5th Ed. Transformation: Consecrating objects

[Wardsman]

Ok I want build a system that may used in fantasy or modern urban fantasy.

Practitioners of the Dark Arts and some haints will vulnerabilities and susceptibilities to consecrated items.

 

Example: a consecrated item will do extra damage against someone with this weakness or hit a desolid character who has this. It may also be used for other effects.

 

Example: Practitioners of dark voodoo and their spirits treat lines drawn with red brick dust as force walls with PD/ED/ Ego defense. If a circle is drawn then there is a force globe with respect to the attacker with this weakness.

 

Question is this cosmetic or minor transformation to consecrate the item like holy water and such?

 

 

[eepjr24]

You are for sure into GM call area here. As a GM in my games it would be a minor, but I can see where some would argue for cosmetic in their campaigns. It depends on how often things would be affected and what the effects would be for the holy water.

 

- E

[Wardsman]

You are for sure into GM call area here. As a GM in my games it would be a minor, but I can see where some would argue for cosmetic in their campaigns. It depends on how often things would be affected and what the effects would be for the holy water.

 

- E

I agree. And I'm not saying you are wrong. But why is this different changing the items color to blue and bad guys have susceptibility to blue items? The more common the blue/blessed objects the more points the bad guys get.

 

I'm just trying to see both sides of the cosmetic/ minor question.

[Christopher R Taylor]

i would require players to use a transform (minor) to consecrate items, but NPCs should be able to just bless things.

[eepjr24]

I agree. And I'm not saying you are wrong. But why is this different changing the items color to blue and bad guys have susceptibility to blue items? The more common the blue/blessed objects the more points the bad guys get.

 

I'm just trying to see both sides of the cosmetic/ minor question.

Because anyone can make something blue and it is a well know process. If there are priests on every corner and you can walk into some place and buy consecrated weapons easily, I would make it cosmetic. And at that point, because they are so common, defenses against them would be equally (or even more) common. One of the tenets of the Hero system is that every attack has a defense and the defense is generally cheaper or easier to acquire. And of course you have to realize that at that point the evil side can desecrate things very easily as well, so watch out paladins and other good leaning players.

 

- E

[Christopher R Taylor]

I see it more as how significant the chance is, not how common or easy to obtain it is.  Transform is based not on defenses but on the complexity of the change.  Making a peach taste like a pear: cosmetic.  Making a peach into a pear: minor. Making a peach able to explode when you pull the stem off and throw it: Major.  Making a peach into a squirrel: Total.

[Wardsman]

Because anyone can make something blue and it is a well know process. If there are priests on every corner and you can walk into some place and buy consecrated weapons easily, I would make it cosmetic. And at that point, because they are so common, defenses against them would be equally (or even more) common. One of the tenets of the Hero system is that every attack has a defense and the defense is generally cheaper or easier to acquire. And of course you have to realize that at that point the evil side can desecrate things very easily as well, so watch out paladins and other good leaning players.

 

- E

Perhaps blue was not the best analogy. But you brought some points about defenses being more common. I was thinking of the susceptibility or vulnerabilities to consecrated items as a the world's defense.

 

Also I was not thinking everyone knowing how to do it . But those in the know it would be almost trivial.

Dispelling the transformation would be a simple desecration ritual. One not even necessarily magical in nature. 

Or having a non-magic thug sweeping  the brick dust or salt away.solve the issue as well.

[Outsider]

Perk : Priest

PS : Rituals

Social Complication : Vows

 

If you are a priest, and know the rituals, and stay in good standing, you can consecrate things.

[eepjr24]

You could also go the CE route, especially for areas.

 

- E

[Wardsman]

Perk : Priest

PS : Rituals

Social Complication : Vows

 

If you are a priest, and know the rituals, and stay in good standing, you can consecrate things.

Consecration goes beyond religious use. Many mystical traditions use the term.

The point was to create an item that could trip a susceptibility or vulnerability.

What really interesting if you have a pantheon with differing power blocks which powers or interests run counter to others.

