Conduct Codes

[Christopher]

Re: Conduct Codes

 

I have a question:

Is the "Code of the Samurai" really always a pschical Complciation?

 

I could just as well see it as a Social Limitation. You have to act according to it, or face repercussion. Once you have family, thier wellbeing also depends heavily on you following that code.

"Death before Dishonor" is something you rarely do out of honor - more likely you follow it because dishonor means "loss of status, loss of work, family won't be supplied by your lord anymroe". There is no social system and people might shun you. Dishonor could literally mean a Death Sentence.

[Greywind]

Re: Conduct Codes

 

Mostly dishonor meant "stick a sharp pointy in my gut and eviscerate myself" unless the Daimyo or Shogun denied the right.

[Laundry Knight]

Re: Conduct Codes

 

Whether or not morals are objective in the real world opens up a huge can of philosophical worms, and if this were site dedicated to arguing philosophy, I would go deeper into the subject. I am willing to have a discussion on the issue via PM.

 

Regarding objectivity of morality within a game world, that is up to the GM and how he wants to run his game, and what is or isn't objectively metaphysically (the discussion of morality is always within the metaphysical realm) is one of those things I try to keep in mind when creating. In a supers game, I tend to view things more objectively. While in cyberpunk, I take more a of a subjective approach.

[Manic Typist]

Re: Conduct Codes

 

I have a question:

Is the "Code of the Samurai" really always a pschical Complciation?

 

It isn't; it's absolutely fine to put it down as, say, a 45 Point Psy/Soc Comp.

 

It's really just short hand for a slew of things.

[bluesguy]

Re: Conduct Codes

 

Bushido - Code of the Samurai can be found here and here. Sometimes it helps to ask the player what they believe the 'code' means. If that doesn't match the GMs then it is up the GM to explain what it means in their campaign.

 

In my superhero campaign, which is a Silver Age campaign, every hero has code vs. killing (total). I have explained to the players that means that if the choice is kill the villain or letting them get away today, they will let them get away today. They are expected to 'ramp' up their attacks - don't start with your biggest attack on a villain. And their powers have been built around that idea. They all have 0 END attacks which have lower DC than their full power attack.

 

What has been great is that they players have naturally fallen into this mode. In every combat they have been very careful with their first attack to make sure they don't kill anyone by accident. In the last session the villain (martial artist) was getting away so the brick picked up a display case (AoE) and threw it at the villain which knocked out the villain. They had a couple of choices but those other choices were a lot more dangerous and deadly. Plus it was sooo comic book.

[Bolon]

Re: Conduct Codes

 

There was an understanding created by the GM with his players. That is a skill of a good GM so the players and the game ran in a specific tone. My point has been that using the virtues of an archtype or role can be an easier way of writing down codes of conduct, complications or social limitations. The fact that a game becomes players versus GM and loses it fun or co-operative story aspect can create difficulties but basic understandings are required. Rule raping or cheating or other ways of working around would be against the flavour of the game depending of the GM.

 

I remember a GM who decided that the rule for an additional point of experience for a long adventure meant that he could just give us a base award and 1 point for each session afterwards. That would be done at the end of the adventure which included an intro with base character that included Mechanon and then got worse. We had to play every angle and cheat we could to survive since he continued to give us harder villain but had yet to award any points. After 3 months of weekly play for 4 hours, the adventure ended and he awarded points. Immediately he ended the game. We all felt robbed as his idea of a game was the GM versus the players. The story was just an excuse to challenge us and prove he was all great and mighty. He once started a game where the characters were low level street heroes and ran the first scenario against the entire Zodiac. The only character to survive that game was the player who didn't buy movement powers so he never made it to the fight where the entire party was killed and Zodiac got away. This is another point about game play and the type of game that can occur. If you are working with your players, you can use a simple form of codes with virtue ethic based on role and not have to write it all out like a legal contract.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Conduct Codes

 

I think you absolutely can, and I feel your post makes the point for me.

