User:Xzean/Sandbox
Armifer posts on Necro guild
Question about consent
>>I understand that we are not to be discussing the issue of consent via guild itself here, however, will Consent be issued to anyone who knows you are a Nec, or will you need to be actively displaying that fact?
I'll be happy to have this conversation when we are ready to discuss possible consent issues.
Until then, this thread and any thread like it is closed.
-Armifer "It is no longer possible to escape men. Farewell to the monsters, farewell to the saints. Farewell to pride. All that is left is men."
- Jean-Paul Sartre Reply
Re: Like... ::Nudge:: • on 2/10/2008 2:38:32 PM 55
Reply
>>(RP choice, since it's easier to hide in the shadows if you match them).
Night Watch is one of my favorite Terry Prachett books. This in no small part due to Lord Vetinari's and Samuel Vimes's commentaries on urban camouflage and the ease of spotting assassins that insist on dressing in all black.
-Armifer "It is no longer possible to escape men. Farewell to the monsters, farewell to the saints. Farewell to pride. All that is left is men."
- Jean-Paul Sartre Reply
Re: Necromancer Guild Requirements • on 2/1/2009 2:42:58 AM 85
Reply
>>I was struck at how alike they are to rangers and of course the obvious differences.
Fringe loners of the Elanthia, unite.
>>But I have to ask...why only an LE req? Why not just a bladed weapon req?
Three reasons, in order of decreasing relevancy.
1) Lore stuff. Knives are symbolically very important to the Necromancers, which informs a ritualized expectation for their students. Necromancers learn to stab people in the face in a parody of why a liberal arts majors takes statistics.
2) Synergy with the Scarification / Thanatology stuff.
3) The requirements are meant to have a touch of cruelty to them.
-Armifer "...everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms-- to choose one's attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one's own way." -Viktor Frankl
Reply
Re: Necromancer Guild Requirements • on 2/1/2009 1:52:19 PM 92
Reply
>>I thought the reqs were pretty lenient, compared to what I imagined 'cruel and unusal' reqs would look like.
Touch does not mean all-consuming element. There's a world of difference between (what I imagine as) playful cruelty of making you learn a token amount of LE versus the asinine cruelty of making you grind 30 more Survivals per circle.
The Necromancer requirements are meant to be a little worse than average, fitting the needs and sensibilities of outcaste and persecuted students of unclean magic, but not by such a degree that it impacts the fun of playing one.
-Armifer "...everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms-- to choose one's attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one's own way." -Viktor Frankl
Reply
Re: Full Necromancer Spell List • on 2/2/2009 5:44:17 PM 114
Reply
>>I'm going to go with Eyes of the Blind, Concussive Force and Siphon Vitality being right. Halt Poison sounded reasonable too though.
Eyes of the Blind is a freebie, since I mentioned the title in the Empath category a few months ago.
I'll let Zeyurn have his fun with the rest.
-Armifer "...everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms-- to choose one's attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one's own way." -Viktor Frankl
Reply
Re: Butcher's Eye Spell • on 2/6/2009 7:15:29 PM 158
Reply
>>Gonna have a lot of Perverse babies if this is a starter spell though, whew. Four ranks of Primary Magic later and you've earned a 100% irrevocably tainted soul. But then there's always AP and classes.
Generally speaking, it would be wise to practice PM and Harness with spells that don't piss the gods off. This will include three out of five spellbooks, four if you count AP.
-Armifer "...everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms-- to choose one's attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one's own way." -Viktor Frankl
Reply
Re: Spell List • on 3/3/2009 5:06:35 PM 221
Reply
I'll update the website's spell list when we're a bit closer to release. For now, there's still a few holes in the spell tree (including the entire Animation spellbook) that'd just look odd and confusing.
-Armifer "...everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms-- to choose one's attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one's own way." -Viktor Frankl
Reply
Re: Structured Suggestions • on 3/4/2009 5:29:36 PM 230
Reply
>>I was for some reason operating under the assumption that almost everything would have overt tells and would not be avoided except through self-enforced exile. Curious.
Most Necromancy spells will have overt tells. However, that's always under your control. You decide when you want to fire off Blood Burst, or indulge in a Transcendental buff. Your risk of discovery, where and when, should be in your hands.
The sort of tells I intend to help you with are those entirely outside your control, such as when a Moon Mage perceives you, or a Empath types PERC HEALTH two rooms over. Those are the kind of things you'll have some method of directly thwarting.
>>But could a Thanatological rite be performed upon a living being against his will in a combat situation?
All the currently proposed rites are performed on corpses. It's not outside of consideration, but it is outside the scope of what's currently being built.
>>BTW - is Thanatology strictly limited to LE, or does the symbolism end where the mechanics begin? Will any bladed thing work? A bastard sword? A halberd? A fork?
Right now? LE. Not written in stone, but the whole "skinning people with halberds" thing doesn't amuse me.
-Armifer "...everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms-- to choose one's attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one's own way." -Viktor Frankl
Reply
Re: Structured Suggestions • on 3/4/2009 6:23:23 PM 237
Reply
>>How do you see us handling things when we have people keeping mirrors on us at most times, or keeping familures following us. Some of course may know our characters intentions from in game actions, others will be using OOC logs to determine who needs to be "watched".
If someone is trying to scry you 24/7, you have demonstrably failed to keep your character's profession a secret. C'est la vie.
But, it's important to distinguish between player knowledge and the justice system. There's correlation between the two (see: Accuse Necromancer), but it's not causal. If someone sees you out in Cougars tossing a necromantic spell...so what? Again, do not assume anything about consent. There's roleplaying considerations, but that's the same as any profession.
