Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mummy: the Curse 2e Kickstarter

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

  • Yeah, no where in Mummy will you find a reference to the Empire using the Amkhata. Again, they are abominations in the eyes of the Judges, and no one in Irem was gonna flirt with winning Frankenstein's game when the powers behind the nation were watching.


    Sean K.I.W./Kelly R.A. Steele, Freelance Writer(Feel free to call me Sean, Kelly, Arcane, or Arc)
    The world is not beautiful, therefore it is.-Keiichi Sigsawa, Kino's Journey
    Male/neutral pronouns accepted, female pronouns enjoyed.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by ArcaneArts View Post
      Yeah, no where in Mummy will you find a reference to the Empire using the Amkhata. Again, they are abominations in the eyes of the Judges, and no one in Irem was gonna flirt with winning Frankenstein's game when the powers behind the nation were watching.
      And yet the Rite of Return...?

      Yeah... "We can't do this thing because higher ups are watching us" sounds very unlike Chronicles of Darkness...

      Edit: Also, I know that "Interacting with a Lifeless without obvious enmity." is a check for a Descent roll. But that seems kind of weird when Arisen explicitly have an Utterance that creates Lifeless Thralls in the preview text, and we know from 1st Edition that they had several other powers involving creating and commanding and otherwise making use of Lifeless.

      I'm not forcing my players to make constant checks for Descent rolls strictly because they're using powers the books lets them use.
      Last edited by Paradim; 11-24-2019, 10:24 PM.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by reseru View Post
        I think it was confirmed Purified won't be in the core.
        My heart's canopic jar is broken. :'<


        nWoD Warhammer Fantasy RPG,
        WoD Wraith: The Oblivion
        and Infernum-style Demon: The Descent, Shadows of Abaddon --> http://madnessforums.com/forums/inde...opic,26.0.html

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Paradim View Post

          And yet the Rite of Return...?

          Yeah... "We can't do this thing because higher ups are watching us" sounds very unlike Chronicles of Darkness...

          Edit: Also, I know that "Interacting with a Lifeless without obvious enmity." is a check for a Descent roll. But that seems kind of weird when Arisen explicitly have an Utterance that creates Lifeless Thralls in the preview text, and we know from 1st Edition that they had several other powers involving creating and commanding and otherwise making use of Lifeless.

          I'm not forcing my players to make constant checks for Descent rolls strictly because they're using powers the books lets them use.
          Okay, fair.

          Still though, nowhere in the text does it say the Nameless Empire used Amkhata, which says something about the way that culture looked at it.

          As for the Thralls, I think we've got a case of obvious exceptions being obvious.
          Last edited by ArcaneArts; 11-24-2019, 11:03 PM.


          Sean K.I.W./Kelly R.A. Steele, Freelance Writer(Feel free to call me Sean, Kelly, Arcane, or Arc)
          The world is not beautiful, therefore it is.-Keiichi Sigsawa, Kino's Journey
          Male/neutral pronouns accepted, female pronouns enjoyed.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Paradim View Post
            And yet the Rite of Return...?
            There's a world of difference between "we snuck this big magic into the culmination of our pet project as scions of the powers that could ostensibly punish us" and "we had the humans make these things for war - you know, these things that we were charged to destroy as creations of the Devourer and, you know, the humans we were specifically tasked to teach the Law of the Judges to so that the world doesn't collapse because Ammut got impatient, and, you know, war, the art that we can already be one of two de facto mastering powers of by virtue of simply knowing things like tactics and metallurgy?"

            The Shan'iatu played fast and loose with a lot of their little white mutiny, but the Shan'iatu were neither Arisen nor human nor placed to rely on any heavenly mandate that they weren't already stretching tissue-thin to begin with.


            Resident Lore-Hound
            Currently Consuming: Hunter: the Vigil 1e

            Comment


            • I'm just not really seeing the big deal here.

              I mean... Having one of the Guilds be Death-Priest Necromancers seems kind of odd if you don't want to encourage making undead abominations as a solution to your problems. Plus, it would add to the horror and fear that the Nameless Empire was able to evoke.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by ArcaneArts View Post
                Okay, fair.

                Still though, nowhere in the text does it say the Nameless Empire used Amkhata, which says something about the way that culture looked at it.

                As for the Thralls, I think we've got a case of obvious exceptions being obvious.

                Like how common sense is rarely common, what you think is obvious, another person will completely miss. Stuff should be written with clarity in mind. While yes, if you try to make something idiot proof, the world just invents a better idiot.

                As it stands, this is a clear difference between Rules As Written and Rules As Intended, and I'm sure you've seen lots of problems in games from such differences whether in person, or argued about online. Wouldn't this be an opportune moment to clarify intent with what's written?

                (Just to be clear, I'm speaking strictly about how the rules as written state that interacting with Lifeless without enmity invoking Descent rolls, which would be a landmine for all interactions with Utterances that create Lifeless, which Arisen already have one of, and likely have more especially with an entire Guild about Necromancer Death-Priests. I'm not talking about Arisen using or creating Amkhata here.)

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Paradim View Post
                  I'm just not really seeing the big deal here.

                  I mean... Having one of the Guilds be Death-Priest Necromancers seems kind of odd if you don't want to encourage making undead abominations as a solution to your problems. Plus, it would add to the horror and fear that the Nameless Empire was able to evoke.
                  In their write-up it seems like they are more about properly treating the dead, burial duties and ceremonies of passing on. While they do create dead, it's pretty clearly not the mandate of the entire guild, with their undead seeming more of a mistake (like with the Guild of Healers).

