Alright first of all, i will try to give all needed information in this thread. If you want to know more, want to read through what i have, or want to make fun of my website, whichever, a PDF of my rule is available at <a href="http://shadowedgames.awardspace.com/channeling.html">My Website.

Now, in a previous thread, Pôl Jackson commented that i kept changing my game, and that i should do another power 19 to straighten out what i want to do, so i can better decide how to do it. So, i started on that, but on the very first question, i realized that i had, indeed, left something out of my game. In the game, the players play as people known as Channelers, those who have the talent of binding demons to themselves, and using them to perform supernatural feats, magic, and other impossible acts. I intended from the start that a large part of the setting was that the vast majority of normal people (and indeed, many other channelers) hated and feared channeling. As i was starting on my redone power 19, however, i realized that nothing in the rule support that. at all. Its in the setting, but players are free to ignore it. So, i began wondering if i could add something to enforce this (Yeah... another fairly major change, but this is to support something i intended all along). I have two ideas on it, which may work together, but still have some holes...

First, a mechanic representing... eh, for lack of a better word, I'll call it Corruption. Corruption represents the character becoming less human, more like the demon he uses, and more in tune with the demon. A higher corruption value makes Channeling easier, but at the cost of, essentially, your humanity. At a high Corruption, a character can Channel more power, and use up more of his strength without worrying about the demon breaking free, but there is obviously something wrong with him. An aura of uneasiness, declining social skills, perhaps even physical effects.
This part in itself has one thing missing... I'm not sure how to decide when a character goes up and down this scale. I don't want to make it straight based on use of Channeling, because i would like a pure mage type character to be viable (then again, maybe I'll decide it's worth it). I also don't want it to be a moral scale... it sounds a lot like good and evil, but it's not. A saint that used his power often, and for all good reasons would corrupt long before a genocidal psychopath that barely used it. Perhaps a character slides towards corruption when their control over the demon gets to low? (Control is a specific mechanic, rated with a number, so that could work)

Second, I'm considering a mechanic of temptation... Something like, if a character is doing particularly bad at a task, he/she must roll if they don't want to resort to Channeling. There would be a bonus to the roll as their Control gets low, and a bonus/penalty based on the Corruption score... more Corrupt, more tempted. A failed temptation check would allow the character to fall into dangerously low Control. The reason for this is partly for color, and partly as a slight restraint on min/maxing with the previous idea. The Corruption mechanic alone, if you really don't care about social and just blast everything anyway, seems to give an advantage to getting as Corrupt as possible. The reason that works is that Control, while it does work like mana in the sense that players burn it to cast spells, is different in that there is no bottom limit. A character can go into negative control. However, the lower they get, the more direct influence the demon has. At low control, he might change your effect on you somewhat, maybe changing the element of a damage spell, or the strength of an enchantment. At even lower levels, the demon might have more direct control, perhaps casting his own effects, or outright breaking free of the binding.

Ok... that was a lot of text, and a bit hard to read... sorry... For those who got through it, and still a little confused, how about an example.

Erik is a Channeler, who depends greatly on his power. His Corruption, while not enough to physically show, is enough that people feel weird around him. He starts haggling with a shopkeeper over an item, and continually gets really bad rolls. After a few of these, he has to make a check to avoid resorting to Channeling. He has very low control already, say from an earlier battle or something, so he gets a bonus from that, but he gets a penalty from his corruption score. He fails the check, and must resort to Channeling. What exactly he does is up to him, however. He can use a charm spell, kill the shopkeeper, or whatever. He decides to just blast the shopkeeper, and attempts to cast a fire bolt at the man. However, since his control is so low, his demon gets a say, and warps the single target bolt into an area effect explosion, causing the shop to go up in flames, and getting Erik in much, much more trouble than he intended from his trip into the store...

Heya,

1) Will these act like i think they will? As far as anybody knows... the only way to be sure would be playtest...
2) How can i determine Corruption? Especially reducing corruption...
3) Is temptation needed?

Or, penalize reducing corruption. Perhaps for every point you reduce corruption, you have to reduce casting skill. Since magic in your system seems to be based on controlling demons?, it makes sense from a setting point of view, too.

I think generally this sounds really good. I am a little confused about the difference between Control and Corruption.  Does a low Control nessesarily mean you have a high Corruption?  If so, do you need two different values or could they be combined?  On the other hand, it sounds like Control may be a more fluid value that may go up and down while Corruption changes more slowly.  Is this what you intend?

Answer #2:  One possible idea for a way to determine Corruption is a really high spell roll.  I assume that characters who are able to roll high are allowing the demons more control.  This opens them up to be Corrupted.  For example, if a character makes a spell roll of a 10 or higher, he gains one point of Corruption. 

As for reducing Corruption, I agree with Narf that suffering a penalty to their spell casting skill is the only way to reduce Corruption.  Perhaps tie this to a in-game action for the character like some way of attonement.

Answer #3:  I like the temptation idea, especially if it fits with what you are trying to accomplish in your game.  In other words, if resisting the temptation of power is an important theme in your game, then temptation mechanic is great.

Woah... 0 to 3 responses, all while i was at work... all right then, lets answer this...

Troy, #1: As for how much, i don't know, i'm torn between having it being a very fluid stat, or a longterm stat (one idea i was comparing it to, vaguely, in my head was Vampire: The Masquerade humanity). As for the low control vs. low power... low control is not low power. While you burn control to use abilities, at 0 control, you are still just as deadly, and can still use any abilities you want. Control can go as far negative as you want. The restriction is that your binding on the demon weakens, until at some point (0 or slightly below), anything the demon gives you, including continuing life, is a gift. The idea behind corruption enhancing casting is that if your closer to the demon, he might not push quite as hard against you, and thus not use up as much focus (in teh form of control)

Troy, #2: Yeah, that question is something i need to answer, i suppose. The Corruption idea isn't trying to encourage a behaviour one way or the other, it will ideally be balanced so that high corruption vs. low is player/character choice. What it is intended for is to give weight to the fact that you are playing a character that holding a demon, and letting him out in a gentle(relatively) and controlled(in tehory) manner. Also to give weight to the fact that 99% of the NPCs in the game will hate and fear what you are.

Troy, #3: Temptation, while not part of my original vision exactly, does seem to fit the rather vague idea i had before that the demons have some degree of control over the character. I actually see it adding a good deal to the game, pulling the game slightly more towards strategy and RP away from "if it moves and i have control left, blast it".

Narf: I tend to dislike anything that require spending XP for something temporary... but if i make corruption a slow mechanic, then i could see it as a slow, unstoppable slide to corruption ("power corrupts..."), that you can delay by force of mind and control (in the form of skill points/xp...). That view actually seems to work well...

Xibalba, #1: Low control isn't the same as high corruption, i'm considering making low corruption a cause of corruption... but in the way that dropping too low would slightly increase your corruption, so if you did it alot it would show, but one time wouldn't matter... much.

Xibalba, #2: Thats seems like a good idea... but i'm hesitant because i was considering another penalty for really high rolls... although i may be able to make it work... huh

Xibalba, #3: i think i already answered this with my response to troy so... yeah...