Saturday, October 13, 2012

Get Thee to the Gym

Question: In your previous blog post “The Apotheosis Rumba” you mentioned that Scions must have their physical Epic Attributes at at least five dots and the rest of their stats at at least three dots (save for a so-called "dump stat"). Why is such primacy given to physical attributes? Wouldn’t this leave social or mental characters with a harder road to godhood?

A good question, and one that our mental and social characters' players also asked us when it came time to start planning ahead for godhood. The reasoning here is twofold: one a metaphysical, fluff reason, and the other a solid mechanical one.

Metaphysically, this partially comes from an idea that we actually kept from Scion: God (I know, once in a while we do actually use the original books' material!). The general idea there is that the conversion from demigod to god is a physically rigorous one; it is a very literal destruction of your mortal body and reformation into a divine being composed of ichor. This is a big deal and a difficult thing to survive, and the need for five levels of physical Attributes helps illustrate that this is something that not every demigod or mortal is capable of even surviving, let along doing to move on to divine greatness. It's not an idea you have to hammer hard, and other games may prefer to look at apotheosis differently; but we liked the idea that it's a process that completely unmakes and remakes a Scion, moving them from the realm of mortal demigods and heroes, who are awesome but never allowed to really be on the same plane as the gods, to the realm of the great deities and powers of the universe, who are not made of the same stuff as mortals.

The mechanical reason, which I suspect is the more important one for most people, is that we don't want social and mental PCs to get murdered as soon as they hit God, and if they don't have somewhere around at least five in their physicals, it's almost inevitable that they will. God-level dangers and antagonists are hardcore; things are going to happen to them that they have no prayer of surviving with lower stats, and we don't want to set them up to fail as soon as they've finally reached their goal of divinity. Hostile Terrae Incognita, Titanrealms and area of effect powers from enemies will kill those with low Stamina instantly, with no recourse; enemies are calibrated to be godly themselves, and no social or mental character is ever going to be lucky enough not to need to have at least a vaguely decent DV once in a while; things in the realms of the gods and Titans are almost without exception immovable and unaffectable by those whose strength never progressed past a couple of dots. We want all the PCs, mental, social and physical alike, to have an equal chance of surviving and shaping the world, and that means that they need to have the physical stats just to live long enough to do so.

It's actually the exact same reasoning behind everyone needing three dots in the socials and mentals; it's only that being too stupid to grasp godly politics or being unable to lie well enough to avoid pissing people off, while definitely dangerous and inconvenient, are not necessarily instant death sentences all the time, and having only seven to fourteen health boxes or a DV that a mortal could hit definitely is. Three in the socials and mentals is the bare minimum we think a god needs to not only be decent enough at enough things to not be a laughingstock, but also to be able to function in divine society well enough to survive; physicals, which carry a much more immediate and concretely harsh penalty for those who fails, need to be at five, not because we want to encourage all characters to be physical or because we want to give physical characters an advantage, but because five dots is what we've observed as the minimum for having a decent chance to not die.

Social and mental characters do, therefore, have a slightly harder time of it if they need to buy a stat up to 5 dots, compared to a physical character who only needs to buy it up to 3, but it's an unfortunate necessity of survival, not an underhanded ploy to disenfranchise them. They can, of course, choose one of the physicals as their dump stat in order to ignore buying it, which helps, but not all of our social and mental gods have actually even chosen to do that; Vala did, letting Strength sit at rock bottom, but Sowiljr chose to buy physicals and let his Manipulation be the stat that took the hit, while Yoloxochitl decided she'd let her Wits take the fall and shore up her physicals instead. (Some of this relates to Fatebonds again; for some characters, buying extra dots of physicals is actually cheaper and easier than trying to fight against Fate to pick up dots of things it doesn't want them to have.)

We don't ever want characters to feel like they're being forced to be generalists instead of specializing in the things they like to do; that would run counter to the spirit of the game and be a dick move to boot. But they need to have at least basic tools to be able to function around divine allies and antagonists, and it just happens that their physical tools need to be a little higher to prevent their grisly demise. This is a consequence of the scaling Epic successes system, and while we absolutely love the off-the-charts awesomeness of the Epics scale and would never want to nerf it down to an even, ungodly progression, it does cause those with low physicals to be severely endangered when faced with antagonists their own level.

12 comments:

  1. I think this probably qualifies as one of those things most people are going to leave behind, instead of take and use in their own game.

    The idea of certain minimum stats to attain apotheosis is thematically very cool, but it makes certain assumptions about the game world that may or may not necessarily be true for other storytellers.

