Lets Talk Disads: Enraged/Berserk

[Manic Typist]

Re: Lets Talk Disads: Enraged/Berserk

 

It's been too long since I read his books, but I think that's essentially the same priority system, yes. I'd like to have "2nd tier and 3rd tier combined" be functionally equivalent to 1st tier, though; the lower priorities can team up to take on, and even overwhelm, a higher-ranking priority.

 

 

 

I'm good with this, provided that (as I said above) the Absolute loyalty can't be used to cheat. Otherwise, one of those could (and probably would) just be taken for a fraction of the points received for a large number of slightly less powerful compulsions, and then used to override them.

 

 

Makes sense to me, but it wouldn't be "3-Law Safe," hehe.

 

Now, I don't understand the second part of what you are saying. Can you explain?

[Robyn]

Re: Lets Talk Disads: Enraged/Berserk

 

Now' date=' I don't understand the second part of what you are saying. Can you explain?[/quote']

 

I think I've explained it in much more detail on an older thread, possibly the same one Vurbal mentioned a few posts ago. I'll see if I can find a link for you.

[Robyn]

Re: Lets Talk Disads: Enraged/Berserk

 

[edit: Nearly deleted both of these thinking "wait a minute, neither of them actually pertain to the question", then realized I just need to add a little bit of explanation: the quoted excerpt can have "another Disadvantage" substituted for the roleplaying, and the link has an example of some paladin character whose Disadvantages can do interesting things when coexisting with his powers, or indeed, with other Psych Limits.]

 

One link, and a quote:

 

Baseline situation: The villain in Exhibit A has a Strong terror of women, after his mother mistreated him and bullied him around for most of his life; he can't approach them or stand up to them. He succeeds in avoiding them for a while, but then a new employee tracks him down at his mundane job, and corners him in a hallway to berate him over some imagined slight or another. He also has a Moderate "can't harm women", because his mother trained him to not raise a hand to her.

 

Normal: Player consults their simulation of what the character would be thinking, doesn't have a problem with any of the Disadvantages, and converts them straight to roleplaying (taking them into account).

My way: The same.

 

Normal: Player consults their PC's mind, decides that the character wants to start fighting his terror now, since his therapist has recommended that he try confrontation in real life, and he hasn't been able to force one volitionally. The player makes an EGO roll to counteract the effects of his terror, and, if he succeeds, will only pass on the "can't harm women" Disad to the roleplaying.

My way: The same.

 

Normal: Player consults their PC's mind, realizes that the villain gets angry when cornered like a rat, and makes an EGO roll to overcome the Moderate "can't harm women". Then, even if he makes it, the Strong terror will still pass on (though it may take the form of violence, now that his aversion to harm is gone), but the Moderate "can't harm women" will only pass on as something with no real force to it that the character has already defeated (or will shortly).

My way: As above, except that the player's interpretation of the character's anger guides the application of the Strong terror, turning it into Anger (an EGO roll could be required for this, or not, I'm not really sure at this stage in developing it), and then (once the terror has become anger) uses an EGO roll to augment the strength of the terror, cancelling out the Moderate "can't harm women" and, if the PC rolled well enough, not even weakening the Terror/Anger from Strong to Moderate. The terror passes on, the "can't hurt women" less so, as above.

 

Normal: The player consults their PC's mind, decides that in their anger they thought of hurting her, and this triggered a flashback to one of the times his mother punished him, then sat applying salve to his wounds and lecturing him on how she really did love him, and was only being like this for his own good, because if he didn't learn to behave he would become a good-for-nothing layabout. The player makes an EGO roll to see if the villain's love for his mother, and his mother's love for him, the feelings fresh and new since he's just been reminded of the time, can temporarily wash away his Strong terror of women, and let him exit calmly from the situation. If he succeeds, only the Moderate "can't harm women" will pass on to roleplaying as normal, and the Strong terror will only translate as something he was able to overcome.

My way: As above, except that the player tells me all this as an origin story (getting bonuses if he told the story especially well, bringing tears to the eyes of the other players sitting around the table), and then gets to pit his Moderate "can't harm women" against the Strong terror, augmenting this effort with his EGO. If he rolls well, the two will exactly cancel each other out, passing on to roleplaying that his Disadvantages are perfectly balanced, and leaving the decision entirely up to him (with, effectively, no interference from Disads). The rolls can still be translated into story terms, quite easily; this will tell the player something about what happened in the character's mind, but the Disads will not dictate or otherwise influence what the character will do. That much is decided entirely at the character's discretion.