 

The player would have to develop at least a rough sense of what "Code of the Samurai" meant to his character (which can be based upon so many factors- historically speaking, any such code changed quite a bit!). ANY code, of Complication, can be evaded if the player is "smart enough" (i.e. cheap enough) to find some convoluted way of twisting his way out of it.... but why should he want to do that, and why let him? At that point, the issue isn't with the code but the player. If he didn't want this, he should have looked for a different Complication. Play the game, right?

 

Anyway, there could be a lot of drama (even an entire campaign!) around different PCs/NPCs wrestling with each other's interpretations of Code of the Samurai.

 

That is why I said this later in the same post:

You might know what your idea of a Samuraii Code is (or any other code, for that matter) but to be in any way externally enforceable then you need to be able to express in writing what you will and will not do in certain situations.

 

You have it on your character sheet without any explanation, and you and the GM have different ideas about what the code means, there is likely to be an issue that is going to need discussing. You might as well get the discussing out of the way at the start and write down what it means.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Conduct Codes

 

...

 

 

About the first, EGO is the Characteristic to overcome Compulsion, Mental Attacks and Interaction Skills. About the only influencign it doesn't affects is PREsence attacks (and there are some option to allow them as well).

But I also see this interaction as problemamtic. A Strong Lim should be worth the same for a 7 EGO guy and a 30 EGO guy. But the 30 EGO guy is less limited. And in some instaces I high EGO might make it harder to persuade someone to go against his Complication (the "to Stubborn to listen" problem).

 

I might argue that PD, ED and such are the characteristics that protect against damage, but they are of no use against Susceptibility. You can't buy off the problem that a Complication causes you by buying something with character points. Well, you can, with Psych Lims, and that is the issue here.

 

The argument runs like this:

 

You have a strong ego. Despite that, you hve a fear of spiders. That fear is rooted in your ego itself. Your own ego convices you that you are afraid of spiders, despite the fact that the rational part of your mind tells you that they are not particularly dangerous. It is your ego itself that is convicning you of the irrational. Your ego is fighting against your ego, and it is always going to be balanced. Strong egos have to overcome strong egos: therefore it makes much more sense to simply go with the 8-/11-/14- that works so well throughout all teh other complications.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Conduct Codes

 

My general belief is that Ego rolls to overcome Psych's are for situations where the character is actually motivated to overcome the psych for valid role playing reasons, not just convenience. Any player who wants an ego roll every time a psych comes up will be told to buy the psych off, given how hard the character is working to overcome it. If you use "poor role playing" to assess xp, this is a great opportunity to apply that rule as well.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Conduct Codes

 

.....

Now here, I must say that if the high EGO character got that high EGO for free, you would have a point (maybe you could spend it on EGO...) but since EGO costs points, you don't have one. A higher EGO roll is one of the benefits a character gets for investing points in EGO.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary is ludicrous which may be the point, or at least a point

 

I might counter with the suggestion that if you buy plenty of EGO and also take Psychological Limitations then you are getting better value for them.

 

I might also point out that other complications do not work this way: if you take damage from kryptonite, a susceptibility, buying defences will not help you.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Conduct Codes

 

Sean, if you have a high DCV, doesn't that mitigate against vulnerabilities? A high movement speed will enable you to escape your susceptibilities faster, doesn't it?

[Sean Waters]

Re: Conduct Codes

 

My general belief is that Ego rolls to overcome Psych's are for situations where the character is actually motivated to overcome the psych for valid role playing reasons' date=' not just convenience. Any player who wants an ego roll every time a psych comes up will be told to buy the psych off, given how hard the character is working to overcome it. If you use "poor role playing" to assess xp, this is a great opportunity to apply that rule as well.[/quote']

 

That makes sense in some ways, but would actually work better for the Hero with a 'Murderous Rage' PS: that is something they ought to fight against, and struggle to overcome, generally. It makes less sense for the character with a Code Against Killing and a high EGO to overcome it, even for valid role playing reasons. Is Captain America really more likely to be able to overcome his code against killing than The Hulk*, given sufficient (but equal) provocation?