Where it gets mechanically important is in places the justice system reach, because that is the avenue we're going to use to screw with you if you're not keeping your secret. Are you blatant around society -- or, if you're blatant to players, are you hanging around civilization long enough for them to maneuver to get the guards involved? A blatant Necromancer is kind of like the Ranger wilderness bonus, only there's a hanging at the end of it.
-Armifer "...everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms-- to choose one's attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one's own way." -Viktor Frankl
Reply
Re: OOC Logs • on 3/4/2009 9:42:53 PM 244
Reply
>>If I were told (officially) I could at least be watched and be the focal point of an attack at the very hint of a disagreement just for circling, I'd probably stop playing.
While I do not expect people to read an entire year's worth of discussion before contributing, I consider it prudent to go back at least seven hours.
-Armifer "...everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms-- to choose one's attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one's own way." -Viktor Frankl
Reply
Re: Structured Suggestions • on 3/5/2009 2:19:11 AM 250
Reply
If someone knows you're both a Necromancer and you are currently in town, they can attempt to sic the guards on you just as if you'd stolen from them. Simply being a Necromancer is a felony. It's easier if there's evidence (obvious necromantic tells), but that's not a requirement. This can only happen while you're in a justice area. As Social Outrage accrues, the NPCs will perform this service without prompting.
The nominal path for Necromancers -- what Zeyurn and I are designing as our expectation of normal behavior -- are Necromancers who go to no great pains to disguise themselves in the wilderness, but conduct their business in town quickly and stealthily, if their Social Outrage permits them to do any business at all. If other PCs know and care, the guards will make your character's urban life unpleasant.
Coincidentally, this contains a portion of the answer to the previously mentioned necessity to navigate towns to get around the game: use Obfuscate, EotB, and don't stand still long enough for people who recognize you, PCs and NPCs alike, to raise the hue and cry.
-Armifer "...everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms-- to choose one's attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one's own way." -Viktor Frankl
Reply
Re: Structured Suggestions • on 3/5/2009 2:57:17 PM 252
Reply
Doing anything with bodily materials will usually fall into one of the four other spellbooks. Synthetic Creation is there for the spells specifically themed around a literal interpretation of alchemy and Victor Frankenstein / Herbert West kind of science.
Alchemy in the abstract can be peppered through everything. They didn't call it the Great Work at random.
-Armifer "...everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms-- to choose one's attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one's own way." -Viktor Frankl
Reply
Re: Thanatology • on 4/6/2009 1:13:51 AM 287
Reply
Non-Necromancers would neither understand nor care about the distinction, but there are two forces that can be considered "negative energy."
First, there is the animating force that Necromancers use. This has been explained as the misuse of life-force, twisted and corrupted in a very horrible way. The motive force behind the undead is misplaced life.
Second is...whatever they used to corrupt life in the first place. Thanatological rituals are the Necromancers' unnatural take on the Transference Link, which by necessity means they are a supernatural lever. Empaths use Empathy, which is a known supernatural quality inherent in the makeup of the Elanthian species. Necromancers use Thanatology, which is...Angry Empathy? Sorcerous magic? Puppies?
Who knows. Given the rote nature of the known thanatological rituals, and how frequently Necromancers tend to wind up on the wrong end of a pogrom, it's possible the Necromancers themselves don't fully understand what they're doing on the metaphysical level. If the Great Work was easy, it'd already be done by now.
-Armifer <Kvlt> Step 1: Want stuff! Step 2: Be ambitious! Step 3: Believe in the ability of your fellow man to carry you to heights you are too incompetent to reach alone.
Reply
Re: Thanatology • on 4/8/2009 1:46:08 PM 324
Reply
>>You're arguing with me by saying the exact same thing I just said. I think this has gotten mixed up somewhere.
That's because his argument is purely a pissing contest based on the semantics between "absence of belief" and "rejection of belief."
We all understood what you meant and we can end this derail now.
-Armifer <Kvlt> Step 1: Want stuff! Step 2: Be ambitious! Step 3: Believe in the ability of your fellow man to carry you to heights you are too incompetent to reach alone.
Re: Super Trained Commoners • on 4/9/2009 12:33:40 AM 365
Reply
While Necrocommoners offend my sensibilities in a mild fashion, I could not live with denying them entry or wiping their skills on entry.
Literally; I'm convinced at least one of them would drive to my house and kill me.
-Armifer <Kvlt> Step 1: Want stuff! Step 2: Be ambitious! Step 3: Believe in the ability of your fellow man to carry you to heights you are too incompetent to reach alone.
Reply
Re: Super Trained Commoners • on 4/9/2009 6:24:01 PM 380
Reply
>>For a while I agreed with the original thought of this post. That it wouldn't be fair to little necromancers having a lot of pre-worked on commoners shoot through the guild ranks.
Two points here.
1: How is someone else's progression through their guild a case of fairness or injustice to your gameplay?
2: What about any of the Necromancer lore bits coming out has suggested fairness is one of the themes of the guild?
-Armifer <Kvlt> Step 1: Want stuff! Step 2: Be ambitious! Step 3: Believe in the ability of your fellow man to carry you to heights you are too incompetent to reach alone.
Reply
Re: Necromancers, Consent, and you! • on 5/6/2009 2:06:33 AM 445
Reply
The real easy rule-of-thumb for killing Necromancers: you can only kill a Necromancer whenever you could kill anyone else -- if they grant you consent, or they have an Open PvP stance. No extra complexity, nothing remotely vague or that would require a judgment call.
All the complexity is on the Necromancer side. Necromancers need to deal with ACCUSE NECROMANCER's repercussions w/o consent. Necromancers risk getting flagged Open when they may strictly not want to, and so on.
