Providence

Providence is a LARP game using Trent Yacuk's Kingdom Come system. It is a game of Fallen Angels and their struggle to survive against the forces of Heaven and Hell and some things in between.

Who is online?

In total there is 1 user online :: 0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 1 Guest

None


[ View the whole list ]


Most users ever online was 15 on Sun 19 Jul 2015 - 8:55

Gallery


Blog Posts

Latest topics

» Shutting down the Forums
Tue 3 Aug 2010 - 11:47 by cenobyte

» Magic Creation-Zeal Table
Tue 3 Aug 2010 - 11:28 by cenobyte

» Houses of the Blooded in Regina, August 28th
Wed 14 Jul 2010 - 15:02 by Bal

» The Sentinel's journal
Thu 8 Jul 2010 - 20:13 by Dorian Mason

» Character backgrounds
Tue 6 Jul 2010 - 12:19 by Corral

» The dreams of Edward
Sun 4 Jul 2010 - 0:32 by Edward

» Some of Eliel's secrets
Sat 3 Jul 2010 - 17:35 by Corral

» Question/June Game
Thu 1 Jul 2010 - 22:51 by cenobyte

» "Map" of the Fallen
Thu 1 Jul 2010 - 14:17 by Molior

Navigation

Statistics

Our users have posted a total of 3440 messages in 394 subjects

We have 47 registered users

The newest registered user is Cyurus


    Rules Changes

    Share
    avatar
    Arc
    Retired

    Number of posts : 155
    Registration date : 2008-08-07

    Re: Rules Changes

    Post by Arc on Sun 3 Jan 2010 - 20:49

    cenobyte wrote:It's even possible that spending a CP to block the use of Transgressions might be okay.

    This is expressed in no uncertain terms as not okay in the BRB. A cinematic point may NEVER be spent to negate another prior expenditure.
    avatar
    cenobyte
    Admin

    Number of posts : 860
    Location : She is overfond of books, and it hath addled her brain.
    Registration date : 2008-06-24

    Re: Rules Changes

    Post by cenobyte on Sun 3 Jan 2010 - 20:52

    There are Transgressions that do not require the use of CPs, though. I have always understood that if a CP was used in this fashion, it would be used for Transgressions that do not require the use of CPs.
    avatar
    Friedrich
    Retired

    Number of posts : 127
    Location : in Gabe's body, playing with his stuff
    Registration date : 2009-10-25

    Re: Rules Changes

    Post by Friedrich on Sun 3 Jan 2010 - 20:54

    cenobyte wrote:Having a combat effect is not the same as using in combat. Using in combat goes back to the discussion of warfare challenges and activating Techniques other than combat-specific Techniques in combat. Burning a CP to avoid death/survive a killing blow would still be permissible.

    I'm sorry, but I don't see the difference between the two.

    In either case a CP is being used in combat for some effect, be it for warfare (which is still an effect, in my opinion), jumping in the way of a blow, or escaping death.

    I don't know how to continue to discuss this given my inability to see the distinction.
    avatar
    Arc
    Retired

    Number of posts : 155
    Registration date : 2008-08-07

    Re: Rules Changes

    Post by Arc on Sun 3 Jan 2010 - 20:55

    The cap I was referring to was the innate cap limited to the number of Archetypes you have in an area. If I have a Dynamic Mind capped at 3 because of Archetypes but can reach a 9 because of my Devotion, I see this as a significant advantage.

    I'm not clear on where you get the Devotion = Willpower, or even what you mean by that.
    avatar
    cenobyte
    Admin

    Number of posts : 860
    Location : She is overfond of books, and it hath addled her brain.
    Registration date : 2008-06-24

    Re: Rules Changes

    Post by cenobyte on Sun 3 Jan 2010 - 22:03

    Devotion in KC is meant to represent, essentially, "Willpower" in other systems.

