Re: Is Spell Trading the hallmark of a vampire squid? (was: Vampirism)

From: Richard Hayes <richard_hayes29_at_N26V2yx1s34ULxJUkXHxOgu_tH5h1miGe7p0mLZjXWfnLgNJK7zOWp4817tx>
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:39:24 +0000 (GMT)


For me the problem Jorganos rightly  identifies should not be about the taking of the magic -- that is what these cults do, and it is why right-thinking people despise them. Rather it is about how the magic can be regained and cast again, (Spell Trading has only ever been about one-shot traded magic the problem does not arise there).  
I don't know the HW mechanic, but in RQ the theist cannot reuse the divine power they have expended until they have spent quite a long time time in prayer, meditation and worship at a place sacred to their god.  
How does a vampire or a Thanatari head or even a Bagogi regain the stolen feats they have used? Here are four possibilities which came to my mind. Am sure there are other, probably better, options out there.
  1. They can't. This might work for vampires, who do their own advanced magic with sorcery nowadays anyway. However it rewrites the rules on Thanatari heads quite radically as it blurs the distinction between Major andMinor Heads (at least in RQ terms -- in HW you might have only one feat, but the caster would get a Minor Head for a modest success and a Major Head for a proper success); or
  2. They can, but they must put in the prayer worship and contemplation towards the god which gave them the power to steal the magic instead. FWIW this is my preferred option. It means that the dark god in question cannot duplicate the stolen magic ab initio, but their power over stolen magic includes the possibility of recreating the stolen magic, as long as the caster has something of the original source to hand (having consumed their blood, mind or soul, or keeping their head or hand as a talisman).
  3. They can, but they have to fake allegiance to the original god: theoretically possible I suppose, but very difficult to believe in practice (and also very difficult for the Chaotic to get right. A resourceful illuminate just might manage it, but they would probably need to go into deep cover for a while first). Might be marginally easier for Thanatari heads -- the head could be left at the shrine or temple to do the prayer and worship, and its owner would 'just' have to smuggle it in, leave it there and collect it in a few days' time. Also would it help much if the 'magic thief' used some of the stolen magic to sanctify a place in which they could perform this ritual of rest and spiritual renewal (if they knew how). Presumably the magician's wrong runes and chequered recent past would still put the god on notice that something very rum was going on 
  4. They can because this is a rule which makes for powerful, scary NPCs in the interests of MGF. No issue of game balance or consistency arises because ultimately it is for GMs to find the right level for their own campaign.  The detail of what Rune level NPCs get up to in the vaults of their Chaos temples should not be allowed to get in the way of MGF (and is too sticky and icky to print anyway). Don't like that kind of arbitrary rule myself, but it would work as long as players accept the "because it does" element of the rule. I suppose making people fake it could make for some interesting stories if you had player characters who belonged to this kind of cult -- though I don't think the advice against this kind of thing first published in Cults of Terror has ever been varied. (Though over the years I have permitted the odd exception to the rule myself, with interesting results. I also remember an intriguing recent request to this group about Bagogi heroquests).   Richard Hayes  

From: jorganos <joe_at_SS41Pihz70QVLVyWM9gRBXwFDhuqIiRafiNbRP9RARXR9zvvOBqw02D6k9F_OQVg3GP7wKrAAbA.yahoo.invalid> To: WorldofGlorantha_at_yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, 15 December 2011, 21:40
Subject: Re: Is Spell Trading the hallmark of a vampire squid? (was: Vampirism)

Richard Hayes:
> Why all the fuss about Issaries' Spell Trading spell/feat, or about why traded spells should be one-use only.

Why the fuss? Because we try to stake out how much control the worshipper has over divine magic, and how much remains in the direct control of the deity.

> This rite is a world away from anything practised by the Thanatari or vampires or the Bagogi. One is consensual, the Chaotic transactions are more like a form of spiritual rape and/or kidnapping.

Still, either is a transfer of a divine power away from the direct connection to this deity, and we are trying to find out what will work and what won't.

None of us would suggest that transferring a spell to a vampire would be a voluntary act...


Yahoo! Groups Links

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]            

Powered by hypermail