-Armifer <Kvlt> Step 1: Want stuff! Step 2: Be ambitious! Step 3: Believe in the ability of your fellow man to carry you to heights you are too incompetent to reach alone.
Reply
Re: Necromancers, Consent, and you! • on 5/6/2009 2:59:43 PM 478
Reply
>>There going to be some sort of IC justification for not killing them on sight, as opposed to NPC necromancers?
Nope. It's consent policy, a strictly OOC rule put in place because we can't trust people to PvP with each other nicely. If you wish to roleplay burning all the Necromancers out, you need to get their OOC consent for the scene, just as you would need to do so if you wanted to try and drive the thieves out of Crossing.
ACCUSE NECROMANCER will be the primary tool for dealing with stupid Necromancers, which neither requires consent nor gives consent to use and deals them a blow to their Social Outrage, something that can potentially hurt a lot more than a lightning bolt.
-Armifer <Kvlt> Step 1: Want stuff! Step 2: Be ambitious! Step 3: Believe in the ability of your fellow man to carry you to heights you are too incompetent to reach alone.
Reply
Re: Necromancers, Consent, and you! • on 5/6/2009 4:04:56 PM 482
Reply
>>If we observe overt necromantic activity in the wilds will we still be able to ACCUSE NECROMANCER? For example, I see Necro Bob with his risen and casting obvious necro spells.
You don't strictly even need to see Necro Bob do anything, it just helps a lot. But Necro Bob does need to be in the town when you do it. If Necro Bob is keeping himself out in the hinterland, or at least is sneaky and quick enough that you never catch him in a justice area, he's home free. The implied addendum to "we like punishing stupid Necromancers" is "we like letting smart Necromancers play the game without interference."
-Armifer <Kvlt> Step 1: Want stuff! Step 2: Be ambitious! Step 3: Believe in the ability of your fellow man to carry you to heights you are too incompetent to reach alone.
Reply
Re: Necromancers, Consent, and you! • on 5/6/2009 4:42:54 PM 485
Reply
>>Ok so out of curiosity what will happen to the few of the already known soon to be necros.
The same thing that'll happen to almost all Necromancers given enough time. Be stealthy around town, or suffer.
This seems to be a recurring question that you will not get any sympathy on from either Z or myself. If you want to walk freely around town, attend events, have evil tea parties, etc. you do not want to play a Necromancer.
-Armifer <Kvlt> Step 1: Want stuff! Step 2: Be ambitious! Step 3: Believe in the ability of your fellow man to carry you to heights you are too incompetent to reach alone.
Reply
Re: Necromancers, Consent, and you! • on 5/6/2009 6:23:24 PM 493
Reply
>>Also, not really sure what the point is in prohibiting the closed pvp stance. Policywise, closed vs. guarded is a distinction without a difference.
It's a gesture to remind you that regardless of your stated wishes, if you choose to play a Necromancer you are explicitly choosing a guild that has PvP complications. You do not get to be a Necromancer who shuns conflicts. You may not be open to having a sword buried in your chest now but that does not mean your character will not be forced to deal with that situation tomorrow, or be harried by accusations in town.
The difference between Guarded and Closed is intent, and you cannot intend to be closed to PvP and play a Necromancer.
-Armifer <Kvlt> Step 1: Want stuff! Step 2: Be ambitious! Step 3: Believe in the ability of your fellow man to carry you to heights you are too incompetent to reach alone.
Reply
Re: Necromancers, Consent, and you! • on 5/7/2009 1:47:15 AM 512
Reply
>>Question. Can one walk around and attend tea parties if you have not been outed as a necro?
If nobody thinks to accuse you, and your Social Outrage isn't high enough for the citizens to string you up, you can walk around as you wish.
>>Or is there something specific about your character that smells funny?
Outrage smells funny. Divine Outrage will make it easier for people to detect what you are. Social Outrage makes it more likely the NPCs will take justice into their own hands. If both are kept low, your only problem is other PCs.
-Armifer <Kvlt> Step 1: Want stuff! Step 2: Be ambitious! Step 3: Believe in the ability of your fellow man to carry you to heights you are too incompetent to reach alone.
Reply
Re: Necromancers, Consent, and you! • on 5/11/2009 7:45:08 PM 523
Reply
>>I could seriously see a necro city cropping up or something...
When we were planning the event, one of the GMs suggested a side-plot. A pre-established NPC would start getting people together to create a Necromancer Outpost. It'd be a slightly more clandestine version of those gather materials / Trader sort of things. Big hooplah about the citadel of dark magic being constructed and a community of the damned being established.
Then the Inqusitors would come in, trash everything, detain and execute the PCs that got involved, and Walk the NPC.
The side plot was rejected, but only because nobody was free to write the mechanics.
-Armifer <Kvlt> Step 1: Want stuff! Step 2: Be ambitious! Step 3: Believe in the ability of your fellow man to carry you to heights you are too incompetent to reach alone.
Reply
Re: Necromancers, Consent, and you! • on 5/11/2009 7:58:50 PM 525
Reply
While I know there is a lot to say about cooperative storytelling and player interactivity, did anyone really believe we'd start the zombie apocalypse without a good idea of how it was going to end?
-Armifer <Kvlt> Step 1: Want stuff! Step 2: Be ambitious! Step 3: Believe in the ability of your fellow man to carry you to heights you are too incompetent to reach alone.
Reply
RE: Consent (I'm disappointed with all of you!) • on 6/7/2009 7:20:42 PM 610
Reply
>>Can you explain what that means?
It's pesudocode.
"If the PC is in an urban zone or justice zone, then increase Social Outrage. "If the PC is in an urban zone and justice zone, then increase Social Outrage moar."
-Armifer <Kvlt> Step 1: Want stuff! Step 2: Be ambitious! Step 3: Believe in the ability of your fellow man to carry you to heights you are too incompetent to reach alone.