    I'm confused by your first statement. Your Prowesses are capped *for purchase* by your Archetype level, but you can use Devotion to boost your Prowess for one challenge. Your Devotion is *not* capped by your Archetype level, though, so yes, you could conceivably spend your build points from Archetypes to load up on 9 Devotion, and you could, further, boost your Prowess for a single challenge all the way up to 9. But a) that *still* doesn't mean you'll win the roll. The most it does is give you a Potent Advantage.

    I mean, even if you blow *all* of your Devotion on a single Inspiration to bring your Prowess to 9 in a single challenge, the most you get out of having 9 Dynamic Prowess is a potent Advantage on *one* challenge.

    Alan: I think it goes back, as I mentioned, to the discussion of "combat scene" versus "combat/warfare challenges". We should talk about this in person or on the phone, though.
    avatar
    Arc
    Retired

    Number of posts : 155
    Registration date : 2008-08-07

    Re: Rules Changes

    Post by Arc on Sun 3 Jan 2010 - 22:17

    Clearly you don't think an almost 90% chance of success holds the same weight for a challenge that I do, especially considering some of the effects that can be garnered from single challenges.

    Combined with your proposed abilities in Devotion, that makes Devotion worth more than any other point in the game in terms of "Bang for your Buck". Why take something that powerful and make it cost just a single point in an Archetype when the cost for it right now is a very prominent, story affecting, Vice.
    avatar
    cenobyte
    Admin

    Number of posts : 860
    Location : She is overfond of books, and it hath addled her brain.
    Registration date : 2008-06-24

    Re: Rules Changes

    Post by cenobyte on Sun 3 Jan 2010 - 22:21

    I don't think there *is* an almost 90% chance of success. I think there's about an 83% chance of success, and that's assuming that your opponent doesn't *also* spend Devotion to raise *his* Prowess.

    But you're saying that right now, that 83% - 90% chance of success is okay, but adding a Technique ability to the Devotion roster would suddenly unbalance the stat?
    avatar
    cenobyte
    Admin

    Number of posts : 860
    Location : She is overfond of books, and it hath addled her brain.
    Registration date : 2008-06-24

    Re: Rules Changes

    Post by cenobyte on Sun 3 Jan 2010 - 22:26

    I should also mention that I'm not trying to be dismissive; I'm trying to really understand what you're saying, Johnathan, because this kind of discussion has never come up with Trent. Not about Cinematic Points and Devotion; certainly with other things, but not with this.
    avatar
    Arc
    Retired

    Number of posts : 155
    Registration date : 2008-08-07

    Re: Rules Changes

    Post by Arc on Sun 3 Jan 2010 - 22:51

    cenobyte wrote:But you're saying that right now, that 83% - 90% chance of success is okay, but adding a Technique ability to the Devotion roster would suddenly unbalance the stat?

    Given all the other benefits that Devotion can be used for, yes. It would unbalance the Devotion stat greatly and devalue CPs to the point that you may see significantly fewer people asking for Vices.
    avatar
    cenobyte
    Admin

    Number of posts : 860
    Location : She is overfond of books, and it hath addled her brain.
    Registration date : 2008-06-24

    Re: Rules Changes

    Post by cenobyte on Sun 3 Jan 2010 - 22:57

    Fair enough.
    I agree with the "devaluing CPs" argument *far* more than the "unbalancing the Devotion" argument. I've passed your concerns on to Trent.

    Thanks, Johnathan!
    avatar
    Friedrich
    Retired

    Number of posts : 127
    Location : in Gabe's body, playing with his stuff
    Registration date : 2009-10-25

    Re: Rules Changes

    Post by Friedrich on Mon 4 Jan 2010 - 13:24

    cenobyte wrote:Alan: I think it goes back, as I mentioned, to the discussion of "combat scene" versus "combat/warfare challenges". We should talk about this in person or on the phone, though.

    Actually, Jill, that makes it quite clear. I wasn't getting that distinction from the previous conversation in the other thread, perhaps because I find it artificially imposed and arbitrary in the context of combat streamlining and simplicity.

    I personally find combat-challenge CP use no more intrusive than combat-scene CP use. In either case, someone who doesn't know the rules and how the effect works is going to slow things down while those who know the rules and effects are going to be able to handle either situation with grace.

