Hunter Playtest!

[ElvesofZion]

True, although even then, it only counts if the Hunter knows the person is a Mage, and not some other near-human with abilities that aren't Dread Power.

[Second Chances]

I'm pretty sure there is s going to be a sidebar that says something along the line of "monsters that have Supernatural Tolerance traits but not Dread Powers will count as having Dread Powers."

[Elfive]

Yeah, magic, gifts, disciplines and all that will count as "dread powers". It'd be really dumb if they didn't.

[Darinas]

Speaking of which... Sorry to rant more about the Code, but the more I look at it, the more I feel it doesn't work story-wise. I mean, take "Getting or bestowing powers from an obviously monstrous source". I guess in rule terms that means Dread Powers. Sooooooo, Conspiracies like the Cheiron Group (who literally transplant monsters parts in their agents' bodies), Les Mystères (who get powers by having spirits share their bodies), the Lucifuge (who have friggin' demon blood) or the Knight of Saint Adrian (who use magic tattos granted by God-Machine Angels) all very blatantly get their powers from monstrous source story-wise, but because these count as Endowment in term of game system, they don't qualify for causing an Integrity roll? How the hell does this make sense inside the story?

[nofather]

Speaking of which... Sorry to rant more about the Code, but the more I look at it, the more I feel it doesn't work story-wise. I mean, take "Getting or bestowing powers from an obviously monstrous source". I guess in rule terms that means Dread Powers. Sooooooo, Conspiracies like the Cheiron Group (who literally transplant monsters parts in their agents' bodies), Les Mystères (who get powers by having spirits share their bodies), the Lucifuge (who have friggin' demon blood) or the Knight of Saint Adrian (who use magic tattos granted by God-Machine Angels) all very blatantly get their powers from monstrous source story-wise, but because these count as Endowment in term of game system, they don't qualify for causing an Integrity roll? How the hell does this make sense inside the story?

'At the end of this scene, however it shakes out, have the Lucifuge mentor(s) suggest that now is the time to bestow new Endowments on some of the characters. They haven’t found the culprit yet, but the monster could outmatch them, and getting this far — and dealing with whatever breaking point trauma they end up with in this scene — warrants the upgrade. The point of this is to trigger the “Gain power from an obviously monstrous source” breaking point for most of the cell, encouraging the option to trade that breaking point out for a new Lucifuge-specific one, per the “Breaking Points and Tiers” rules above. Let each player decide individually whether or not they want to make that trade. This sets up the end of scene 3, which revisits this theme. Consult the individual character sheets to see which characters should learn which Endowments.'

You might just take the hit, too.

Because when you start making deals with demon from Hell, letting your boss graft monster parts onto you, or letting spirits possess you, it is likely going to affect you on a deep level.

[Darinas]

Oh. So I guess monstrous Endowment DO trigger this point. Now this is getting confusing...

[ElvesofZion]

Dread Powers were only mentioned in relation to defining a Monster for the Code. Not for breaking points directly.

For example:

'Causing a person to suffer a breaking point from exposure to the supernatural'

The triggering supernatural does not have to be a code-defined monster here, just supernatural. So making someone look at a mostly human but supernatural power like the Telekinesis merit would trigger this, as would supernatural endowments.

[The Kings Raven]

Because when you start making deals with demon from Hell, letting your boss graft monster parts onto you, or letting spirits possess you, it is likely going to affect you on a deep level.

Yeah. No issue with that.

But it does leave groups like Les Mysteries in a bind, because either they use the Code to protect their Integrity when learning powers, or they use it to protect their Integrity when they're favours work for a Spirit (e.g. a Voudon punishing a cliche evil industrialist who wants to build a car park over a sacred site), but they cannot do both.

The system just needs to be more flexible, and drop the nonsensical idea that there can be a universal code of morality.

[Darinas]

Personally I would suggest having it so that you can change ANY Tenet of the Code with no limit, but whenever you interact with a Hunter group using different Tenets, you get a social penalty equal to the number of Tenets you don't share with them. But I do realize that might get overly complicated.

[Second Chances]

Personally I would suggest having it so that you can change ANY Tenet of the Code with no limit, but whenever you interact with a Hunter group using different Tenets, you get a social penalty equal to the number of Tenets you don't share with them. But I do realize that might get overly complicated.

That doesn't actually sound too complicated to me. Maybe cap the changes at 5 so that the penalty caps at -5 (assuming -1 per change)?