    ReplyDelete
  2. That's fine. But then I suggest you leave behind the god upgrade template for the same reason.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The free dot of strength, dexterity, stamina, and appearance yeah. I've already had some other players get cranky they were getting free dots that don't suit their character concept, so we dropped it.

      The 10 points, 5 birthrights, and 15 bonus points I'll keep. I don't see much reason not to have that, unless you just feel like tinkering with the base upgrade templates in general.

      Delete
    2. I've often wondered if, to go along with the Fatebond system that sometimes buys things players weren't planning on, we should allow PCs to buy skills they really don't want to have off their sheets by spending XP. I don't think very many would actually do so, though, so I've never bothered more than daydreaming about it.

      Delete
    3. I think my players would do so, but that is because they are weird. I personally really liked your fatebond system and wanted to use it, but there was an outright revolt at the idea their character stuff could get taken away or unwanted things could be added.

      I tried to explain to them that this kind of thing happens all the time within a game. You might loose an arm or gain a birthright, but they are old school players and XP is absolutely sacred to them. :(

      Delete
    4. Heh, I'm the same way - I'd totally pay XP once in a while to buy off something I didn't like having, but it's hard to imagine too many players passing up on getting something they did want just to remove something else.

      Alas, I've heard that song before. :( A lot of old-school players are very set on what XP means to them.

      Delete
    5. I mean, I can see it both ways. I would personally love to use a system that was fluid and malleable, and changed based upon your accomplishments (either in Scion or some other system).

      On the other hand, really old-school players have already experienced losing progress in a very negative way. Losing EXP on death in MMOs, losing levels to undead in D&D, and countless other situations.

      It's such a major negative to lose progress that the majority of games you encounter these days ensure that you only lose the minimum necessary. Most MMOs for example don't have any death penalty anymore, and I can't count the number of friends who save their games every 20 steps. The idea just isn't marketable.

      But it can definitely work in small groups of friends who have a lot of trust for each other. I just need to make my players less loss averse because I really am in love with most of your fatebond system.

      Delete
    6. Yeah, I think the key is that with Fatebonds it's not actually a loss scenario in the same way - unlike a death in FFXI, where you just go down a level and cry, things you lose to Fatebonds are just being turned into new things (and, since they buy them more cheaply, you're actually technically gaining). The only way it's a straight loss is if you lose stats to gain ones you actively didn't want or can't use, and part of the beauty of Fatebonds is that you can try to change that by getting new/better Fatebonds that fix it.

      But yes, games in which you just lose progress have never made sense to me; I get that they give you a concrete penalty or disadvantage for death or failure, thus making those things really matter more, but I've always felt you could do that better with penalties that offer new opportunities or changes instead of just straight docking players for their hard work not turning out as intended. In a computer game setting, there's not a lot you can do with that, but luckily in an RPG, the GM can always make sure that the consequences are important but not punishing without purpose.

      Hey, as long as you guys have fun, that's the most important thing. We've found that Fatebonds are easiest for players to cope with if they come in the normal progression - if they know ahead of time what'll happen and then play from Hero, where it's not an issue, up through Demigod where it starts to become important until it's a major theme at God, growing with it usually helps people internalize and work with it instead of feeling like it's been dumped on their heads.

      Delete
    7. I think the one thing I would personally change about your Fatebond system is just eliminating 'Range of Bond'. Keeping track of range seems like an amazing headache, and I wouldn't want Fatebonds to be something you can escape from just by walking away. I prefer Fatebonds to just be an 'always until you do something about it' thing with unlimited range.

      Delete
    8. I agree, actually - range is a bitch to keep up with and the annoyance of having different sets of Fatebonds depending on where you are makes bookkeeping a pain for both Storyteller and players. The intent was to show the difference between small, local cults and global beliefs, but at the moment that's a place that it desperately needs slimming down.

      We've been talking about Fatebond system revamping a lot lately, so well-timed, that's a good point.

      Delete
    9. Range does have some interesting quirks, such as a god who visits Scandinavia behaving in X manner but when he goes to Ireland he behaves in Y manner. In some ways this can even be used as an explanation for syncretization. Same god, different regional beliefs.

      But that can create a lot of trouble when one god might be in multiple pantheons (from a mortal perspective), instead of two unique and different gods. Then you have the sticky job of deciding who is who instead of everyone being an individual.

      Delete
  3. Exactly. All the templates in general don't make sense in all campaign worlds. They're completely arbitrary.

    ReplyDelete