    It seems as though understanding the distinction still closes discussion.
    avatar
    Molior

    Number of posts : 124
    Location : The Dojo
    Registration date : 2008-06-26

    Re: Rules Changes

    Post by Molior on Mon 4 Jan 2010 - 17:42

    Waaaaait a second.

    cenobyte wrote:Your Devotion is *not* capped by your Archetype level, though

    Wut? If it isn't capped by your Soul Archetype right now, it bloody well should be. And pg. 119 seems to indicate that it is.
    avatar
    cenobyte
    Admin

    Number of posts : 860
    Location : She is overfond of books, and it hath addled her brain.
    Registration date : 2008-06-24

    Re: Rules Changes

    Post by cenobyte on Mon 4 Jan 2010 - 17:49

    I was referring to the fact that it is not a Prowess.
    avatar
    Eliel

    Number of posts : 198
    Registration date : 2009-01-16

    Re: Rules Changes

    Post by Eliel on Sun 10 Jan 2010 - 1:28

    Someone asked for examples of who thought infected trauma should go because there are too many types of trauma. I am very much one of them. Admittedly I think just getting rid of infected trauma does not go nearly far enough; to me it is at least a step in the right direction. If anyone is curious as to why I think there are too many types of trauma I compiled a sample list of the different types of trauma. Shockingly this list isnt exhaustive as there a few types I missed but I think it illustrates why I have concerns.

