Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How often should (second edition) infernals gain limit from violating their urge?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How often should (second edition) infernals gain limit from violating their urge?

    If we use the usual "once per scene" rule it becomes problematic, because it takes away all free will. On the other side if we make it much longer then it becomes meaningless
    Is there any official rule about this?

    Also, i assume that the infernal is not obligated to fulfill the Urge in the Yozis's usual way right? That is, if i have a Malfean Urge to "Kill Lytek" i can do the deed in ways more reminiscent of the ebon dragon without violating the Urge, right?

  • #2
    “Violating your Urge” isn’t the same as “not doing it this instant.” If your Urge is just “kill Lytek,” then something like tipping him off would be a violation of your Urge, but saving a basket of puppies from a house fire would not be.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by mark View Post
      If we use the usual "once per scene" rule it becomes problematic, because it takes away all free will. On the other side if we make it much longer then it becomes meaningless
      Is there any official rule about this?
      Abyssals have the same when they commit sins of life, having to role their essence to gain resonance. Also acts of villainy can reduce their limit.

      As far as limit breaking, it is only for a scene. And the urge itself is a secondary motivation, where if you act on it you get willpower back and other bonuses. It is only when you act against the urge that you roll for limit.

      It's something that the player and ST should define out in character creation so it does not feel like free will is being robbed.

      Also, i assume that the infernal is not obligated to fulfill the Urge in the Yozis's usual way right? That is, if i have a Malfean Urge to "Kill Lytek" i can do the deed in ways more reminiscent of the ebon dragon without violating the Urge, right?
      If you are doing ways to tear down Lytek, to weaken him for the kill, then it should not matter how you go about it. Again, per the rules you only gain limit if you act against or contrary to the urge. So if you help Lytek, you gain limit for going against the urge. If you decide to take over a city in the meantime, then limit is not rolled since you are not acting contrary to the urge.

      That's how I read it of course.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by TheCountAlucard View Post
        “Violating your Urge” isn’t the same as “not doing it this instant.” If your Urge is just “kill Lytek,” then something like tipping him off would be a violation of your Urge, but saving a basket of puppies from a house fire would not be.
        But what if i just sit around in my hellish town house, doing nothing but sex with neomahs? After how much time is this considered as acting contrary to an urge

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by mark View Post
          But what if i just sit around in my hellish town house, doing nothing but sex with neomahs?
          If an Abyssal does nothing but grind out knuckle-children over the Mouth of Oblivion, without ever having a Deathlord show up and tell him to cut that out, does he gain Resonance?

          ​Why should your situation be different from his?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by TheCountAlucard View Post
            If an Abyssal does nothing but grind out knuckle-children over the Mouth of Oblivion, without ever having a Deathlord show up and tell him to cut that out, does he gain Resonance?

            ​Why should your situation be different from his?
            Because the abyssal gains resonance by committing sins of life and sins of death, not by ignoring an artificial motivation.

            In fact, technically speaking, said abyssal is furthering the cause of oblivion, if only in the most inefficient way possible. But having sex with Neomahs does not bring you even an inch closer to killing Lytek. Or corrupting Lytek, or subverting him, or ruining his work, etc depending on your type of Urge

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by mark View Post
              If we use the usual "once per scene" rule it becomes problematic, because it takes away all free will.
              No it doesn't; harmful consequences does not mean that you're incapable of making a choice.

              (Free will does not exist and people almost never really make choices for entirely different reasons)


              Originally posted by mark View Post
              But what if i just sit around in my hellish town house, doing nothing but sex with neomahs? After how much time is this considered as acting contrary to an urge
              I would presume that a character acting in a manner suggesting that they're never going to try and fulfill the Urge qualifies for gaining limit.

              I also think your chosen example is not really a thing that would happen, least of all in an actually played game where tracking limit and Torment actually matters.

              That being said, the Urges of Green Sun Princess should maybe not often be something so narrow as killing a specific person, and they're stated to be something that's supposed to generally complement the motives and nature of the character.


              I have approximate knowledge of many things.
              Watch me play Dark Souls III (completed)
              https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLDtbr08HW8RW4jOHN881YA3yRZBV4lpYw Watch me play Breath of the Wild (updated 12/03)

              Comment


              • #8
                If you really want to give out limit for Infernals ignoring their urge you can have people remind them of it, and when they refuse to act then give out some limit, or provide obvious means of advancing their urge and when they ignore it give them some limit.

                Really the question of how often you want give any exalt limit depends on the kind of story that you're telling. If you want to have one of your themes be that Infernals are doomed to be monsters and a player is avoiding their urge to be less monstrous you can give out limit and limit break to force the Infernal to be more monsterous.