 

It makes no sense at all with something like 'Fear of spiders', because the point about that is the fear is not a rational one. Even if you need to get past the monstrous spider to save the royal romantic interest; it is your ego, your unconscious, your own mind which has created the fear in the first place, and so if it is that strong, it should be hard to overcome.

 

The point you make about XP awards is an interesting one because I've often thought that personality should be reflected in the rules more than it is. If you have a psychological profile, you should feel free to simply ignore it, but if you have gotten points for that there will be consequences. I'm not keen on XP enforcement, but I can see nothing wrong with having to define what the points you got from the Complication went into and losing those poitns (and those abilities) if you do not follow your psychological limitations. That seems a perfect balance.

 

 

 

*And if Hulk doesn't have a code against killing, why did he never** kill anyone, given that he could quite easily have flicked the head off virtually anyone he met?

 

**Well, until The Ultimates and some of the modern stuff.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Conduct Codes

 

Sean' date=' if you have a high DCV, doesn't that mitigate against vulnerabilities? A high movement speed will enable you to escape your susceptibilities faster, doesn't it?[/quote']

 

This is true, although both DCV and movement are easy enough to counter if the GM wants to make you pay for the Complications. Short of adjusting your EGO, it is difficult to get the mileage out of Complications without overt cheating. If you've got 50 EGO, well, you can pretty much ignore your psychological limitations. Spiders? Pah!

[Lucius]

Re: Conduct Codes

 

because the point about that is the fear is not a rational one..

 

Which is why you don't reason your way out of it (INT roll) you will yourself to transcend it (EGO roll.)

 

Also, a character with Distinctive Features or Bad Reputation may still buy Persuasion or Charm;

A character with Hunted by ninja may have Danger Sense, Hunted by the Scorpion King may have Life Support vs Venom, or Hunted by Florence the Flamethrowing Floozie may have extra ED vs fire and heat;

and a character with Vulnerability may have Desolidification.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

You can have Dependence on Palindromedaries, and have a Palindromedary

[Sean Waters]

Re: Conduct Codes

 

Which is why you don't reason your way out of it (INT roll) you will yourself to transcend it (EGO roll.)

 

Also, a character with Distinctive Features or Bad Reputation may still buy Persuasion or Charm;

A character with Hunted by ninja may have Danger Sense, Hunted by the Scorpion King may have Life Support vs Venom, or Hunted by Florence the Flamethrowing Floozie may have extra ED vs fire and heat;

and a character with Vulnerability may have Desolidification.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

You can have Dependence on Palindromedaries, and have a Palindromedary

 

 

...and if you have desolidification that protects you against your vulnerability/susceptibility then you have to reduce the frequency that it occurs at, and the points you get in complications. Distinctive features and charm don't cancel: you'll get penalties if the person you are talking to finds you repugnant/terrifying/etc. Hunted and danger sense? Well, if you did not have danger sense you might have 10 more PD. Psych Lim is still different because it is one specific counter. Moreover it really is not necessary.

 

It makes no sense to me that someone with a very strong will can easily overcome their lifelong conviction that killing is wrong. I can see that someone with a low willpower might 'slip' when they are in a rage or strongly provoked. That is the exact opposite of the way Hero presents it. I would divorce it from EGO rolls entirely and have it on a straight roll depending on how strong your conviction is, if a roll is even necessary.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Conduct Codes

 

My general belief is that Ego rolls to overcome Psych's are for situations where the character is actually motivated to overcome the psych for valid role playing reasons' date=' not just convenience. Any player who wants an ego roll every time a psych comes up will be told to buy the psych off, given how hard the character is working to overcome it. If you use "poor role playing" to assess xp, this is a great opportunity to apply that rule as well.[/quote']

 

I would like to come back to this because I can see the sense - but only, really, for 'negative' Psychological Limitations. If someone is a pathalogical liar - the PS is really acting AGAINST them, it does make sense that they could overcome that with an EGO roll (although my preferred solution would be that you simply say the PS bites on an 8- and get less points back, which seems fairer all around but still allows you to accurately define behaviour AND does not prejudice low EGO characters by suggesting that they are less able to hold strong convictions).