[Wardsman]

You could also go the CE route, especially for areas.

 

- E

Yeah I thought about change environment for Holy or consecrated ground.

[Wardsman]

Perk : Priest

PS : Rituals

Social Complication : Vows

 

If you are a priest, and know the rituals, and stay in good standing, you can consecrate things.

Oh I see where you going with this now I think. reversing transformations on both sides.

[Hyper-Man]

I guess I'll be the dissenter. I don't think this is an ability that requires a Power Build. I would encourage a Perk approach instead as it seems desecrating a consecrated item is something a layman with the right knowledge can accomplish (no Dispell build required). Also, what exactly would be the target of any Transform based approach? It's not targeting a character so what is the target number for success/failure of the ability?

 

HM

[Wardsman]

I guess I'll be the dissenter. I don't think this is an ability that requires a Power Build. I would encourage a Perk approach instead as it seems desecrating a consecrated item is something a layman with the right knowledge can accomplish (no Dispell build required). Also, what exactly would be the target of any Transform based approach? It's not targeting a character so what is the target number for success/failure of the ability?

 

HM

 

Body of the Item. 

Say a witch want to consecrate an athame to strike at spirits and sea salt for warding.

 

In my game all magic users will choose a path .

Each path has weaknesses.

 

Say voodoo practitioner can be stopped by red brick dust(susceptibility:Brick dust acting as a force wall)

But sea salt from witch will not affect him unless it is consecrated. (susceptibility: Consecrated powdered warding substance) 

 

But letting normals with simple non magical ritual undo a consecration on a weapon(not needed on the dust unless you are setting a trap) is a good idea.

 

what you are summoning demon and someone desecrating your consecrated warding powder?

oops!

[Hyper-Man]

Exactly.

 

It's the same concept for 'Clerics' ability to'Turn Undead'. A complex Mind Control or Limited PRE build is not necessary since the Undead have a Disadvantage/Complication that dictates how they are affected by a 'devout Cleric' performing a PRE Attack. The Cleric gets a bonus determined by what type of Disad/Complication the Undead is built with.

 

HM

[Christopher R Taylor]

I just build my undead with a vulnerability to presence attacks by holy people; x2 for weak ones, x1½ for stronger.  A "turn undead" type ritual is just more presence with instant and offense only, vs undead.

[NuSoardGraphite]

If all this does is add a "blessed" or "Holy" sfx to a weapon or item which allows it to take advantage of vulnerabilities and susceptabilities, then I would allow a minor Transform to do that.

[NuSoardGraphite]

I guess I'll be the dissenter. I don't think this is an ability that requires a Power Build. I would encourage a Perk approach instead as it seems desecrating a consecrated item is something a layman with the right knowledge can accomplish (no Dispell build required). Also, what exactly would be the target of any Transform based approach? It's not targeting a character so what is the target number for success/failure of the ability?

 

HM

The Target number would be the Body of the object being blessed. A sword might be 5 Body (requiring a roll of 10 or more on the Transform dice). A cup only 1 Body, but blessing a whole house might be 20 Body (i would base it on the highest body wall in the place) and might be beyond the capacity for the priest to bless. Or multiple priests could do a ritual and combine their efforts to bless larger areas.

[Wardsman]

The Target number would be the Body of the object being blessed. A sword might be 5 Body (requiring a roll of 10 or more on the Transform dice). A cup only 1 Body, but blessing a whole house might be 20 Body (i would base it on the highest body wall in the place) and might be beyond the capacity for the priest to bless. Or multiple priests could do a ritual and combine their efforts to bless larger areas.

House could be done by change environment.

[Wardsman]

If all this does is add a "blessed" or "Holy" sfx to a weapon or item which allows it to take advantage of vulnerabilities and susceptabilities, then I would allow a minor Transform to do that.

That seems to be consensus but I don't see why it is more than a cosmetic personally.

[Christopher R Taylor]

I would say its not cosmetic because it is changing the item beyond its normal range of simple appearance and sensory alterations.  Turning your sword blue: cosmetic.  Making your sword do extra damage to creatures vulnerable to a kind of attack: minor.