Reply
RE: Consent (I'm disappointed with all of you!) • on 6/8/2009 1:08:57 AM 618
Reply
>>I've seen a few lines about how necromancy used on the self will carry less of a taboo then necromancy used on another.
No? At best you might get into the divide between Divine and Social Outrage: society doesn't care about what it can't see and isn't told about.
-Armifer <Kvlt> Step 1: Want stuff! Step 2: Be ambitious! Step 3: Believe in the ability of your fellow man to carry you to heights you are too incompetent to reach alone.
Reply
Re: Detection • on 7/6/2009 8:13:53 PM 623
Reply
>>Will necromancers be more obvious to other necromancers in the way that Thieves spot Thieves?
Nope.
>>In a similar vein, will there be repercussions for a Necromancer ACCUSing another Necromancer?
Not as it currently stands, though it might be funny to make a Social Outrage check on the accuser as well as the accused.
-Armifer <Kvlt> Step 1: Want stuff! Step 2: Be ambitious! Step 3: Believe in the ability of your fellow man to carry you to heights you are too incompetent to reach alone.
Reply
Re: A Piece of History • on 7/8/2009 1:15:06 AM 631
Reply
>>While I understand that it is unlikely to be a major facet of PC Necromancers, is there some advantaged to working with sentient or non-animal corpses? If so, could you hint or outright share it?
Peasents are easier to kill than bobcats and are distributed in conveniently placed clusters of huts and cottages.
Some more esoteric (and not in the hands of PCs at the start) forms of undead creation also places emphasis on the quality of the corpse. The ability to capture the personality of the corpse doesn't do much when you're dealing with a musk hog.
Spiritual Necromancers, such as Lyras or Maelshyve's slaves, have as much interest in working on a sentient, empowered soul as playing around with the flesh.
-Armifer <Kvlt> Step 1: Want stuff! Step 2: Be ambitious! Step 3: Believe in the ability of your fellow man to carry you to heights you are too incompetent to reach alone.
Reply
Re: A Piece of History • on 7/8/2009 3:52:42 AM 635
Reply
>>Hmmm.... is what Maelshyve does considered Necromancy, or does her otherworldly origins grant her a different method to achieve a similar effect?
It's necromancy. Most differences between the sort of wild things Maelshyvean disciples throw around and what a Philosopher does in his basement should be interpreted as limits in the power and scope of what the Philosopher is doing.
By intentionally avoiding demonic entanglements, the Necromancers who will learn from the approach of the Necromancer's Guild abandon access to a lot of powerful and exotic tools. That's the price of trying to make it through a career in necromancy with your soul, sanity, and free will intact -- most Necromancers on Elanthia end up losing at least one of the three.
-Armifer <Kvlt> Step 1: Want stuff! Step 2: Be ambitious! Step 3: Believe in the ability of your fellow man to carry you to heights you are too incompetent to reach alone.
Re: Necro Walks? • on 8/5/2009 5:10:34 PM 2303
Reply
>>I also wonder about whether liches are restored via demon favor or if their magics reconstruct them
Generally speaking, a lich reconstructs itself under its own power. The lich form is such a powerful type of undead that it literally just stands right the hell back up after you "kill" it.
However, keep in mind that liches are Very Special people. While PCs will eventually get access to a standard template lichdom, the NPC liches have almost all Descended in different ways and displayed radically different abilities and physiology. Lyras and Xerasyth are (were?) both liches, but clearly weren't using the same cook book.
-Armifer Re: Necro Walks? • on 8/5/2009 5:10:34 PM 2303
Reply
>>I also wonder about whether liches are restored via demon favor or if their magics reconstruct them
Generally speaking, a lich reconstructs itself under its own power. The lich form is such a powerful type of undead that it literally just stands right the hell back up after you "kill" it.
However, keep in mind that liches are Very Special people. While PCs will eventually get access to a standard template lichdom, the NPC liches have almost all Descended in different ways and displayed radically different abilities and physiology. Lyras and Xerasyth are (were?) both liches, but clearly weren't using the same cook book.
-Armifer >>Well, there have to be some limitations to what Empaths can do. Otherwise no one would die.
I'm not going to touch on permanent injuries too much, since I don't know enough about how they've been presented in the past, but I'll go for the limitations tangent. The ultimate limitation of Empathy-as-mortals-know-it is Life itself. The cycle of life, death, creation and destruction has a teleological weight behind it and, from there, a sense of what is "meant to be" and "not meant to be."
Empathy cannot create what was, within Life's set limitations, not meant to be. Life magic in general terms, powered by this cycle, cannot violate the cycle. To do so would be like trying to build a wall out of air (without a Warrior Mage): the medium simply cannot do what the magician in this case conceives it to do. Immortality is abhorrent to how the cycle works. Things are born, experience and contribute, then die off as the next generation takes their turn. Nature does not want you to live forever, but to have your rightful place in the cycle and then return from whence you came.
It's possible that there are some plateaus of Life magic that supersede this limitation, by tapping into some higher idea of life than the relatively crude mechanism of the Plane of Abiding, but if so nobody has proven it. Instead, this is traditionally where necromancy comes in; the magic of breaking the cycle.
-Armifer
Re: Zamidren Book is a Tea-Loving Necromancer • on 10/12/2009 6:33:06 PM 4364
Reply
>>It was a red herring though. He didn't actually explain anything. Zamidren probably put the symbols there himself. His explanations never made much sense, people just sort of accepted it because "oh the smart researcher/NPC said this is what it is so let's go."
Ding ding ding.
The explanation Book gave for the symbols had absolutely no relationship to the messaging you got studying them, or the visions Bards saw recalling them.