 

I can also work with 'positive PSs' when you have competing 'good' goals: do you save the child or the small furry animal when you have PSs that require you to protect both, and you can only get to one or the other*. The problem comes when you have the classic situation in the comics and such that the hero is being goaded into killing someone, for example, or forced to. For example: Superman has a PS: Believes in Truth, Justice and The American Way. Due to some plot, he is declared wanted and an arrest warrant is issued: he is to be incarcerated in the new Krypto-Prison. Should he hand himself in? Even though he knows he is innocent, he believes in the system. Mind you, despite the fact he believes so deeply, it is easy for him to overcome those feelings because he has a high EGO. That just seems backwards.

 

Complications are all about voluntarily restricting what a PC can do. The restriction on two charatcers with the same Psych Lim, for which they get the same points, is different if they have different EGOs. Compare that to Physical Limitations. If you have compensating powers, you get less points or maybe none at all.

 

Finally there is the meta effect: it makes good sense to pad out Ms Willpower's character sheet with Psych lims (especially 'positive' ones that might make her more resistant to certain types of mind control), whereas it makes less sense to do the same with Butterfly Mind, as she will become a slave to her drives but get no more points for it. OK, true role players will not care, but anyone with an eye to character efficiency will spot that straight off the bat and it will influence character design because of system mechanics. I appreciate that happens to an extent all the time (how much CON should I buy...) but Psych Lims seem particularly thorny, at least to me, because of the 'Superman Situation', and other similar scenarios - your high EGO should make you MORE likely to do something that seems like an objective bad idea, not less.

 

 

 

*And if your rolls indicate that you have to protect both - and you can't - do you do nothing? OK, that is off track, but interesting...

[Christopher]

Re: Conduct Codes

 

This is true' date=' although both DCV and movement are easy enough to counter if the GM wants to make you pay for the Complications. Short of adjusting your EGO, it is difficult to get the mileage out of Complications without overt cheating. If you've got 50 EGO, well, you can pretty much ignore your psychological limitations. Spiders? Pah![/quote']

Also it is more common for DCV and Movement to be limited/negatively adjusted. A Drain DCV or Entangle is much mroe common than a Drain Ego.

 

The problem comes when you have the classic situation in the comics and such that the hero is being goaded into killing someone' date=' for example, or forced to. For example: Superman has a PS: Believes in Truth, Justice and The American Way. Due to some plot, he is declared wanted and an arrest warrant is issued: he is to be incarcerated in the new Krypto-Prison. Should he hand himself in? Even though he knows he is innocent, he believes in the system. Mind you, despite the fact he believes so deeply, it is easy for him to overcome those feelings because he has a high EGO. That just seems backwards.[/quote']

You might have forgotten an important factor here:

Whoever framed him, did it as part of a Plot. A Plot his other complciations force him to stop. So it's "Believes in Justice" vs. "Protective of Innocents".

 

If there wasn't any plan he knows of, then of coruse he has no reason to go against his Psych. Lim. He would have to go into prision, until he learns (or is informed) of the real plot or some other danger shows up.

 

*And if your rolls indicate that you have to protect both - and you can't - do you do nothing? OK' date=' that is off track, but interesting...[/quote']

Yes, I think that is what should happen. You have to make a decision, you cannot make. The only result is doing nothing until it is too late (or you get help).

[Sean Waters]

Re: Conduct Codes

 

...

 

You might have forgotten an important factor here:

Whoever framed him, did it as part of a Plot. A Plot his other complciations force him to stop. So it's "Believes in Justice" vs. "Protective of Innocents".

 

If there wasn't any plan he knows of, then of coruse he has no reason to go against his Psych. Lim. He would have to go into prision, until he learns (or is informed) of the real plot or some other danger shows up.

 

 

....

 

Interesting food for though...