    Emotional Forced Immoral Surface Trauma
    Emotional Forced Moral Surface Trauma
    Emotional Forced Unaligned Surface Trauma
    Emotional Forced Immoral Severe Trauma
    Emotional Forced Moral Severe Trauma
    Emotional Forced Unaligned Severe Trauma
    Emotional Forced Immoral Mortal Trauma
    Emotional Forced Moral Mortal Trauma
    Emotional Forced Unaligned Mortal Trauma
    Emotional Coerced Immoral Surface Trauma
    Emotional Coerced Moral Surface Trauma
    Emotional Coerced Unaligned Surface Trauma
    Emotional Coerced Immoral Severe Trauma
    Emotional Coerced Moral Severe Trauma
    Emotional Coerced Unaligned Severe Trauma
    Emotional Coerced Immoral Mortal Trauma
    Emotional Coerced Moral Mortal Trauma
    Emotional Coerced Unaligned Mortal Trauma
    Emotional Voluntary Immoral Surface Trauma
    Emotional Voluntary Moral Surface Trauma
    Emotional Voluntary Unaligned Surface Trauma
    Emotional Voluntary Immoral Severe Trauma
    Emotional Voluntary Moral Severe Trauma
    Emotional Voluntary Unaligned Severe Trauma
    Emotional Voluntary Immoral Mortal Trauma
    Emotional Voluntary Moral Mortal Trauma
    Emotional Voluntary Unaligned Mortal Trauma
    Emotional Forced Immoral Severe Lingering Trauma
    Emotional Forced Moral Severe Lingering Trauma
    Emotional Forced Unaligned Severe Lingering Trauma
    Emotional Forced Immoral Mortal Lingering Trauma
    Emotional Forced Moral Mortal Lingering Trauma
    Emotional Forced Unaligned Mortal Lingering Trauma
    Emotional Coerced Immoral Severe Lingering Trauma
    Emotional Coerced Moral Severe Lingering Trauma
    Emotional Coerced Unaligned Severe Lingering Trauma
    Emotional Coerced Immoral Mortal Lingering Trauma
    Emotional Coerced Moral Mortal Lingering Trauma
    Emotional Coerced Unaligned Mortal Lingering Trauma
    Emotional Voluntary Immoral Severe Lingering Trauma
    Emotional Voluntary Moral Severe Lingering Trauma
    Emotional Voluntary Unaligned Severe Lingering Trauma
    Emotional Voluntary Immoral Mortal Lingering Trauma
    Emotional Voluntary Moral Mortal Lingering Trauma
    Emotional Voluntary Unaligned Mortal Lingering Trauma
    Emotional Forced Immoral Surface Temporary Trauma
    Emotional Forced Moral Surface Temporary Trauma
    Emotional Forced Unaligned Surface Temporary Trauma
    Emotional Forced Immoral Severe Temporary Trauma
    Emotional Forced Moral Severe Temporary Trauma
    Emotional Forced Unaligned Severe Temporary Trauma
    Emotional Forced Immoral Mortal Temporary Trauma
    Emotional Forced Moral Mortal Temporary Trauma
    Emotional Forced Unaligned Mortal Temporary Trauma
    Emotional Coerced Unaligned Surface Infected Indulge Trauma
    Emotional Coerced Unaligned Severe Infected Indulge Trauma
    Emotional Coerced Unaligned Mortal Infected Indulge Trauma
    Emotional Coerced Unaligned Surface Infected Covet Trauma
    Emotional Coerced Unaligned Severe Infected Covet Trauma
    Emotional Coerced Unaligned Mortal Infected Covet Trauma
    Emotional Coerced Unaligned Surface Infected Despoil Trauma
    Emotional Coerced Unaligned Severe Infected Despoil Trauma
    Emotional Coerced Unaligned Mortal Infected Despoil Trauma
    Psychological Forced Immoral Surface Trauma
    Psychological Forced Moral Surface Trauma
    Psychological Forced Unaligned Surface Trauma
    Psychological Forced Immoral Severe Trauma
    Psychological Forced Moral Severe Trauma
    Psychological Forced Unaligned Severe Trauma
    Psychological Forced Immoral Mortal Trauma
    Psychological Forced Moral Mortal Trauma
    Psychological Forced Unaligned Mortal Trauma
    Psychological Coerced Immoral Surface Trauma
    Psychological Coerced Moral Surface Trauma
    Psychological Coerced Unaligned Surface Trauma
    Psychological Coerced Immoral Severe Trauma
    Psychological Coerced Moral Severe Trauma
    Psychological Coerced Unaligned Severe Trauma
    Psychological Coerced Immoral Mortal Trauma
    Psychological Coerced Moral Mortal Trauma
    Psychological Coerced Unaligned Mortal Trauma
    Psychological Voluntary Immoral Surface Trauma
    Psychological Voluntary Moral Surface Trauma
    Psychological Voluntary Unaligned Surface Trauma
    Psychological Voluntary Immoral Severe Trauma
    Psychological Voluntary Moral Severe Trauma
    Psychological Voluntary Unaligned Severe Trauma
    Psychological Voluntary Immoral Mortal Trauma
    Psychological Voluntary Moral Mortal Trauma
    Psychological Voluntary Unaligned Mortal Trauma
    Psychological Forced Immoral Severe Lingering Trauma
    Psychological Forced Moral Severe Lingering Trauma
    Psychological Forced Unaligned Severe Lingering Trauma
    Psychological Forced Immoral Mortal Lingering Trauma
    Psychological Forced Moral Mortal Lingering Trauma
    Psychological Forced Unaligned Mortal Lingering Trauma
    Psychological Coerced Immoral Severe Lingering Trauma
    Psychological Coerced Moral Severe Lingering Trauma
    Psychological Coerced Unaligned Severe Lingering Trauma
    Psychological Coerced Immoral Mortal Lingering Trauma
    Psychological Coerced Moral Mortal Lingering Trauma
    Psychological Coerced Unaligned Mortal Lingering Trauma
    Psychological Voluntary Immoral Severe Lingering Trauma
    Psychological Voluntary Moral Severe Lingering Trauma
    Psychological Voluntary Unaligned Severe Lingering Trauma
    Psychological Voluntary Immoral Mortal Lingering Trauma
    Psychological Voluntary Moral Mortal Lingering Trauma
    Psychological Voluntary Unaligned Mortal Lingering Trauma
    Psychological Forced Immoral Surface Temporary Trauma
    Psychological Forced Moral Surface Temporary Trauma
    Psychological Forced Unaligned Surface Temporary Trauma
    Psychological Forced Immoral Severe Temporary Trauma
    Psychological Forced Moral Severe Temporary Trauma
    Psychological Forced Unaligned Severe Temporary Trauma
    Psychological Forced Immoral Mortal Temporary Trauma
    Psychological Forced Moral Mortal Temporary Trauma
    Psychological Forced Unaligned Mortal Temporary Trauma
    Psychological Coerced Unaligned Surface Infected Approbation Trauma
    Psychological Coerced Unaligned Severe Infected Approbation Trauma
    Psychological Coerced Unaligned Mortal Infected Approbation Trauma
    Psychological Coerced Unaligned Surface Infected Indulge Trauma
    Psychological Coerced Unaligned Severe Infected Indulge Trauma
    Psychological Coerced Unaligned Mortal Infected Indulge Trauma


