There are a lot of compelling reasons to want to have two sorcerers bound to the same demon. I mean, it certainly shows up a lot in the literature.

What do y'all think? What does this change, systematically, especially in terms of the initial summoning+binding -- especially in the context of the rollover successes (who gets them, etc.) How does this change "stages of rebellion" and demon behavior in general? Is it a good idea or a bad idea?

yrs--
--Ben

Hi Ben,

One Binding per demon, at most, at any time.

I suggest that what you're seeing in the literature is best represented in the game by any of the following.

1. One Binding by sorcerer A, but sorcerer B helped with it. The demon deals with sorcerer B, personally speaking, much as it does with sorcerer A, but ultimately the Need must come from A and the Binding strength applies only to interactions with A.

In other words, it looks as if B and the demon are Bound, and in-game the demon does indeed work with or otherwise have a relationship with B, but the game mechanics don't apply to that relationship.

2. One Binding by sorcerer A, but the demon happily exploits the perception that B has Bound it as well.

This is a lot like #1, in game terms, but in-game it's different because the demon is leading B down a primrose path for whatever purposes of its own. (Sorcerer A might or might not be collusive in this as well, or maybe sorcerer A is under the same misapprehension as B.)

3. They are vying for the Binding, which depending on the in-game definitions/concepts of the rituals, might actually take place over a long time and even throughout a scenario.

In this case, both sorcerers are or have rolled at least one of various pre-Binding rolls, and they each have a variety of conflicts or situations which yield even more potential dice of victories that can be factored into the upcoming Binding rolls.

During all this, the demon "serves" whoever has the higher current total of dice (if they had to roll Binding right at that moment). It isn't actually Bound to either one, but it's probably getting its Need from both of them. Its penalties for not being Bound are an issue which would have to be dealt with via the local customized concepts of sorcery in this game.

Conceivably, it might indeed serve both of them rather than switching, and conceivably on top of that, the sorcerers might not actually personally be vying for control - although their dice are (i.e. the real Binding).

There might be a couple other versions or approaches as well, but those seem like the main three.

Best,
Ron

Hmm... None of these seem totally satisfactory to the things I want to do. Perhaps what I really need is a different system? Here are the situations which I'm looking at:

1) The Dark God. The dark god has many servants to do his work for him as he sleeps beneath the earth. Many servants. I suppose that one could have lots of different, smaller demons that were all *aspects* of the Dark God, but that is somewhat unsatisfying to me, mainly because I like the way that big demons work.

2) Similarly, an artistic movement (yes, I'm still working on that game) has a lot of different members. I suppose that, in this case, it is easier to see one person as the "ringleader" but even that is going to shift with time and internal politics. I suppose that this could be made to work with option #3, but how would you handle, say, will rolls against the demon and other things? Is it considered "bound" for the purposes of giving orders? Bound to whom?

yrs--
--Ben

Hiya,

I forgot an important option! Your examples jogged it for me.

) The Dark God. The dark god has many servants to do his work for him as he sleeps beneath the earth. Many servants. I suppose that one could have lots of different, smaller demons that were all *aspects* of the Dark God, but that is somewhat unsatisfying to me, mainly because I like the way that big demons work.

2) Similarly, an artistic movement (yes, I'm still working on that game) has a lot of different members. I suppose that, in this case, it is easier to see one person as the "ringleader" but even that is going to shift with time and internal politics. I suppose that this could be made to work with option #3, but how would you handle, say, will rolls against the demon and other things? Is it considered "bound" for the purposes of giving orders? Bound to whom?

) The Dark God. The dark god has many servants to do his work for him as he sleeps beneath the earth. Many servants. I suppose that one could have lots of different, smaller demons that were all *aspects* of the Dark God, but that is somewhat unsatisfying to me, mainly because I like the way that big demons work.

Ron Edwards wrote:
Pacting.

Also, there's no particular reason for every servant of the Dark God to be a sorcerer who's entered into a ritual-defined relationship with it. Maybe a bunch of them just serve him because they're bonkers, no sorcerer mechanics necessary.

2) Similarly, an artistic movement (yes, I'm still working on that game) has a lot of different members. I suppose that, in this case, it is easier to see one person as the "ringleader" but even that is going to shift with time and internal politics. I suppose that this could be made to work with option #3, but how would you handle, say, will rolls against the demon and other things? Is it considered "bound" for the purposes of giving orders? Bound to whom?

Needs more information. Based on the assumption that you are thinking one-demon-one-artistic-movement, I think you might do better to individualize and scale down demons into smaller "artistic units," suitable for one-on-one Binding.

