Also after this adventure, Jehan will wander off just too unnerved by these happenings and it is too much like the diabolism that he fled from home and is in hiding from.
I hope this message finds those of you who remain doing well.
If the offer is still open to play then I would like to resubmit my concept later in July. I just moved from IL to KY and am on a bit of hiatus (no computer of my own, sleeping on an air mattress, all sorts of fun).
Take care.
But that's the way you designed her, deliberately and purposefully, knowing already full well what the game was all about.
No. I have already ruled on the botch and Moes life was saved. If you wish to leave in the middle of an adventure, Ameline becomes an NPC under my control.
I think it is ignoble to quit a game in mid-adventure just because of an argument that has been ruled in your favor. You are a more honorable and enlightened person than that.
If it had been ruled and settled, then there wouldn't be a problem. The fact is that it has come up again and again, says it is not ruled or settled. The fact that the new players now far outnumber the ones against it means it is going to come up again and again. Twisting rules into pretzels is not my style of game.
The fact that you said you don't agree, GIJoo doesn't agree, Vortigen doesn't agree, Arawn doesn't seem to agree. It is coming up and still being debated. This means it isn't settled. I just don't feel light fighting about it. I don't have the brawl, I don't have the parma, I don't have the offensive spells. Sorry, but I don't think I fit this game.
You have GiJoo, Arawn, Vortigen, Fearghus, JeanMichelle, Marie's player which is the 3-6 that you wanted.
Ameline has 3 long term fatigue now. She has no spells useful. She has no way to manage miracle or saint invocation so she will be quiet and come along until adventure is over and then be gone. I am gone. I was kind enough to tell you I was leaving. Respect my decision.
People have freedom of speech. You guys can talk all you want, but a decision made is a decision that shall hold firm.
Look, if you or anyone wants to quit, go ahead and quit. Hell, all this pointless arguing makes me want to quit. I work really f'n hard all weekend, and all I look forward to is going to the library on Monday and playing my game. And I walk into all of this BS. And for what? To deal with petty player jelousy? So-and-so thinks so-and-so is too powerful. So what? What does that have to do with your character and how does it affect what they are doing with their lives?
I just don't want to deal with it any more. This is my hobby. I do this for enjoyment. I am not anyone's employee.
I am going back to utterly ignoring this thread. I believe in free speech, chat all you want. I am just not listening anymore. I amd going to focus on my storytelling and having fun with the people who want to play and have fun.
Marko and I had a quick conversation regarding Might Destruction in PMs. The only problem is that the stuff we talked about drastically change how it works as when compared to RAW. Now Marko I'm sorry about bringing PMs into the board, but since this does change so much and it's not listed in the House Rules I figured that it needed to.
This raises a number of issues:
Vis Destruction - This is open to debate since it's not stated either way in RAW. But I honestly don't really have any objection to it happening as it makes sense to me. However I just wanted to throw it out there.
Temporary Condition of the Damage - What happens to any Superiorities etc? Are they temporarily lost and return when the creature recovers its Might? How long does it take for Might to start recovering? Does the Might come back all at once or over time? If it comes back over time, what Superiorities etc do they gain first? How about Spirits and other creatures, who have no corporeal bodies naturally? Are they totally destroyed when they lose their Might? What happens if they have a Greater Immunity to Corporeal Destruction ( Like a lot of Spirits do )?
The Rather Large Nerf to Might Destruction - As you can see, this causes a number of problems, especially for those of us who have PeVi Might Destruction spells and relied on them as our main way to kill all manner of magical beasties. Because given the new rules, you can't just hit something with a Might Destruction spell to kill it, you have to use something else too.
Basically I happen to disagree with the rules and I think it needs to be either something that the group is allowed to vote on, or the players who have PeVi Might Destruction Spells need to be allowed to rework their characters, because these guidelines weren't in place at character creation. I know at least for Titus it's a giant.. well for lack of a better word, nerf. Instead of being able to go out and kill creatures solely with his PeVi he'll need other spells.
Again, if this is just something you want to hand wave and say "This is how it's going to be", that's fine Marko, you're ASG and this is your Campaign, say the word and you won't hear a word of protest from me. I'm just asking for clarification on a number of topics, requesting that it be listed as a house rule and asking for the chance to make changes to my character ( as this neuters his PeVi concept a rather large amount )
This has direct impact on Ludovico and his ability to engage with spirits with his current build/spells.
It also is something entirely new to me and Ludovico has been approved/'in game' for ... quite some time now.
My two pawns of vis? Hmm.
I am in favor of might damage healing over time and not being permanent. It makes sense that a creature of might could recover from that without having to slowly build it's might up the hard way. This of course is predicated on the ammount of might damage it sustained being non-lethal.
I am also however in favor of might damage being lethal if the might of the creature is reduced to zero. I think a fair compromise of this with the fact that creatures have to spend their might to use their powers etc. is to subtract might damage first from their theoretical might 'capacity' or 'maximum' first and only reduce current might points if the that capacity is reduced below current might.
Making a Perdo Vim might destruction spell reduce an Ogre to 'big fat guy' instead of a 'dead Ogre' is a -major- nerf of Perdo Vim.
And as for Perdo Vim destroying the Vis in a creature... the RAW doesn't say that, but it is a logical side-effect of that method of killing something, depending on interpretation. I don't mind that, but think it like the rest definately would need to be clearly stated in the House Rules section of the game for clarity. Titus, for example, is a guy made to hunt creatures for Vis... with Perdo Vim. This is a major problem if his Perdo Vim killing spells don't kill and/or destroy the Vis in a creature as a 'bonus'.