    Last edited by Eliel on Sun 10 Jan 2010 - 1:57; edited 2 times in total (Reason for editing : removed 18 types of trauma after just recently discovering that they couldn't exist)


    _________________
    Eliel

    He who would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself". -Thomas Paine, philosopher and writer (1737-1809)
    avatar
    Eliel

    Number of posts : 198
    Registration date : 2009-01-16

    Re: Rules Changes

    Post by Eliel on Mon 11 Jan 2010 - 0:45

    While I mentioned my dislike of the current trauma system, it isn't really my "one thing" that I'd like to see changed (although it is related).

    I would like to see the removal of morality from the realm of mechanics. Currently characters have conviction, embodiment and morality that all to some degree fill the role of "alignment" on a character. I would prefer it reduced down to two and morality seems the least needful of a mechanic. Leaving Innocent and Irredeamable as pre-eminences could still work but everything else isn't mechanic based. One could also still have morality listed on a sheet as a guidepost for characters. However I think it would be easier to have the supernatural/mechanic elements of the game be based on embodiment rather than morality. (for note this also reduces the number of different types of trauma by close to 100).


    _________________
    Eliel

    He who would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself". -Thomas Paine, philosopher and writer (1737-1809)
    avatar
    cenobyte
    Admin

    Number of posts : 860
    Location : She is overfond of books, and it hath addled her brain.
    Registration date : 2008-06-24

    Re: Rules Changes

    Post by cenobyte on Mon 11 Jan 2010 - 9:41

    I'd like other opinions on this, please!
    avatar
    Rebecca O'Malley
    Retired

    Number of posts : 86
    Registration date : 2008-06-25

    Re: Rules Changes

    Post by Rebecca O'Malley on Mon 11 Jan 2010 - 11:34

    I hate rules discussions with a hot hot heat.

    but...

    I love having morality. I think it's important. Trauma too, though I will say that trauma in this game has been far more abundant than I have experienced it, and I think that is for a combination of reasons that Wade outlined in a different thread. I have had more trauma in this one game than I have in all the years I've been playing Kingdom Come put together...and I'm not going to place the blame for that on anyone but me. I knew exactly what I was doing each and every time I got more (and more) stinking trauma. If my character has become unplayable (which it kinda has) I have no one to blame but myself. My only complaint is that lingering trauma is way to effing hard to heal.

    Anyways, I think the game would lose a great deal if morality was removed - particularly in a world where Sin does not equal Evil, and in my opinion, neither does infernal. If anything, I'd love to see morality play a bigger part in the game, but that I suppose, is up to the players.
    avatar
    Corral

    Number of posts : 359
    Location : Leaving myself behind...
    Registration date : 2008-06-25

    Re: Rules Changes

    Post by Corral on Mon 11 Jan 2010 - 15:38

    I was going to send this via an email, but my "one thing" is also morality, although for a different reason, so I might as well say it here. I think that Kingdom Come spends a lot of time telling you how to play your character (rather than suggesting) and morality is the worst example of this. For example, when you witness something bad, most people in most games would roleplay that out, and maybe you'd slowly get over it, but in KC it is forced via trauma tests and symptoms that don't go away until you've spent effort to get rid of it. That's okay in most cases, but it's frustrating when you want to have a character that you really think wouldn't be bothered by things that the book tells you you're gonna have to be bothered by. For the most part I have come to accept this as part of Kingdom Come but I still dislike the fact that there are characters that simply cannot exist - mainly, people who define good or evil in different terms than those described in the book - or sometimes cannot exist for long, since they would have slipped to Irredeemable after a few years as Fallen.