[massey]

I'm going to agree with Hyper-Man on this.  Characters who took vulnerabilities/susceptibilities did so knowing that these things can come up in the course of gameplay.  They got points for a vulnerability to blessed weapons.  Unless your game universe has a very different definition of "blessed weapon" than a normal setting does, it should not require a power to bless something.  But it really depends on how they work in your campaign.

 

Vampires are held at bay by crosses.  How many points did they get for that?  Are "crosses" very common, common, uncommon?  Does holding two sticks together in a cross shape count?  Because if so, crosses are probably "very common" and it doesn't take any points to use a cross.  If its got to be an actual cross, manufactured into that shape, maybe its just common (somewhat rare depending on where you are, but easy enough to get one if you know there's a vampire around).  You don't have to pay for the ability to use a cross.

 

Normally the definition of what counts as holy (or whatever) comes in the disadvantage.  You don't have to pay points for it because somebody else already got points for it.  They got extra points because it's relatively easy to hit them in the disadvantage.  If you have to have a power to hit his disad, then it's gotta be uncommon at best.

[Wardsman]

I would say its not cosmetic because it is changing the item beyond its normal range of simple appearance and sensory alterations.  Turning your sword blue: cosmetic.  Making your sword do extra damage to creatures vulnerable to a kind of attack: minor.

Here is my problem. the system is based on built in susceptibilities.

I can have susceptibility to objects a certain shade of blue. Would necessitate a minor transform?

What make  old school kryptonite more than cosmetic?

[eepjr24]

You are back to the point I made. It depends on the campaign. If Consecrated weapons are available in a general goods store, they would be a cosmetic transform to me. And the Susceptibility would be at the Very Common level. If they are made by a small subset of people who control the rate at which they are created and have a reason to restrict the output (in this case to not cheapen the effect of divinity), then it is Minor. That makes the Susceptibility either Common or if they are extremely rare, Uncommon. Making something a certain shade of blue is both trivial (the "transform" method can be duplicated easily with off the shelf goods) and would merit a Very Common susceptibility as well.

 

Kryptonite (an alloy made up of 15.08% plutonium, 18.06% tantalum, 27.71% xenon, 24.02% promethium, 10.62% dialium, 3.94% mercury, and 0.57% of an unknown substance) would be a major transform from say another metal or thin air or the life. It might be minor if you could gather up all the component parts besides the unknown and use the transform to assemble them, basically.

 

All of this comes back to GM though. There is only so much that you can make a hard and fast rule for. So if you convince your GM (or yourself if you are the GM) that it is cosmetic, then it is so for that world.

 

- E

[Wardsman]

You are back to the point I made. It depends on the campaign. If Consecrated weapons are available in a general goods store, they would be a cosmetic transform to me. And the Susceptibility would be at the Very Common level. If they are made by a small subset of people who control the rate at which they are created and have a reason to restrict the output (in this case to not cheapen the effect of divinity), then it is Minor. That makes the Susceptibility either Common or if they are extremely rare, Uncommon. Making something a certain shade of blue is both trivial (the "transform" method can be duplicated easily with off the shelf goods) and would merit a Very Common susceptibility as well.

 

Kryptonite (an alloy made up of 15.08% plutonium, 18.06% tantalum, 27.71% xenon, 24.02% promethium, 10.62% dialium, 3.94% mercury, and 0.57% of an unknown substance) would be a major transform from say another metal or thin air or the life. It might be minor if you could gather up all the component parts besides the unknown and use the transform to assemble them, basically.

 

All of this comes back to GM though. There is only so much that you can make a hard and fast rule for. So if you convince your GM (or yourself if you are the GM) that it is cosmetic, then it is so for that world.

 

- E

 

Thank you for that well thought out explanation. It gives me more to think about.

 

As an  aside I take it you quoting superman 3?

The comics , at least in 70's and 80's,  had it as an isotope that decayed to iron.