The symbols are Very Important. Important enough that Book apparently risked an audacious, bald-faced lie and threw someone under the bus to try and convince you to stop thinking about them. This may not be something you want to let him succeed at.
-Armifer
>>>And if we're busting out RL philosophers, Nietzche is not the first place I would go for a Philosopher of the Knife allegory. >>I'd call Nietzche perverse if I conformed to the typical sects of the mainstream. You know, the wool over the eyes sort: the fools. I'd be laughing if I wore gold.
The actual philosophy of the Philosophers is a fantasy-parody of Existentalism. In particular, the concepts of "terrible freedom" and personal ownership of good and evil get a lot of play when they are trying to excuse their atrocities.
Some Philosophers might have a Heideggerian slant on the world but, while it'd work perfectly well with the Great Work, most Philosophers would prefer something a bit more "solid" and regard that kind of thinking as Moon Mage business.
-Armifer
The two normal ways guilds create new spells:
1: The march of progress. The guilds have spell designers that understand the fundamental principles of their spell patterns ("This configuration of lines creates kinetic energy.") and slowly, painstakingly put them together into new configurations.
Entirely new principles could be discovered as well ("Oh, hey, Elemental mana can be used to produce lightning."), though the magic equivalent of pure research is more likely to produce explosions than viable results. Spell research is, by far, a more methodological thing than one of random moments of genius.
2: Historical finds. Many guilds are, in one sense or another, less than they used to be. In particular, the Bards, Moon Mages and Necromancers all have heritages that go far beyond what the modern organizations encompass. In those cases, spells can be found by delving into the past, finding lost grimories, and otherwise doing a little Indiana Jones action.
-Armifer
>>I'm really hoping they explore the Transference link and it's impact on how Necromancers do their thang. It is one of the more interesting facets of it for me OOC, and the line of research my character is the most interested in.
The main thing Empaths would understand about what Necromancers do isn't a grand theoretical system or even necessarily in any meaningful context: there is some sort of unsolvable incompatibility that prohibits Empaths from becoming Necromancers. Empaths who try to cross the invisible line... disappear. Nobody ever hears of them again and history forgets.
If anyone understands the mechanism, they found a reason not to talk about it. In a strictly quantitative sense, it makes Empaths a more moral group than the Moon Mages and Warrior Mages with their dime-store Sith.
-Armifer
>>I am at least pleased to see that you're discussing the Tribe as a faction of the Nomad Sect, rather than as an extension of the [fabled/hypothetical] Necromancers Guild (as I have often dreaded would happen).
Oooh, yes, that I can be clear on.
The Bonedancers are a part of the Nomads of the Arid Steppe's lore. Calling them Necromancers just because they have a corpse fetish is sort of like calling the Sophisters Warrior Mages just because they like kung-fu.
On the flip side, I'll put a strong emphasis that the true Bonedancers are not Necromancers, and will not have access to anything in that "sphere." They don't raise corpses or have a special knack for Necromancy. They are Moon Mages.
>>And as a side note, I hope Lasarhhtha has something to do with it.
That one I can't help you with. No matter what he chooses to call himself, the spirits of the steppe and the Plane of Probability have abandoned him. Wherever he walks now, he does so in darkness. Even Bonedancers, as depraved as they are, still have heights they can fall from. To lose what Lasarhhtha lost is profane even to them.
-Armifer
>>It could be too much parsing of words but Armifer does state "true Bonedancers" which I agree with. (Not to state that Kir was / was not a true Bonedancer or even to get into that debate).
Mostly a reference to Lasarhhtha, who calls himself a Bonedancer (despite being a Necromancer, a native of the Leth Deriel area, and a lizard).
I don't want to say it's impossible for Bonedancers to fall, or even imply that it's a large stretch of the imagination to go from the Bonedancers' depraved rites and sociopathy to an even deeper form of both. But as the Nomads know them, they still perform their sick divination rites and can, if nothing else, sense the obliteration of everything that clings around Necromancers like any Moon Mage. Sociopaths have self-preservation instincts too.
For the ones that do fall, they stop being able to function as shamans of any caliber. Even if the Bonedancers allow Necromancers among them (huge "if"), someone with enough pride and arrogance to go down that road certainly won't stand to lose the shaman's privileged position in his society and take orders like a common raider or sheep herder. They would strike out on their own, likely cursing the haughty Moon Mages for their fortune.
Switching to the Necromancer Guild perspective, I treat the Bonedancers somewhat like the Bone Elves: I won't look askance at anyone who RPs a background as a Bonedancer (or a Bone Elf) as long as they remember that in both case, they have severed their ties to their people by doing so. The Second Kir is not going to send any Necromancer care packages, and Sidhlot doesn't like the competition.
>>(Not to state that Kir was / was not a true Bonedancer or even to get into that debate)
Kir's an interesting case, especially since many, many centuries passed between Kir the peacebringer and Kir the bonedancer.
There's a few different ways to understand what's going on, and nobody except maybe Kir himself knows what's going on.
1) The modern Kir is a wholly different man, claiming a spiritual and historical precedent of "Kirness" to try and shape the tribes. 2) Kir did, in fact, fall to necromancy and everything I just told you is a lie intended to make the reveal more amusing for me. 3) It... really is Kir. Somehow.
-Armifer
What sorcery is has been a fairly confused issue. Since we're near enough to the Necromancer guild release, incoming lore wonk.
First, we need to separate out the social and the physical dimensions at work: they are not the same thing.
SOCIAL:
Okay, while we all play wise wizards of tremendous power and lore, the average person populating the Crossing does not really care what a mana stream is. They cannot see what you are doing with mana when you're casting the spell, only that you gesture and something happens. If you tried to explain sorcery as a manipulation of multiple manas and yadda yadda, most would think you are being pointlessly theoretical.
