic match for Roger than the rival human female Angel. But I maintain that every time Roger goes out of his way to protect Dorothy as an individual with an identity he's putting his Humanity on the line. In fact there are a few episodes where Roger goes out of his way to engender or acknowledge the personal indentity of androids while simultaneously failing to do so in his fellow humans.

So, that I don't get completely wrapped up in the problems of cross media interpretation the whole thing made me think of Ron's Demon Cops mini-supplement. If I'm not mistaken Demon Cops was intended as an attempt at "lighter" Sorcerer where the Demons lean more towards colorful sidekicks rather than dark horrors man was not meant to toy with. Humanity is "To protect and serve." Am I right in thinking that if a Sorcerer goes out of his way to "protect and serve" a particularly sympathetic demon that would still constitute a humanity loss, particurly if it meant violating the rights of say, a deplorable human villain?

You see, it is this Humanity subtlety that I think prevents Sorcerer from being Sim (Humanity is GOOD, if you want to be THE HERO, do stuff that's in line with Humanity) or Gamist (sometimes "winning" relative to Situation and even Character can run through either humanity gaining or losing situations).

I think this is a subtely that trips some players up. I've noticed a slight trend among players I've played with to object if I call for a Humanity Loss roll when their actions run counter to the humanity definition but are viewed by the group as fairly heroic or morally sound. It seems that there is a desire on the part of some players for Humanity Gain to always correspond with GOOD, HEROIC or even just SYMPATHETIC and Humanity Loss to always correspond with EVIL in a sort of D&D alignment split kind of way. I think it's a hard concept to view the Humanity Definition OUTSIDE of a pre-game moral judgement.

Thoughts?

Jesse

There's a very brief discourse on humanity and sympthy here:
http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=9393

Personally, I think the concept of Humanity as Sympathizable stems from value systems that some people make of the game, paticularly using Humanity as a control mechanic on the players.

Worried about players doing the psychotic gamer thing and slaughtering a bunch of people for little reason, making your morality play very lopsided? Well, they'd have pretty low Humanity then.

That sort of thinking can evolve into groups which expect Humanity loss calls in order to discourage action they want to discourage as players, or establish as having a large cost to them. When you call a humanity loss roll for someone the group feels is doing encouragable behavior, that feeling is broken and you have a disconnection of concepts.

jburneko wrote: SNIP

The way I see it Humanity is "personal identity." The central character Roger Smith, is a Sorcerer with two demons Big O (his starting demon) and an android named Dorothy (who he comes to bind over the course of the first two episodes). I particularly enjoyed the part where Dorothy is being used as a battery pack for one of the giant robots and while trying to save her Roger shouts "Just be who you are!" Engendering a personal identity in something that (by human standards) shouldn't have one.


Thoughts?

Jesse

Hello,

I've taken the details of Big O to Sorcerer conversion to private message. I was mostly using it as a strong lead in to my more general topic of highly sympathic and lighter demons and heroic and "good" actions that run counter to the humanity definition.

I'd like to keep this thread focused on that issue.

Jesse

jburneko wrote: I've taken the details of Big O to Sorcerer conversion to private message. I was mostly using it as a strong lead in to my more general topic of highly sympathic and lighter demons and heroic and "good" actions that run counter to the humanity definition.

Tod and I have batted about describing P.G. Wodehouse's Jeeves and Wooster stories in Sorcerer terms. Jeeves is obviously Wooster's demon. Humanity would be something in the order of social graces.

I don't think you could get much lighter than that.

Julie

Hi Jesse,

That's definitely one of the lines that trips up Sim or Sim accustomed players, is that there is no actual "right or wrong" moral statement made by the game system or setting itself regarding the choice to preserve or blow away your Humanity- the moral statement is made by the people at the table.

The real question being asked every time, is, "Is your Humanity worth it?", which only the players can answer.

Chris

This is all very interesting. I think it's very tempting to get into a lot of pre-game arguments about the "appropriateness" of a Humanity definition based on one's own value judgements about such things. For example in my space-western game Humanity was "respecting the rule of law" and resulted in this kind of situation where we were gleefully cheering for the protagonists as their Humanity was being sapped away in a plot to undermine the government's authority.

For some reason the whole setup worked for the particular group of players I was with at the time. BUT I could easily see someone who's say, a zealot liberterian objecting to the Humanity definition on the principle that because respecting the rule of law isn't ALWAYS a good thing then it ISN'T (objectively) the defining quality of Humanity. In fact, I imagine that this phenomenon might happen anytime someone has strong feelings on morality and might start insisting that we find THE definition of Humanity before we start deciding if we're violating it or not.

I also like the suggested idea that demons can be viewed as "innocents." I think the concept that a demon's inhumanity could be seen as something to be pittied rather than feared is very interesting. In fact, it strikes me that there would be a very subtle difference in saying that be default demon's have a Humanity score of zero rather than no Humanity score at all. This feeds into the ideas in Sorcerer's soul about Demon-To-Human conversions.

One possibility that comes to mind is Humanity trading from Sorcerer to Demon. Perhaps rolling one's Humanity vs. the demon's Power. Regardless of success or failure the number of victories is taken off the Sorcerer's Humanity. BUT if the Humanity roll was the victor those victories are directly added to the Demon's Humanity score (and maybe subtracted off the demon's power score).

This is a little softer than what's suggested in Sorcerer's Soul. I believe the suggestion in there is that Humanity gain for a demon FIRST whittles down the demon's power score to nothing and then once Humanity is gained all demon-ness is gone and if the demon uses any of it's abilities all previous Humanity gain is lost. I think a setting in which the demon's constant teetering in a effort to be human is almost as interesting as the Sorcerer's own struggle to keep up with the Demon's Need and Desire would be a lot fun.

Jesse

jburneko wrote: For some reason the whole setup worked for the particular group of players I was with at the time. BUT I could easily see someone who's say, a zealot liberterian objecting to the Humanity definition on the principle that because respecting the rule of law isn't ALWAYS a good thing then it ISN'T (objectively) the defining quality of Humanity. In fact, I imagine that this phenomenon might happen anytime someone has strong feelings on morality and might start insisting that we find THE definition of Humanity before we start deciding if we're violating it or not.

This is a little softer than what's suggested in Sorcerer's Soul. I believe the suggestion in there is that Humanity gain for a demon FIRST whittles down the demon's power score to nothing and then once Humanity is gained all demon-ness is gone and if the demon uses any of it's abilities all previous Humanity gain is lost. I think a setting in which the demon's constant teetering in a effort to be human is almost as interesting as the Sorcerer's own struggle to keep up with the Demon's Need and Desire would be a lot fun.