Anyhow, in other news, here are the character sheets I've adapted for Doubting Souls. Almost all of the changes are cosmetic, so you should still be able to run the playtest in a way that is beneficial to Monica and her team. I've had three people express interest in the forum playtest so far, so there are two open spots if anyone is interested.

[nofather]

But it does leave groups like Les Mysteries in a bind, because either they use the Code to protect their Integrity when learning powers, or they use it to protect their Integrity when they're favours work for a Spirit (e.g. a Voudon punishing a cliche evil industrialist who wants to build a car park over a sacred site), but they cannot do both.

A Breaking Point is not an impassable wall. It's entirely possible to be a character who does not like letting spirits use them as sock puppets, but is willing to 'Gain power from an obviously monstrous source' because they believe it has to be done. Just like it's possible to be a character who doesn't feel entirely comfortable killing people but has done it and it's possible for a character to feel both those ways and still never lose Integrity over it. As is, you can even have a character who is perfectly fine with one of these things by trading one out.

The alternative you're suggesting, however, is a person who feels that having a spirit use them as a sock puppet and killing people on behalf of these alien dwellers of another world is as natural and emotionally, spiritually and psychologically irrelevant as anyone in this thread might feel putting an envelope in a mailbox. It sounds more like someone who would be hunted than a hunter.

[The Kings Raven]

A Breaking Point is not an impassable wall.

It's not an impassible wall, but what is and is not a Breaking Point says something fundamental about your charachter, which is why it's vital that players are able to create Codes that fit their concept.

The alternative you're suggesting, however, is a person who feels that having a spirit use them as a sock puppet and killing people on behalf of these alien dwellers of another world is as natural and emotionally, spiritually and psychologically irrelevant as anyone in this thread might feel putting an envelope in a mailbox. It sounds more like someone who would be hunted than a hunter.

More hunted than hunter? They're a typical member of a 1E Hunter organisation.

Just like a Hunter who sees nothing wrong with receiving powers from an angel of the Abrahamic god and working on his behalf is pretty standard member of the Malleus Maleficarum.

I wouldn't compare it to putting an envelope in a mailbox though. There's a middle ground where you consider it to be significant, but not a Breaking Point. I doubt a hunter who gets into a silver bullet gunfight with a werewolf considers it as emotionally signifcant as posting a letter, but it's not a breaking point for them.

Also I didn't say anything about killing. There's plenty of ways the Code could be a Breaking Point because a member of Les Mysterys sided with a spirit over a human, or a member of the Malleus Maleficarum sided with God over a human, not all of them involve killing or even violence.

[Leliel]

Personally I would suggest having it so that you can change ANY Tenet of the Code with no limit, but whenever you interact with a Hunter group using different Tenets, you get a social penalty equal to the number of Tenets you don't share with them. But I do realize that might get overly complicated.

Sounds good to me.

[ArcaneArts]

A Breaking Point is not an impassable wall. It's entirely possible to be a character who does not like letting spirits use them as sock puppets, but is willing to 'Gain power from an obviously monstrous source' because they believe it has to be done. Just like it's possible to be a character who doesn't feel entirely comfortable killing people but has done it and it's possible for a character to feel both those ways and still never lose Integrity over it. As is, you can even have a character who is perfectly fine with one of these things by trading one out.

The alternative you're suggesting, however, is a person who feels that having a spirit use them as a sock puppet and killing people on behalf of these alien dwellers of another world is as natural and emotionally, spiritually and psychologically irrelevant as anyone in this thread might feel putting an envelope in a mailbox. It sounds more like someone who would be hunted than a hunter.

This. The things you do as a Hunter should not be comfortable. They should not be okay. If you are completely numb to it, you're probably a Slasher. Hunters are damaged, and the healthy ones know it and constantly deal with it.

[ArcaneArts]

One other thing: To be a hunter entails committing to harm of monsters. You can be a bleeding heart as much as you want-be the shoulder for a vampire to cry on or dedicate yourself to helping out the poor kid who just doesn't want to lose control again, you might want to do as little harm as possible-but at the end of the day, to be a hunter means you are committed to harm against monsters in some form or fashion. If you don't want that, you don't want to be a hunter, you want to be a mortal investigator.

What makes a hunter is a lie that let's them be comfortable with their monstrosity-that they are anything other than killers, torturers, fighters, harmers.