As far as society cares (as reflected in the justice system), whether something is or isn't sorcery depends on the spell. Limb Disruption is sorcery, it doesn't matter if you happened to have distilled it to use a single mana type. Shadows is not sorcery, even if you're casting it with Elemental mana.
This is semi-arbitrary, as all social structures are. What is and is not sorcery depends on society's iconic ideas here, moderated by the strong political powers of the magic-using guilds. Moon Mages, in particular, get a pass on some demonic looking stuff because the Celestians and Tezirites are working night and day to keep Moon Mages looking presentable and profitable to everyone involved.
This benefits Necromancers to some extent, because not everything they do is obvious. If a Necromancer casts a spell that is utterly invisible, he is "not doing sorcery" as far as society is concerned. The reverse is also true: anyone, regardless of guild, who casts an obvious necromancy spell "is a Necromancer" as far as the pitch-fork wielding mobs are concerned.
PHYSICAL:
There's been a lot of confusion about this, which I am about to add to. Consider this definitive and superseding any previous statements that conflict with this -- until the next GM after me does the same thing, anyway. Sorcery is the act of using multiple types of mana to empower a spell pattern. A sorcerous spell is one that is written to presume this is happening.
Let's take a step back and review two important background concepts to make sure we're all on the same page. A: Individual Elanthians cannot attune to more than one type of mana at once, due to physiological limits. Your nervous system becomes wired to your first attunement and just can't be made to "bend" in another direction. B: While the four mana frequencies share the majority of their qualities each each other, creating an understanding of all four as a single force we call mana, each also has distinct characteristics. Each one can be thought of as a different environment for spellcasting.
A sorcerous spell is one that was written that crosses the streams, which could only be cast "for reals" if you had access to two (or more) frequencies of mana feeding into it at once. Since you don't and you can't have access to that, this gives sorcerous spells the quality of being volatile and dangerous to everybody.
So, if that's the case, what's Arcane mana? Nobody except the Necromancers actually know ICly, but, hey, I'll tell you as part of a social experiment to see how fast it gets taken for IC knowledge anyway.
Remember, the limit on attunement is physiological. If you were a god sitting up there in the spiritual plane and got the urge to, you could probably create a being that was able to do it. For whatever reason they didn't do this, but they probably could've. And if you're a bunch of mortal magicians with a panache for freakish mutations of the human body and a well developed god complex, there's nothing to stop you from trying.
Attunement to Arcane mana involves some pretty substantial changes to how a Necromancer's nervous system works (in ye olde days, the Imperial Healers' Guild hypothesized that the social deviance of sorcerers was somehow linked to these changes to the brain -- fortunately, no one knows or cares about their pesudo-magical theories anymore). The goal of the procedure is to produce a magician that can see and operate with multiple types of mana at once.
It... doesn't quite work. Perhaps their method is still too crude and faulty, or perhaps the prohibition is wired even deeper into how the brain works than even they can manipulate, but the attempt always goes wrong. Even attuned to multiple mana types, in the Necromancer's perceptual sphere they superimpose upon each other into this freakish, aggregate, other kind of mana that does not really exist.
Necromantic spells are written to account for deranged movements of this "fifth frequency," but the lack of true multi-attunement perception means they can suffer like other people when casting outside their normal environment.
-Armifer
>>Where does arcane mana type fall on the holy - life - elemental - lunar ladder?
It doesn't.
>>Even attuned to multiple mana types, in the Necromancer's perceptual sphere they superimpose upon each other into this freakish, aggregate, other kind of mana that does not really exist.
Arcane mana is a perceptual illusion, an abstraction created by a brain that is being forced to process information that it was never designed to. Necromancers use multiple types of mana, but through a nightmare lens that robs them of any way to tell what is what.
-Armifer
>>I was asking mechanically, not conceptually. Do you have the same chance (independent of the spell's difficulty and whatever other factors) to for spell backlash for using spells that aren't based on arcane mana?
Necromancer backlash risk works differently than other MUs. They have an equal chance of backlash when casting Lunar, Elemental, and Life spells, rather than a sliding scale of difficulty. Holy mana presents some additional... complications that I'm tempted to leave as PAFO for my own amusement.
>>To go off on a theoretical tangent for a moment, does this mean that you could get two or more people attuned to different mana types to each put together their part of the spell and set it off at the same time to do "real" sorcery. Or does magic just not work that way?
It would take a nearly impossible amount of finesse, but it could be done. A more practical way to do "real sorcery" would be through the aid of some specialized magical devices. However, for what should hopefully be obvious reasons, this line of thought doesn't get explored publicly by any of the guilds.
-Armifer
Part of the confusion is that we've traditionally used "sorcery" to describe two related but distinct things: evil spells and a way of manipulating mana.
One of the differences of the current write up is I'm trying to draw a clearer distinction between sorcery (the act, theoretical outside of Necromancers, of using multiple manas at once), and something which is sorcerous (something that happens or exists in conceptual relation to this process).
A Paladin casting Shadows is not performing sorcery -- he is utterly incapable of doing so, since he can only ever jam Holy energy into a spell pattern. But the act of doing so creates the same risks as casting a sorcery, including the backfire iconic to sorcery blowing up in your face. It is fair to describe it as sorcerous.
This is confusing, and I might just invent some new term later on. Alternately, since this is a topic that involves arrogant, self-described "sorcerers" trying to skirt the laws of man and Immortals alike and torch-wielding mobs, some confusion in terms might be flavorful to keep.
-Armifer
Also, I am very serious about the later part of my last post: let me know if this just confused matters more, or if the distinctions being made are too convoluted. I'm not 100% happy the material I have to work with, and if it's still a mess I can look at more radical revisions. A bit of confusion and wordplay is fine, but actually struggling with the concept isn't.