 

The difficulty I perceive though is that the player is almost bound to recognise it as a plot, even if Superman has no reason to think it is - he may even know that it is a frame up but still believe that the justice system will sort things out - the problem is that, because he has such a high EGO (I assume he does, anyway) he can easily ignore his own Psychological Limitation. That may be bad role playing, but most players can cobble together some role playing consistent reason (I know it is a frame up, and I am sure it will get sorted out, but it can only mean that someone wants me out of the way, probably so that they can commit a heinous crime, so, I think it best that I remain free for the moment...), but it still comes back to the fact that someone with a high Ego can, at least mechanically, ignore anything but a Total Psych Limitation (and even then might be able to overcome it reasonably easily, if the GM allows them a roll at EGO-5). Someone like Superman may well have a 30+Ego, which translates to an EGO roll of 15- or better.

 

I think it would be better to use a different system, for example losing the abilities that you paid for with the complication if you deliberately go against it if you contravene the PS. Superman might be able to justify avoiding a lawful arrest warrant, but it will still upset him on some level and that might slow his reactions or cause him to forget something important due to distraction. I just do not see how a high EGO should help in that situation (or, necessarily, why a low EGO should be a hindrance). Alternatively you could impose roll penalties (say -1 per 5 points of complication) that are imposed to all rolls if you are acting against your basic psychology. That would be independent of EGO and also have the advantage of having an ongoing effect until you change your behaviour (and, perhaps, atone) or buy off the complication.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Conduct Codes

 

For example: Superman has a PS: Believes in Truth' date=' Justice and The American Way. Due to some plot, he is declared wanted and an arrest warrant is issued: he is to be incarcerated in the new Krypto-Prison. Should he hand himself in? Even though he knows he is innocent, he believes in the system. [/quote']

 

Whoever framed him, did it as part of a Plot. A Plot his other complciations force him to stop. So it's "Believes in Justice" vs. "Protective of Innocents".

 

If there wasn't any plan he knows of, then of coruse he has no reason to go against his Psych. Lim. He would have to go into prision, until he learns (or is informed) of the real plot or some other danger shows up.

 

The difficulty I perceive though is that the player is almost bound to recognise it as a plot' date=' even if Superman has no reason to think it is - he may even know that it is a frame up but still believe that the justice system will sort things out - the problem is that, because he has such a high EGO (I assume he does, anyway) he can easily ignore his own Psychological Limitation. That may be bad role playing, but most players can cobble together some role playing consistent reason (I know it is a frame up, and I am sure it will get sorted out, but it can only mean that someone wants me out of the way, probably so that they can commit a heinous crime, so, I think it best that I remain free for the moment...)[/quote']

 

I think a lot depends on the way we play psych limitations. To me, the player has said “this is an ingrained part of the character’s psyche”. That means that he will be played in this manner, first and foremost. It is a restriction the player will self-enforce. Only where there is a compelling reason to attempt to overcome that mindset is there any justification to attempt to “override the programming” with an Ego roll.

 

Where the players are playing under that model, the mechanics of an EGO roll become a lot less relevant. And I then come back to “if you are not going to play the psych lim, then spend the XP and buy it off”.

 

it still comes back to the fact that someone with a high Ego can' date=' at least mechanically, ignore anything but a Total Psych Limitation (and even then might be able to overcome it reasonably easily, if the GM allows them a roll at EGO-5). Someone like Superman may well have a 30+Ego, which translates to an EGO roll of 15- or better.[/quote']

 

And if you are playing on pure mechanics, then the role playing aspect is eliminated. One approach – impose more penalties. Let’s also note that “When a situation related to a character’s Psychological Complication occurs, he usually must react as the Psychological Complication dictates for at least one Phase. Then he may attempt to control his feelings through strength of will (i.e., EGO Rolls, as outlined on the accompanying table).” [6e v1 p 426] So the EGO roll does not give him a free ride, even if it is always permitted and always succeeds. Now, we have that “usually”. I would suggest “Usually” might sometimes means the situation is so dire that the EGO roll is available even in the first phase. However, it may also mean that, where the Complication is less an in-combat issue, the time factor goes up. So, having no direct indication of a plot, Supes turns himself in as his “usual reaction as the Complication dictates”. Only once he’s locked up may the player advance his “but I’m also very paranoid and believe there must be a plot because there are no innocent mistakes or misunderstandings” argument.