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Paradim View Post
                    I'm just not really seeing the big deal here.

                    I mean... Having one of the Guilds be Death-Priest Necromancers seems kind of odd if you don't want to encourage making undead abominations as a solution to your problems. Plus, it would add to the horror and fear that the Nameless Empire was able to evoke.

                    Simple: Amkhata are a lot like other Lifeless, in that they are thralls of Ammut. Each one is essentially an independently sentient tooth of hers, much as how the Shuankshen are her priests.

                    Judges may not care about more necromancy, but magic to conjure forth an avatar of their archenemy...yeah, they're going to be a bit skeptical.


                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by nofather View Post
                      In their write-up it seems like they are more about properly treating the dead, burial duties and ceremonies of passing on. While they do create dead, it's pretty clearly not the mandate of the entire guild, with their undead seeming more of a mistake (like with the Guild of Healers).
                      To say nothing of how the ability of the Arisen to learn Utterances has always been a shaky metaphysical thing as far as their intended state goes — I haven't done a deep read of the entire line yet, but as far back as the corebook "mummies were never meant to be able to do this" was an in-universe theory, and by Dreams of Avarice that appeared to be borne out by the fact that the Litany of the Fivefold Soul mentions, almost offhand, the fact that in order to become Deathless every one of the Arisen had to be taught a specific Utterance that they forgot as the price of passage into Duat.


                      On the matter of enmity for the Lifeless, considering that the 1e equivalent just says "Shuankhsen" and the same preview where the line appears uses it interchangeably in the paragraph on Bane Relics, I think it's safe to say that the Judges aren't going to strip the Sekhem from your bones for calling up feral zombies to eat the impious if you're not really mean to them, too.


                      Resident Lore-Hound
                      Currently Consuming: Hunter: the Vigil 1e

                      Comment


                      • Not to mention the fact that few mummies would raise a corpse thrall to take them out to dinner and a movie. I'm pretty sure enslaving them for war or labor counts as enmity by the Judges' standards, and if you bring someone back to true life, they don't count as lifeless.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Satchel View Post
                          To say nothing of how the ability of the Arisen to learn Utterances has always been a shaky metaphysical thing as far as their intended state goes — I haven't done a deep read of the entire line yet, but as far back as the corebook &quot;mummies were never meant to be able to do this&quot; was an in-universe theory, and by Dreams of Avarice that appeared to be borne out by the fact that the Litany of the Fivefold Soul mentions, almost offhand, the fact that in order to become Deathless every one of the Arisen had to be taught a specific Utterance that they forgot as the price of passage into Duat.


                          On the matter of enmity for the Lifeless, considering that the 1e equivalent just says &quot;Shuankhsen&quot; and the same preview where the line appears uses it interchangeably in the paragraph on Bane Relics, I think it's safe to say that the Judges aren't going to strip the Sekhem from your bones for calling up feral zombies to eat the impious if you're not really mean to them, too.
                          Sothis Ascends really sure seemed like it implied they were a gift from Sutekh in the earliest Turn.


                          Remi. she/her. game designer.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by atamajakki View Post
                            Sothis Ascends really sure seemed like it implied they were a gift from Sutekh in the earliest Turn.
                            I am referring to the Utterance of Anpu's true name, the use and forgetting of which are essential to avoiding the third and fourth strayings from Deathlessness, well before the First Sothic Turn.

                            The Arisen have the capacity to learn Utterances because it was required for them to become Deathless at all, and even with the involvement of the sha there's still little sign that exercising that retained capacity was in the Shan'iatu's plans to the degree that the role of the Su Menent in Irem could be described as "necromancers who make undead abominations."
                            Last edited by Satchel; 11-25-2019, 03:04 AM.


                            Resident Lore-Hound
                            Currently Consuming: Hunter: the Vigil 1e

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by nothri View Post

                              .....I'm not finding any reference to Irem weaponizing these things or the Judges ever using them as servants, actually. Also, since I assume the rules for Amkhata are largely the same, their "master" must keep them fed once a week to keep them obedient and not go berserk and turn on them. They feed on Sekhem, which means you will be performing constantly raids searching for vessels or ordering assaults on fellow arisen to keep the beast on your side. So I don't really see their peers looking at them as misguided or of poor form so much as heretics and traitors that are playing russian roulette with the lives of their own cults as well as endangering all Arisen in the Nome by playing with blasphemous and forbidden forces they barely comprehend.
                              ... Except there are references that Amkhata were used as weapons during the Days of Irem in the first edition Corebook, and the very preview even says that there are fewer servants of the Judges that are dreaded more than an Amkhat. Now that might change, but go back and read again before saying you can’t find any reference please.

                              Now would the majority of Arisen entertain the idea? Absolutely not, especially the ones who are extremely pious and/or dogmatic. But the ones who are desperate enough will, the disenfranchised arisen will. It is a blasphemy against their gods... but at the end of the day, the Use of Sekhem for any purpose that doesn’t further the goal of ones judge is a blasphemy - yet mummies can and will do so if they think it is the right course of action.
                              Last edited by Korogra; 11-25-2019, 09:24 AM.

                              Comment


                              • Finally got around to reading on the updates to the Sadikh (don't look at me like that), and the only real comment that comes to mind is

                                here in the garden
                                let's play a game



                                Sean K.I.W./Kelly R.A. Steele, Freelance Writer(Feel free to call me Sean, Kelly, Arcane, or Arc)
                                The world is not beautiful, therefore it is.-Keiichi Sigsawa, Kino's Journey
                                Male/neutral pronouns accepted, female pronouns enjoyed.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X