>>It makes me happy that Arcane mana sounds like TES cosmology... impossible realities perceived because of 'mental stress.'
Reach for the stars in an attempt to do what they all say is impossible... create an unreal state that technically does the impossible at some horrible, unexpected price. It's Necromancers in a nutshell.
-Armifer
>>For some reason I thought necros were not going to have backlash from casting other scroll spells, or runes.
That was the initial plan. People complained, Grejuva and I realized we didn't actually care very much about the point, and threw sorcery risk back into it.
Works like this: Arcane spells = Considered native, even those that are not necromantic (but they still cannot cast guild-specific sorceries, such as Blackfire and Teleologic). Lunar, Elemental, Life = Low risk, equivalent to any other guild's best combination. Holy = DANGER, DANGER WILL ROBINSON!
Necromancers trade much, much larger complications in Holy magic to downgrade two other combination to low-threat. Perhaps not 100% fair, but it works and we can return to it if necessary once there's actually Necromancers.
>>The impression I got was that to the uneducated masses, Sorcery is magic that looks zomg flashy and evil. Casting a low-key spell like Shadows using non-lunar mana just wouldn't register for anyone.
This.
The presence of 3 strong, highly active guilds of wizards has helped narrow down the "zomg evil" response to the spells nobody claims, which creates a correlation-but-not-causation between public conception of what sorcery is and the theoretical, physics based use of the term.
If it ever comes down to it, the social element gets primacy over the term. It's easy enough to say that the academicians get annoyed and finally invent new terms, but there is something wondrously visceral and untouchable about a horrified commoner pointing at a casting of Blackfire and crying out in fear and rage, "Sorcerer!"
-Armifer
>>a guilded non necromancer (lets roll with a cleric for fun) casts a domination Sorcery spell: ie mana disruption. >>What does the necromancer see this as? >>What does the moonmage see this as?
They don't see anything untoward in isolation, since neither can perceive Holy mana, or would even necessarily know how the Cleric was "doing it wrong" even if they could.
>>Also a question when a necromancer casts this spell vs a cleric casting this spell, what is the mechanical and lore differnce?
Let's try a slightly different example and see if it still answers your question.
In the physics, there is no meaningful difference between a Cleric casting Shadows and a Cleric casting Mana Disruption -- they both generate the same risks through the same mechanism (which is called sorcerous backfire, since it is iconic to attempts at sorcery).
In society, there's a big difference, because people "know" that one is sorcery and the other is not due to the spell's presentation, effects, and historical background.
If you're a good ol' American empiricist, this would suggest society is right or wrong. A perhaps more informative way of looking at it is that they're measuring two different things.
-Armifer
>>Wait, now I'm confused, too. >>I was always under the impression that you can't fill a shadows spell with Holy energy and get anywhere- the problem was that in order to cast Shadows you had to manipulate Lunar mana blindly and hope you don't create something explosive.
That's something that gets changed in this explanation, yup. I call it a revision of the description of sorcery rather than a clarification for this reason -- we never were really clear up to this point what was going on, and I'm taking a stab at doing so.
I do still consider this tentative for now and am willing to adjust it to taste. Though part of the reason I go for "incompatible spells" rather than "stuffing Lunar mana in blindly" is that it better reflects the reality of what a PC experiences -- you never actually use Lunar mana values when casting Shadows unless you're a Moon Mage.
>>Will there be any necromantic spells that don't immediately flag someone as a necromancer to the masses?
>>This benefits Necromancers to some extent, because not everything they do is obvious. If a Necromancer casts a spell that is utterly invisible, he is "not doing sorcery" as far as society is concerned.
-Armifer
>>So... in light of this, casting a sorcerous spell would basicaly be the mage attempting to not just bend his mana into the spell pattern, but aggressively bend it in the way another mana frequency bends.
Yup. The background idea I'm running with is that each mana frequency has its own little quirks ("Woah, wait, don't join up those two lines at the crest of a mana wave, you'll overload it and backfire!") and mundane laws ("How do you say 'contact the spiritual plane' in Lunar?") that they don't necessarily share with the others. The difficulty increase reflects needing to know a far larger and esoteric body of knowledge to successfully translate a spell to your mana environment than you'd need to construct it natively.
And the unavoidable danger reflects that it's not a perfect science (if it was, everyone would have everybody else's spells at this point), and that even at your best there's a chance some freakish variable is going to slide off kilter and damn the whole work.
>>...that leaves unanswered the question of what's happening technically when you cast a genuine sorcery. Does the player ever interact with the other streams in casting? Or is all sorcery in the mold of Blackfire, where the sorcerous agent is only a token 'sliver' of mana?
Hrm, that could still be open. My immediate answer is that taking it this we, we relegate "sliver of Holy mana" into a metaphor. A Blackfire spell is almost a true Elemental spell, but relies just enough on Holy principles that are volatile in ELemental to work right.
However, it's not unreasonable to believe that a spell could, in extremis, be "programmed" (IC sense, not technical sense), to do mana manipulations of its own, without the caster's intervention, in some weird, sorcerous, Russian egg thing. On the other hand that also gets contrived and returns us back to where we originally were.
Let me give it some thought.
-Armifer
>>Armifer, I'm curious if there are any spells Necromancers will have, aside from the obvious analogous patterns, that the general populace doesn't immediately recognize as "ZOMG EVIIIIIL!!!".
Hrmph. I probably haven't been clear on this, since it keeps getting asked.