 

The player doesn’t like that? Well, remember that “he gets the points because his condition restricts his ability to act and function in important game situations.” (same page) Any argument that he is not restricted is an argument for removal of the points.

 

And let’s remember that Total Commitment doesn’t say “but he can break it with an EGO roll at -5”. It says “EGO roll at -5 (minimum) required to change actions (if the GM allows such a roll at all). You’ve basically put “no conscious control” on the ability to make an EGO roll. The GM is within his rights to deny the roll, or penalize it more than -5. That’s the minimum, so it should apply only where the most compelling reasons to deviate from the Psych are presented.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Conduct Codes

 

I would like to come back to this because I can see the sense - but only' date=' really, for 'negative' Psychological Limitations. If someone is a pathalogical liar - the PS is really acting AGAINST them, it does make sense that they could overcome that with an EGO roll. [/quote']

 

In instances where the complication does not act against the character, it’s not really a complication, is it? When the player wants to lie, this isn’t remotely limiting. And he still needs to lie for at least one phase, so why should I believe his new story when he recants?

 

I can also work with 'positive PSs' when you have competing 'good' goals: do you save the child or the small furry animal when you have PSs that require you to protect both, and you can only get to one or the other*.

 

*And if your rolls indicate that you have to protect both - and you can't - do you do nothing? OK, that is off track, but interesting...

 

Seems like at least one phase delay. And given total commitments “make the character totally useless”, being paralyzed with indecision seems like a reasonable result.

 

Complications are all about voluntarily restricting what a PC can do. The restriction on two charatcers with the same Psych Lim' date=' for which they get the same points, is different if they have different EGOs. Compare that to Physical Limitations. If you have compensating powers, you get less points or maybe none at all.[/quote']

 

Whether you have no enhanced senses or Targeting Hearing and Smell, Sonar and Radar, you get the same 35 points for selling back sight.

 

Finally there is the meta effect: it makes good sense to pad out Ms Willpower's character sheet with Psych lims (especially 'positive' ones that might make her more resistant to certain types of mind control)' date=' whereas it makes less sense to do the same with Butterfly Mind, as she will become a slave to her drives but get no more points for it. OK, true role players will not care, but anyone with an eye to character efficiency will spot that straight off the bat and it will influence character design because of system mechanics.[/quote']

 

There’s always a compromise. As noted before, being hard to hit, having high defences or having high STUN, or having 75% Damage Reduction mitigates a Vulnerability considerably. For that matter, that Speedster who has a really high DCV but minimal defences and STUN is likely to be KO’d by any solid hit, so how is taking double stun limiting when a typical hit he’s not vulnerable to would still leave him at GM’s option. At least the Psych has that 1 phase minimum which is easily enforced.

 

 

Also it is more common for DCV and Movement to be limited/negatively adjusted. A Drain DCV or Entangle is much mroe common than a Drain Ego.

 

This is campaign-specific, although the Entangle is definitely a common one. I see a lot of mentalists with Drain Ego or similar devices.

 

I think it would be better to use a different system' date=' for example losing the abilities that you paid for with the complication if you deliberately go against it if you contravene the PS. Superman might be able to justify avoiding a lawful arrest warrant, but it will still upset him on some level and that might slow his reactions or cause him to forget something important due to distraction.[/quote']

 

I think a direct link strains credibility (I did not turn myself in, so I no longer have X-Ray Vision and Life Support - Immune to Radiation). Seems like more of a Social Limitation – you adhere to your limitation due to outside consequences, rather than internal beliefs.