                Heck, you can do lots of story manipulation with limit breaks if you wanted. Emphasis the limit break can be cathartic or even addictive by forcing a situation when a character is low on Willpower and desperately needs more at the same time the character needs just one more limit to limit break then offer the opportunity for that last point of limit. Now, you have a character that just got a ton of value out of limit break and a player that may actively seem out limit break.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Isator Levi View Post

                  No it doesn't; harmful consequences does not mean that you're incapable of making a choice.

                  (Free will does not exist and people almost never really make choices for entirely different reasons)




                  I would presume that a character acting in a manner suggesting that they're never going to try and fulfill the Urge qualifies for gaining limit.

                  I also think your chosen example is not really a thing that would happen, least of all in an actually played game where tracking limit and Torment actually matters.

                  That being said, the Urges of Green Sun Princess should maybe not often be something so narrow as killing a specific person, and they're stated to be something that's supposed to generally complement the motives and nature of the character.
                  hmm, in that case maybe base the time intervals on the exact urge and situation? So if Lytek is standing before me i have to ignore my urge in order not to kill him right away. But if he also has an army of celestial lions with him then it doesn't count, similar to unacceptable orders.
                  And if i'm only planning his murder(with the actual execution taking a long time) then maybe i can spend some time pursuing leisure. After all the Yozis do the same despite their urges, the ebon dragon steals children's toys, Malfeas dances, SWLIHN plays gateway, only question here is whether this fact gives THEM limit.

                  By the way does anyone else dislike the arcane link element of Torment? I am thinking of removing this element, and in return, also removing the capability of infernals to lose limit by indulging in ANY act of villainy. I feel it's better if they are only capable of doing it by committing their urge's patron Act of Villainy.

                  Any thoughts?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    From an IC perspective, the Urge is supposed to be something which serves the purpose of the Yozi which suits the Green Sun Prince in question.

                    OOC the player is picking their Urge.

                    Inaction shouldn't grant Limit IMO (unless Lytek is standing right in front of you and you're deliberately passing up the perfect chance to kill him)... but inaction shouldn't be a problem in play.


                    Hi, I'm JohnDoe244. My posts represent my opinions, not facts.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      The situation with MoEP: Abyssal Resonance isn't something you should seek to replicate with Infernals.

                      #1 Most people who used Resonance as-written hated it, there's a reason it got alternative rules.
                      #2 If you're in the minority on point #1 it's worth remembering that Acts of Villainy to reduce Limit are harder to perform than venting Resonance and paying some short-term cost like health levels. Do you really want Infernal PCs constantly marrying people?


                      Onyx Path Forum Moderator
                      Please spare a thought for updating the Exalted wiki.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Lioness View Post
                        The situation with MoEP: Abyssal Resonance isn't something you should seek to replicate with Infernals.

                        #1 Most people who used Resonance as-written hated it, there's a reason it got alternative rules.
                        #2 If you're in the minority on point #1 it's worth remembering that Acts of Villainy to reduce Limit are harder to perform than venting Resonance and paying some short-term cost like health levels. Do you really want Infernal PCs constantly marrying people?
                        By the way, where do i find those updated rules? Never bothered much with abyssals

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          The alternate rules are in the appendix of Shards of the Exalted Dream.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            The way I see it part of the point of the coadjutor was to function as a sort of mediator on when the build up happens for not fulfilling your Urge. That said so long as one would be deemed to be working in good faith towards their Urge nothing happens. Example, If you got the Urge of obliterating Paragon and you exalted in White Wall you aren't gaining limit because Paragon still exists while you're in transit from White Wall to Paragon. If you were in Gem and proceeded to go to White Wall despite the Urge then unless you have some big plan for destroying Paragon that involves going to the other side of the world you'll probably get limit from time to time.

                            Probably once or a chapter or story that the character knowingly defies their Urge and takes no actions towards fulfilling it, with additions happening for incidents where they're given a clear opportunity to uphold/advance the Urge and they don't take it. So if your task was to steal information from the library of Nara-o and you don't know who Nara-o is you're probably safe so long as you're still making good efforts at finding out who he is and things that would advance the goal.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by mark View Post
                              removing the capability of infernals to lose limit by indulging in ANY act of villainy. I feel it's better if they are only capable of doing it by committing their urge's patron Act of Villainy.

                              Any thoughts?
                              If they're Infernal PCs, this is a bad plan. It's a feature that the entire coven can indulge in the same Act of Villainy (even if they don't need to) because there's already enough factors pulling them in wildly different directions, not to mention the repetition required is a recipe for Acts of Villainy to wear out their welcome.



                              Onyx Path Forum Moderator
                              Please spare a thought for updating the Exalted wiki.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X