Whether it's the dark god or an artistic movement, why not just devise an uber-demon that spawns identical young for the members to bind? I mean really, pretty identical. Like the sorcerers can't tell them apart. And they have the same (or mostly, anyhow) motivations.

Everyone gets their own demon. You get an extra tool with which to fuck with them. The system's mechanics remain intact. And the feel of what you seem to be going for is maintained.

Each demons is one face of the nameless dark god.

Chris

Christopher Weeks wrote: Whether it's the dark god or an artistic movement, why not just devise an uber-demon that spawns identical young for the members to bind? I mean really, pretty identical. Like the sorcerers can't tell them apart. And they have the same (or mostly, anyhow) motivations.

Everyone gets their own demon. You get an extra tool with which to fuck with them. The system's mechanics remain intact. And the feel of what you seem to be going for is maintained.

Each demons is one face of the nameless dark god.

Chris

Well, the real question is one of the demon's motives. That is, if each Sorcerer's demon is actually just a face of one demon, which has just one set of motivations and understanding regarding the PCs - then that's one demon, and is problematic.

If, however, each "face" has it's own personality, motives, the whole schmear, then saying that they're all part of one entity is just a "special effect." That is, it'll work just fine. In a way this is the case in Sorcerer & Space.

Taken for the art example, this is just Ron's "sub-foms" all over again.

The point is that the sorcerer can't be a proper protagonist if he doesn't have his own demon to deal with.

Mike

Can't a Dark God possibly be handled using the Angel rules? Thus the Dark God binds the humans, not the other way around? This can work in conjunciton with the idea already being bandied about that humans, in turn, will be binding offspring of the Dark God.

Lxndr wrote: Can't a Dark God possibly be handled using the Angel rules? Thus the Dark God binds the humans, not the other way around? This can work in conjunciton with the idea already being bandied about that humans, in turn, will be binding offspring of the Dark God.

I've been pondering the same thing myself, primarily due to the type of Demons in my Mythic Past, Haunted Present game.

The set up: The Demons (Shades) are the ancestors of the players, and those of the blood can call forth their ancestors to transform them into heroes of the past. Now some of these mythical figures, the First Hero for example, are shared by all cultures as are some of the earliest Warlords. So in theory Shadewalkers (the Sorcerers) from different areas can all claim to be related to the same mythical hero.

Now, the Shades may not actually be the ancestors, they could be something else, or they could be other shades assuming the mantle of that figure, or they could have been previous shadewalkers who ascended and no longer distinguish between themselves and the shade that that particular shade had once bound while living.

That said, let's assume that for the reason of dynamics both players are bound to the same ancestor - they're grandfather who was an epic figure. Twin brothers share the same Shade/Demon, who constantly mistakes them for the other and is constantly confusing with whom provided the need last time.

All or Nothing

Now if they both call on the Shade/Demon at the same time, they have to make a Will test against the other using their binding strength as an advantage. The winner gains the Shade that scene while the other is left out. Successes are kept aside until the next time or until the ascendent Shadewalker/Sorcerer misses the need or until the weaker Shadewalker does something to trick or convince the demon/shade otherwise.

Alternating Power

Perhaps both are hosting the Shade and its powers are spread out between two people. In this case, the number of successes that both have 1) determine who has initiative and gets the power first and 2) the number of times they can draw upon the demon before it gets weakened during that scene. Player 1 has 5 successes, player 2 has 2 successes. Player 1 can choose to draw upon that power first if he or she so desires. Then the next round player 2 gets it, and it alternates back and forth: P1, then P2, P1, P2, P1, P1, P1. At the end of it, the Shade is drained from the effort of being used in such a manner.

Diverted Power

A bit like above, but in this case both channel the power of the Demon simultaneously. If they agree on the ability and both want its use, than that use of the power is spread out over two players, except the Power of that ability is X-1 and then split equally in half. If they can't agree on a power, they make a Will roll against each other as detailed above, with the winner gaining ascendance and the loser not getting the use of the power. If both draw upon an ability, its use is considered double.

There's a few other ways to toying about with it, determining favor through role playing and the like, that sort of thing. Or using a pool of favor points to quantify who has favor, but that seems to me to be adding an unnecessary set of rules.

Personally, I think two sorcerers bound to the same demon can make for a very interesting and dynamic relationship between the Sorcerers and the demon. I don't think it necessarily detracts from the Protagonists and in fact I think it plays on some of the conflict inherent in the game itself.