 

Coming back to the buyback of the complication, one answer could be removal of EGO rolls entirely in favour of player decisionmaking. You always control your character’s actions, so if you decide this violation of your Code vs Killing is justified, you can kill the villain. Now, since complications need to complicate, we need an enforcement mechanic. Perhaps that is the imposition of a point value of Unluck, with a premium (let’s say an extra 2d6) to reflect the bad things that happen because the character is distracted by his internal conflict. How about converting the Psych to a form of Susceptibility – the character suffers a -1 penalty to all rolls (perception, skill, characteristic, to hit, etc.) due to his internal conflict. Let’s say -1 for Moderate, and it lasts no more than a day; -2 for Severe and it lasts for a week, and -3 for Total, lasting until the character clearly comes back into line with this Psych, with a general rule that it’s at least a month.

 

To me, however, the bottom line is that the player should be willing to role play these psych’s and other mechanical measures should not be required. That’s the social contract, in my view.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Conduct Codes

 

I have to agree that a PS should, first and foremost, be a decision to role play a character in a certain way and a committment to actually doing so. I think that, if you role play it, the whole point becomes largely moot, however, the issue becomes a live one when the player does something - or wants to - that the GM rules will trigger the PS. In that situation, the player might well believe that their proposed action is justifiable even given their PS, but the GM disagrees - this is where the mechanics become important, and the EGO roll mechanic seems to allow high EGO characters to, in effect, justify their personal decision over the ruling of the GM. I'm not suggesting in this sort of instance that anyone is meta-playing or roll or rule playing - the point is that the degree of control you cede with a PS does not affect the points you get back (for a given intensity) - and, in my opionion, it should.

[Laundry Knight]

Re: Conduct Codes

 

One way of getting around an EGO roll to bypass a PS complication is something done in the old LUG Star Trek game where if someone chose to take a Code vs Kill they could still kill if they needed to but would be under penalties after the adventure due to guilt until they has X amount of time talking to an appropriate counselor or doctor. In my campaign, I would allow the nearest chaplain or bartender depending on how the character was portrayed.

[Lucius]

Re: Conduct Codes

 

Mr. Waters, PS means Professional Skill. I can tell by context that you mean Pscyhological Complication, but it's distracting and annoying.

 

I have no idea why you're doing it but would you please stop?

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary notes that other people are starting to do it too

[Bolon]

Re: Conduct Codes

 

I like the counselling idea to remove it but I also like the idea that anything the character does that would bring in the complication, they need to think twice, take a penalty, become unsure or just take on some other complication until it is considered resolved. That would include nightmares, overconfidence in combat as a death wish or punishment, lack of self preservation, whatever you can think is appropriate. Give the player that to roleplay for his bonus points and see what happens. You can always give him a reputation as a stone cold killer and all the associated complications like hunted by cops and outrage people. The GM might want to take it under consideration from the other players but it is your game and you need to keep a degree of balance. Fully telepathic thought police who make your life hell might be too much but there are more reasonable ways.

 

After all, you describe what the character sees and hears. Too bad it might not be what the party sees and hears, WEG. Think game appropriate and secret notes. It could be really fun to work through something and could even be a plot hook. What about a hero who is being haunted by someone that they only can see and hear but is really the key to the next scenario. It would be so much fun to have a clairvoyant power that is uncontrolled that is activated via the complication. You need to right the wrong to give over this. If you fail, you need to right more to remove the curse or complication you have earned (swapped in) by failing to play your complication right. There are so many fun ways to take the story and resolve the issue. Be creative.

[Christopher]

Re: Conduct Codes

 

What about a hero who is being haunted by someone that they only can see and hear but is really the key to the next scenario. It would be so much fun to have a clairvoyant power that is uncontrolled that is activated via the complication. You need to right the wrong to give over this. If you fail' date=' you need to right more to remove the curse or complication you have earned (swapped in) by failing to play your complication right. There are so many fun ways to take the story and resolve the issue. Be creative.[/quote']

I don't think you need a power for that. You cannot actively use it and it provides not more information than any other Plothook would do.

I would propably built it as "Subject to Orders". Maybe Hunted or DNCP of the week.

 

In fact I have a character (Violet Flower, Star Sapphire Corps clone) who has such complications. It's just enough to find where it is, Megascale T-Port there, get on to it and Megascale T-Port back. It isn't providing any usefull game information.