 

That's how I see "less mechanics" existing here. When it comes right down to it, any dice or numbers aside from sheer roleplaying exist as an "extra" to roleplaying, and should stay on their side. While roleplaying may determine the existence, and subsequent force and direction of these Disadvantages, doing calculations on the system side to reduce what is passed on to the real place where things happen, the character's mind (through roleplaying), can only reduce the effect of mechanics relative to roleplaying.

 

The standard HERO system allows roleplaying to influence the force and direction of Disads already; that's what an EGO roll is, a dice-based system mechanic that is a representation of one's roleplaying within that system.

[Guyon]

Re: Lets Talk Disads: Enraged/Berserk

 

@Manic Typist - But remember Berserk is a disadvantage and you should not make a graceful way around it. You bought it so you are Enraged. till you recover. That is what disadvantages are all about.

 

 

http://www.protectors.frih.net/index.html

[Guyon]

Re: Lets Talk Disads: Enraged/Berserk

 

WOW I really like that idea Labrat. having to break the Psych Limit disadvantage is an awesome idea. Reps to you!

It really would help role playing too, coming up with reason or actions why you are doing the things you are.

 

Too bad you are on the other side of PA it would be fun to have a joint game some night.

 

http://www.protectors.frih.net/index.html

[jkwleisemann]

Re: Lets Talk Disads: Enraged/Berserk

 

Are you telling that me when Enraged' date=' a character cannot control his character so that he can best decide how to accomplish the irrational act that the Disad calls for? Vice versa, that the character with the Psych Lim CANNOT behave irrationally, but instead is perfectly capable of behaving in a normal fashion?[/quote']

 

I don't think that's what they're trying to say. I've actually used Enraged in the suggested manner before, as a note.

 

Basically, here's the difference, looking at two 'identical' builds:

 

Will not leave a comrade behind (C?, Total): Will argue with people who try to make him leave a comrade behind, and will do whatever is necessary to actually avoid doing so. However, in an extreme situation, you can get out of it with an Ego roll at -3 or so, or you can be dragged off by your comrades and you'll probably fight, but not actually fight them, as in try to cause them serious hurt to go back.

 

Enraged - Cannot leave a comrade behind (C, 14-, 8-): Will argue with people who try to make him leave a comrade behind. Further, if necessary, he will inflict serious harm if somebody tries to force him to and it triggers. He will break arms, hurl people off of himself, and charge right back into a suicide fight to try and save a downed comrade, and cannot make himself, or allow himself to be forced to, leave the field until nobody else is being left behind. Add in Berserk, and he'll resort to lethal force to get back in there and save them.

 

 

Similarly:

 

Greedy (C, S): When presented with a chance for self enrichment, needs an Ego roll to avoid taking it. However, he doesn't have to take it immediately - he can actually plan things out and prepare himself to do it right.

 

Obsessively Greedy (C, 11-, 8-): When presented with a chance for self-enrichment, if it triggers, he must take the opportunity, and will do so immediately. In many ways, he is a kleptomaniac, but on a broader scale. He can't plan out a proper B&E if he's enchanted by a particular piece of jewelry, he will go for it immediately. Further, he can't stop himself until he Recovers.

[Guyon]

Re: Lets Talk Disads: Enraged/Berserk

 

^ I am fine with the above, except in the situation....... I wouldn't allow skill levels to be used at all.

 

If a highly disciplined, honed, skilled, and trained warrior is capable of loosing all of that mental discipline and tactics in the face of rage, and just go charging forward... then that warrior has also lost the skill levels that come with that training and self-control.

 

But, that's just a me thing.

 

I think you are missing the point Manic Typist. He bought that disadvantage so while he is a highly trained warrior, he has a character flaw. If you didn't want him to have that flaw then don't buy the disadvantage.