    We've talked about my first example before, and it was by no means accepted by everyone that this is a bad thing. I think the main point was that in this setting, good and evil ARE terms that are known, quantified, and unchanging. However I don't accept that a person who absolutely believes, for example, that killing humans and angels is wrong, but killing devils/demons is not, and has had many years of hunting demons to reinforce that, would actually be mentally traumatized by seeing a demon killed, and - here's the kicker - possibly lose morality for that, so that they get to the point where they no longer believe killing humans (or angels) is evil, either.

    I'm not saying I don't like the trauma system (I kinda do, I mostly don't) but the way that the trauma system interacts with and determines morality - that is my "one thing".

    (PS, it's been suggested that this is something that might be overcome with player-defined preeminences, but this is only one example.)
    avatar
    Rebecca O'Malley
    Retired

    Number of posts : 86
    Registration date : 2008-06-25

    Re: Rules Changes

    Post by Rebecca O'Malley on Tue 12 Jan 2010 - 13:53

    Okay, I'm much better at saying these things in person, so I apologize if I'm a little incoherent. Also, this is the *second* time I'm posting on a rules thread, WTF??

    Killing is hard. Killing is really hard. Only the most hardened people can kill without batting an eye. Psychopaths, serial killers, people who are so emotionally numb from whatever, those are the folks to whom killing comes easily. The morality system leaves a lot of wiggle room. Can you be a castrating psychopath who cares deeply for the children? Sure you can! You can care about kids, kittens, women, the environment, whatever else...but the bottom line is that in your spare time, you go out, hunt down bad men, castrate and kill 'em and don't bat an eye about what you're doing....You are irredeemable, not because you are a mostly good person who cares about the children/kittens/zebras/trees, but because you kill and it doesn't affect you in the slightest. You, my friend, are a monster plain and simple.

    Can you be a good person, a person who hates the fact that you have to go out and kill angels/demons/bad guys? Absolutely! You can be a person who hates killing, hates the fact that your hand is forced, who is traumatized each and every time you take a life, but you do it because you know it needs to be done. Look at soldiers who come home from war...they do what they have to, and they are (for the most part) deeply affected by it. Look at police officers and the terrible trauma they go through when they have to actually shoot someone down. Killing is not easy.

    Listen, the fact of the matter is that there has to be consequences for actions, and personally, while I think that while the trauma system may be flawed, it's one of the best ways I've seen to deal with the action=consequence issue. If your character would jump into situations that *will* cause them trauma, you may want to rethink what morality you chose to set your character at when you created it. If you want to play a game where there is absolutely no consequence for your actions, well, I don't know how to help you with that.
    avatar
    Bal

    Number of posts : 102
    Registration date : 2009-07-28

    Re: Rules Changes

    Post by Bal on Tue 12 Jan 2010 - 14:16

    On the killing is not easy part - a lot of folks say "But what about soldiers? They kill all the time and are fine!" Okay, well, not all of them are fine. But here's the thing. If a soldier is out in the field for a couple of weeks doing battle, he then needs a couple of months to recuperate if you want to mitigate the chances of serious battle fatigue. To translate to game terms, they spend one month fighting, possibly fail a trauma check, get their maximum of one a month trauma, and then spend three months doing rehabilitation actions, which they probably succeed at. Now, some soldiers will do better - they'll make their trauma checks and not acquire any in the first place, or they'll recouperate quickly or whatever. Others will fare poorly - they'll get lots of trauma, and fail to heal it. Often soldiers won't get near enough time outside of conflict as they need - this leads to them gradually building up trauma, and finally have breakdowns. All of this makes a lot of sense to me.

    So when folks say "My character should be able to kill those he considers 'the enemy' all the time without psychological consequences, cause real soldiers do it all the time", I laugh. Because real soldiers don't. There is a reason why in high intensity conflicts, psych causalities often match physical casualties in terms of how many soldiers they disable and take out of the fight.