Yes, there are Necromancer spells that do not trigger the justice system. For ease of use and interpretation, we draw the line in a simple manner: if a spell has no externally sensible effect (think Clear Vision here) it's kosher. These spells almost all fall within the Corruption spellbook, but that's one of those correlation-not-causation things: some Corruption spells are obvious, and there's at least one Synthetic and one Transcendental spell that also qualify.
>>Also, I recall someone earlier mentioning that at character creation, a Necromancer will perceive as though they have another type of mana clinging to them, at least short term. How does this fit into the new mana type explanation? Is the Necromancer more attune to a particular pattern type?
There's no "magical destiny" thing meant to be applied to it. The Arcane attunement technique is fickle and very imperfect: a random mana type becomes slightly more prominent than the rest. No matter how thoroughly you shuffle your cards, there's always going to be a card at the top of the deck.
-Armifer
>>Of course who is to say the hounds of Rutilor didn't lie about the fate of Kigot? Wouldn't be the last time that the public face of an official entity hid failures by claiming victory.
Heh, I was betting on the side how long it'd take someone to suggest that.
Some Necromancers think Kigot is alive (or undead), while their peers put it on par with people who wouldn't give up Elvis. Critics point out two major flaws in this belief:
1: If he's alive... where is he? Kigot was not a quiet man -- the reason he was such a strange threat to the Temple was he couldn't shut up. In sharp contrast, no one can reliably claim to have seen him since his death. It would be wildly out of character for Kigot to simply sit somewhere quietly scheming instead of writing a tell-all book about what happened.
2: Given #1, even if Kigot survived... what's the point? Either Kigot is dead, or the experience left Kigot so scarred and changed that he is essentially not Kigot anymore. Either he's dead, or he's functionally dead.
However, I don't wish to protest overly much. It was written fully intending that Kigot could be spun off as a messiah figure with a few leaps of faith, so I'm not going to tell you it's a bad characterization. In the profound stress and religiosity of the Necromancers' life, it's entirely appropriate that some of them crack and desperately seek our their own brand of miracles.
>>And what is the Old Man, really?
There's a man that I used to know And sometimes he still visits with me When it's late and the alcohol's glow Is nearly gone and it's time to awaken
And he looks and he laughs at the sight And he asks what has happened to me And I blame it all on the lights But he smiles and says I'm mistaken
And there is no use in disguising What the eye can so clearly see That I've spent my whole life denying That the man in the mirror is me
...
In a child-like illusion of life He imagined the things yet to be But they all disappeared on this night Carried on among the forsaken
And there is no use in denying What the eye can so clearly see That one day I too will be dying And the man in the mirror agrees
>>I wonder if we'll find out more about what he is when the guild gets released.
Nope. You can find out more about him during the Redemption quest, which will not be available at release.
-Armifer
>>Oh ho... so there is more to being redeemed state then just... not using certain spells. Ever.
You lose a lot of your spells and your ability to use Thanatology (with the possible exception of a single, mostly useless ritual to circle with). You gain back the ability to have divine favors, lose any Divine Outrage penalties you're laboring under, and regain access to the holy widgets people are complaining about losing.
>>If you're bothering to develop a quest for it (and I admit, I'm considering making a redeemed necro) have you given any more thought to making it more playable then... how did you put it "A fallen paladin or a shocked empath"?
Zeyurn convinced me to relent enough to let them continue to circle (initially, you'd have been completely barred from fulfilling your reqs). Beyond that, no.
-Armifer
Reply
>>Firstly - Is Redeemed status still a one time ever thing - and is there still planned to be a point beyond which you cannot become Redeemed?
Yes and yes.
>>Secondly - So out of the three schools of necromatic thought... it seems fairly clear that the Philosophers of the Knife are intended to be the bulk of PCs just due to playability issues if nothing else and the other two paths are mostly there as lore coherency and "well if you REALLY want to go down that path...". Am I off base here?
I think it's not spoilering at this point that the "Necromancer Guild," as in the IC organization that the PCs join, is the Philosophers. How committed he is to the Great Work is his own business, beyond considerations about the hand that feeds him.
-Armifer
That was an advanced, but optional, puzzle. Solving it or not solving wouldn't have influenced the plot, but it existed to let people figure out well ahead of reveals what was about to happen if they synthesized all the material.
Zamidren painted the signs specifically to stir up discussion of them, one which reached the far corners of the Provinces. They were a coded message that was not meant for you, but your discussion of them acted as a carrier wave for those who could understand it to take heed.
It appeared over two days, as two distinct phrases.
Failure, Crucible Coagulation, Great Work. "We have failed our crucible
We must gather to conduct the Great Work"
It was the call for the Philosophers to gather.
The Bardic visions were an unintentional side effect, which, if you look over the logs now, you might notice Zamidren acted genuinely surprised by. They were not of a specific person, but rather a montage of scenes that each reflected the true meaning of the symbol within Zamidren's phrase. Failure showed the moral, personal failings of everyone involved -- Coagulation showed a Necromancer helping another Necromancer, etc.
It was 80% a symbolic vision illustrating Zamidren's true intent, 20% the universe making its own commentary on it.
-Armifer
>>You must be misinformed if you think all necromancers are like Lyras.
Actually, that was one of the points of the whole Lyras thing. There's nothing really special about Lyras, she was a convenient flesh puppet for a demon that wants really, really bad the eat you. Every you.
It will probably happen again. And again. And again. Each time dragging the world a little closer to obliteration until there is either no world or no Necromancers left.
Necromancy is bad.
-Armifer
>>So how long as Lyras been a flesh puppet? Before the she attacked the Prydaens.. oh and the Rakash, or only in the following years when she ran out of brains to eat?
The only people that could speak professionally on the point are currently be hunted down and burnt alive to protect the world from their taint and the unspeakable blasphemy which has percolated in their minds for a hundred years. Though you might be able to take an educated stab at it.
-Armifer