[Robyn]

Re: Lets Talk Disads: Enraged/Berserk

 

I think you are missing the point Manic Typist. He bought that disadvantage so while he is a highly trained warrior' date=' he has a character flaw. If you didn't want him to have that flaw then don't buy the disadvantage.[/quote']

 

We should be able to expand the mechanic so that it covers similar flaws, though. The rules for Enraged/Berserk already do part of what we want them to, and are severely underdeveloped compared to the rest of the system, so it makes sense to do something with Enraged/Berserk rather than restrict ourselves to a standard Psych Limit.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Lets Talk Disads: Enraged/Berserk

 

Well' date=' I wouldn't let an Enraged character use Conversation, Lockpicking, Stealth or Computer Programming...[/quote']

Neither would I, but it isn't because he "loses" those skills while he's Enraged, it's because Enraged means he is continuously fighting, and those aren't fighting skills.

 

Suppose he has the Panicked described earlier, and he sees a troll. He runs away at full speed. He comes to a locked door blocking his path. Would you not let him use Lockpicking to open the door so he can continue to run away from the troll? Sure, his hands might be shaking with fear which would give him penalties to the roll, but he doesn't forget how to pick locks, nor does he forget that he knows.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Lets Talk Disads: Enraged/Berserk

 

Neither would I, but it isn't because he "loses" those skills while he's Enraged, it's because Enraged means he is continuously fighting, and those aren't fighting skills.

 

Suppose he has the Panicked described earlier, and he sees a troll. He runs away at full speed. He comes to a locked door blocking his path. Would you not let him use Lockpicking to open the door so he can continue to run away from the troll? Sure, his hands might be shaking with fear which would give him penalties to the roll, but he doesn't forget how to pick locks, nor does he forget that he knows.

 

I would not allow the attempt at lockpicking with one exception. If he had any other route to go, even a dangerous one, that didn't force him to confront whatever triggered the panic he'd have to take that route. If the the only way away was through that locked door, he'd have to try to force it first, then see if the character is far enough away that he feels okay (roll for recovery unless will within an unreasonable distance), and then if all that fails, he can attempt a Lockpicking roll, and even then I'd probably impose a penalty to the roll (time penalty for a hasty action; must attempt the pick the lock in a single Phase)

[Manic Typist]

Re: Lets Talk Disads: Enraged/Berserk

 

@Manic Typist - But remember Berserk is a disadvantage and you should not make a graceful way around it. You bought it so you are Enraged. till you recover. That is what disadvantages are all about.

 

 

http://www.protectors.frih.net/index.html

 

 

This is about two conflicting Disads, not a way around a Disad.

 

"Absolute Loyalty" is a DISAD.

 

In my example, it stopped the character from finishing off his enemy to go save his sister (who might have a bitter relationship with her brother, and have been trying to destroy him, but it doesn't matter because the character has "Absolute Loyalty"), and no doubt the villain will flee (nursing a wounded ego) and make the character rue the day that they ever crossed paths...

 

I think you are missing the point Manic Typist. He bought that disadvantage so while he is a highly trained warrior' date=' he has a character flaw. If you didn't want him to have that flaw then don't buy the disadvantage.[/quote']

 

Um, I'm sorry, but I'm afraid that you missed the point. I was saying that not only would I have the Disad, but I would NOT allow OCV skill levels. You are interpreting what I was saying, backwards.

 

But, now, I'm not so sure I would do that. A number of people have made persuasive points. I would probably allow OCV skill levels, and chalk them up to "muscle memory." While this opens a dangerous door for allowing the same for DCV, I would tell the player: First- true, it's also muscle memory, but you cannot conciously shift into defense mode. Your unconcious mind is demanding a full offensive, and so your unconcious muscle control is invested into achieving that goal. Second- a Disad that isn't disadvantageous isn't a Disad....

[Labrat]

Re: Lets Talk Disads: Enraged/Berserk

 

Beserk was never intended to make you a killing machine, it was intended to make you a danger to friend and foe alike (and convenience store and car parked on the street and mailbox...). The psychology of 'Beserk' implies unpredictable behavior. That can certainly translate to any kind of passionate mindset. Using Beserk to your advantage against a group of thugs clearly isn't a Disadvantage, but being Beserk in a town full of innocent bystanders certainly would be a Disadvantage. If a GM is going to allow OCV bonuses to apply against the group of thugs, then he/she should also apply it when the PC goes bonkers at the county fair when the fireworks go off.

 

As a GM I would be very cautious to allow "Beserk when confronting terrorists" or "Enraged when fired at" simply because the focus of the Enragement may quickly go to the player's advantage. Sure the PC would still have to survive the all out attack, but it seems awful convenient. Depends on the maturity of the player involved.