    Though the Irredeemable caring about the children and kittens does make me think of one of the weirdest elements of the Trauma system - they actually can't in Kingdom Come. Or, rather, caring for the kittens will cause them mental anguish that will eventually build up and render them into uncontrollable murder rampage machines. Bwha? The Trauma for Acts of Grace thing has always been the one that seemed the most hard to rationalize mentally. I understand it is there for balance, and I can think of some justification, but in the end it just seems very strange to me.
    avatar
    Rebecca O'Malley
    Retired

    Number of posts : 86
    Registration date : 2008-06-25

    Re: Rules Changes

    Post by Rebecca O'Malley on Tue 12 Jan 2010 - 14:22

    Yes, that's exactly what I meant when I brought up soldiers. Soldiers are often horribly traumatized by what goes on in the field of war, and many of them never recover.

    Also, you've hit on the one thing about the trauma/morality system that I hate the most, and I really think ought to be changed.

    Of course, an "Act of Grace" is completely different from caring about the kittens and puppies. In my mind an Act of Grace is something completely and utterly selfless - doing good for no reward, giving of yourself for the benefit of others. I can love kittens, but I love them because they make me feel good, so cute and fuzzy and cuddly. I think that anything can be twisted like that - I care about battered women not out of the goodness of my heart, but because someone needs to do something about the dirtbag abusers that hurt them, and it makes me feel good to castrate and murder them. I care about kids because they are easily molded into what I want them to be, and one day if they are brought up right, they will be able to make the world the way I want it. I care deeply about the environment, not because I want to make the world a better place, but because it makes life difficult (recycling is hard!), and heaven help the bastards that I find with glass in their garbage - it makes me feel so good to murder them the way they are murdering our planet.


    Last edited by Rebecca O'Malley on Tue 12 Jan 2010 - 14:42; edited 2 times in total
    avatar
    cenobyte
    Admin

    Number of posts : 860
    Location : She is overfond of books, and it hath addled her brain.
    Registration date : 2008-06-24

    Re: Rules Changes

    Post by cenobyte on Tue 12 Jan 2010 - 14:35

    The Trauma for Acts of Grace thing has always been the one that seemed
    the most hard to rationalize mentally. I understand it is there for
    balance, and I can think of some justification, but in the end it just seems very strange to me.

    I find that odd, too. It seems to me there has to be SOME way of causing Moral Aligned Trauma to Irredeemable characters. Maybe it lies in forcing them to realise it's not all about them? I dunno. But I'd like to suggest things other than what's there, which I think is a bit confusing.

    I also find Immoral Therapy confusing.
    avatar
    Friedrich
    Retired

    Number of posts : 127
    Location : in Gabe's body, playing with his stuff
    Registration date : 2009-10-25

    Re: Rules Changes

    Post by Friedrich on Tue 12 Jan 2010 - 14:36

    Bal wrote:Though the Irredeemable caring about the children and kittens does make me think of one of the weirdest elements of the Trauma system - they actually can't in Kingdom Come. Or, rather, caring for the kittens will cause them mental anguish that will eventually build up and render them into uncontrollable murder rampage machines. Bwha? The Trauma for Acts of Grace thing has always been the one that seemed the most hard to rationalize mentally. I understand it is there for balance, and I can think of some justification, but in the end it just seems very strange to me.

    If I am remembering correctly, not having a BRB in front of me, the trauma from Acts of Grace is Moral and as such the mental anguish will build up and render them less of a killing machine as they become more moral. Oh, and remember, caring for the kittens doesn't count if you are raising them as snacks. ::grin::
    avatar
    cenobyte
    Admin

    Number of posts : 860
    Location : She is overfond of books, and it hath addled her brain.
    Registration date : 2008-06-24

    Re: Rules Changes

    Post by cenobyte on Tue 12 Jan 2010 - 14:42

    Raising them as snacks

    THAT made my day.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Rules Changes

    Post by Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sun 18 Feb 2018 - 23:17