Ludovico isn't as good at the might destruction thing as Titus but does know some spells in that area and have a decent spread in the relevant Arts. Do not Conjure that which you can not Put Down. Yeah... so, not being able to kill a spirit with a might destruction effect? Bad News for Ludo the Summoner.
I'm open for discussion on this as it does raise -lots- of question as to how it could theoretically work, but I think it is a lot more complicated than it needs to be as well.
I agree with you on this one, I don't like the current system.
This would be acceptable, it would make it so that creatures with Might don't automatically get screwed the minute they eat a Might Destruction spell.
My point exactly, it really takes the 'Oomph' out of Titus' build. Now if this is the way Marko wants it done, again thats fine. But I think that since it wasn't overtly stated that we should be allowed to make the appropriate changes ( which could range from the minor to the major depending on how important PeVi is to the character ).
I'm quite alright with it destroying Vis. But as you stated, this kind of thing needs to be stated in the House Rules. The idea that it might destroy the Vis didn't occur to me until after creation/approval. If PeVi destroys the Vis, Titus will take some revising as he will need other ways to kill creatures without destroying the Vis.
Yup, I figured you'd be affected by this too.
You need to reverse your perspective. I hate PM's, and would rather that everything was discussed on the board instead.
Having said that...
Partial Might depletion heals over time.
Total Might depletion destroys all vis.
That's just the way it is. No negotiation.
That's fine! Is it alright then if I make adjustments to Titus? Since his PeVi Might Destruction spells become far less useful for someone who is hunting magical creatures, I'd be moving him a lot closer towards his original PeCo concept rather than PeVi.
I cannot allow that to happen, since Jehan is Rodrigo's apprentice. I can NPC herand let her fade into the background though.
I am pretty sure that this is core RAW, and is not at all a House Rule.
I'm talking about PeVi Might Destruction Spells not actually killing a Creature with Might when they get to 0. If thats no longer the case ( which is fine ) I'll just have to work on Titus' concept a tad, since it becomes far less efficient to hunt a creature with PeVi rather than.. say PeAn.
But as for the Vis destruction, it's not stated either way in RAW. But again, I'm not honestly worried about that at all.
This doesn't address the issue of might destruction and whether it kills a creature.
I agree with the first point, it should be that way even if it isn't described in RAW. The second, meh, I'm ok with it. It makes sense from a theoretical perspective as a side effect of killing something by destroying it's magical energy. Not RAW, but certainly makes sense. However the not killing things I think is a bit much on the side of nerfing. Not getting Vis is already a powerful reason not to kill with it if you don't have to. And all three of those points I am quite sure are things that fall firmly into the 'House Rule' category.
This. Vort hit the nail on the head, basically if PeVi Might Destruction no longer kills a creature, then Titus will need a change in builds as it were. Because to have a Magical Creature hunter who is unable to kill Magical Creatures... I'm not opposed to any of this Marko, just wanting clarification so I can change Titus as needed so his build fits his theme.
That comes right from the first page of RoP-Magic. It may kill them, it might not. It all depends.
Really? I can't seem to find it. Do you mind quoting it? I'm honestly curious about it, not saying you're wrong boss. That and I think I'm blind >.>
Okay, I stand corrected. It is on the 29th page (the first page of Chapter 4: Magic Characters).
So, RoP-Magic, page 29, middle column, second paragraph of said column (fourth paragraph on that page), very last sentence.
“The fate of characters who are destroyed by the loss of their Might Score is up to the storyguide”.
Suggested fates include spirits being banished to the magic realm, elementals becoming inert, transformed beings being rendered mundane, or others simply dying. In the case of these giants, I have ruled that they remain giants (because shrinking them would be stupid), but they loose any qualities that do not specifically relate to their size and mass. Thus, they keep Great Strength, but loose their magical power of Endurance of the Berserkers. Thus they suffer the pain from the wounds inflicted by the arrows and were dropped.
Thank you Marko!
Marko, correct me if I am wrong, but I think this is the section you are referencing regarding the application of might destruction to individual cases etc?
If this is the correct passage, and I’m fairly certain it is?, then I think this is still overall confirmatory that in general might destruction results in the relative ‘death’ of the creature in question. This seems to me to be intended to provide flexibility to the interpretation of exactly how that happens and/or how it looks or is presented in play.
There is one example where a creature is rendered a mundane creature.
This is a very specific example that I would apply, as a general rule, as follows.
A creature that was originally mundane and then ‘became’ magical somehow could/would be rendered mundane if it’s might was destroyed.
This is not a case, necessarily, for applying the same treatment to creatures/characters that are innately magical and/or were not mundane in origin. In fact it states immediately after that;
And prior to that
This makes it seem plain to me that the default assumption is that something that is ‘destroyed’ by might destruction is, effectively, removed from play barring some exceptional circumstance following. For example… the creature of mundane origin that ‘became’ magical. Or a spirit ‘banished to the magic realm’ could theoretically be recovered by a trip to the magic realm in search of it. But really, this all feels like twisting of the basic mechanic of might destruction to me.
I can just imagine the level of extreme objections that I would experience, for example, if I tried to take Ludovico on such a magic realm quest to recover a ‘killed’ spirit.
So, is a creature ‘killed’ by might destruction ‘dead’ or just ‘not magical anymore’?
To me the default answer is ‘dead’ and ‘not magical anymore’ feels like a rare exception for particular cases.
Otherwise I want my ghosts back. 