Possession vs. Materialization Options

[pbangarth]

Yes, shouldn't it at least be "any dicepool >= threshold"?

Peter

[MaxMahem]

In the years of gaming, I've personally seen:
- 14 hits on 7 exploding dice
- 13 hits with 14 regular dice
- 2 hits against TN 22 with 4 dice (SR 3)
- 2 hits against TN 13 with 2 dice (SR 3)
- 4 hits on 4 regular dice in 5 tests in a row
- four rolls of 20 on a d20 in a row
- 6 doubles on 2d6 in a row
and lots of others I don't even remember at the time

So no, I wouldn't disallow that roll purely because it's "not possible". That bar hangs a lot higher in the games I play in. Now no way is more correct than any other, it's purely personal preference, which is precisely why i advised bringing that up in your group. Those are the only people that need to agree on that.

I didn't say 'not possible' I said improbable. And while I won't call you a liar, some of the results you are quoting are statically very, very improbable.

For example, rolling 4 20s in a row (one of the most probable of your examples) has a 0.000625% change of happening. Or 1/160,000. Or the odds of rolling 6 doubles in a row on 2d6, which is ~.00002 or 1/50,000. These odds are poor, but the some of the odds you state are much worse. 4 hits on 4 regular dice in 5 tests all in a roll (essentially 20 sequential hits) is ~.00000003% or 3 in 10 billion. Calculating the odds of resisting drain of 30P with even a large resistance pool of say 15, is tricky due to the exploding dice, but a rough guesstimate puts the odds at considerably wore then your 20 sequential hits.

At some point you have to draw a line and rule that some results, while technically possible, are not something a character realisticly 'hope to achieve.' Comparing the odds in some cases it would be just as reasonable for my character to go by a lottery ticket, then burn a point of edge for critical success on the drawing. In fact in some cases the odds are probably considerably greater for hitting the jackpot then resisting damage greater than twice your pool.

Which is why I think a simple and reasonable rule of thumb as to when to allow the critical success rule would be, you can apply it whenever your dice pool is at least equal to your threshold. Beyond this, you have liitle hope of success.

---

As to the cheesyness of the GM burning edge to negate a players burn, come-on. The player is blatently twisting the rules in order to summon a spirit way more powerful then his character could normaly have. Whats more, a force 12 spirit is a incredibly powerful being, on par with a dragon or even a great dragoon. They have edge scores of 12 for a reason, and one of those is to thwart foolish mortals who try and bind them to his will. GM's should play NPCs (epsecially very powerful NPCs such as force 12 spirits) as intelligent creatures who use all of their resources (including their edge) to act in their own interest, not mindlest fodder for the PCs to walk all over. The GM didn't force the PC to burn his precious edge on a dangerous contest vrs a much more powerfull (and karmicaly far more lucky) being, that was his call. The player has no room to complain if that being decieds to use its superior resources in its own interest to thwart him.

But if you make reasonable limits on what a player can burn edge for in the first place it won't be a problem. Attempting to bind a force 12 spirit would result in extreamly lethal drain in most circumstances. Even worse if the spirit chooses to spend (not burn) its edge to resist the test. And since I wouldn't allow a player to burn edge for a critical success on this test, I doubt any player would want to take his chances on such a test.

[CoyoteNZ]

Topic seems to be going a little off topic, but all good.

I think the easiest solution to the burning edge to buy a success/crit would be to say the success had to be possible (even if not likely) without spending edge in the first place.

Ie, if you need 15 hits, and you have 15 dice, no problem, but if you need 16 hits, and only have 15 dice, yes it would be possible to do it with edge, but i'd say that it isn't probable, so no burning edge to buy it.


Maybe be a little more friendly, and say if your dp + edge dice is >= threshold, then you could buy it.


But that would just be my placehold.


On a similiar area, I am wondering, do you guys let people keep buying/burning edge, or do you put a limit on edge, and after you have brought/burnt that much, you are just out of luck?

[MaxMahem]

I think the easiest solution to the burning edge to buy a success/crit would be to say the success had to be possible (even if not likely) without spending edge in the first place.

I agree, and this seems to be the intention of the rule, which states exactly that. "the character must be capable of carrying out the action." Test where the threshold is higher than your dice pool are generally not possible, and so would not be candidates for this rule. In reality this doesn't restrict you from very many tests at all. Only truly absurdly obscene ones like trying to resist 30P drain.

Under the same logic some have present here you could have a runner jump a kilometer (or theoretically any distance). Since jumping is an Agility+Gymnastics test with a threshold equal to the distance in meters/2. So if you follow some of the logic here, jumping to the moon would be possible, the threshold is only ~20,000,000. Theoretically possible with even a dice pool of one with exploding dice you know...

On a similiar area, I am wondering, do you guys let people keep buying/burning edge, or do you put a limit on edge, and after you have brought/burnt that much, you are just out of luck?

A common approach is that when you burn edge it is gone from use, but still counts as purchased. Thus if you have an edge of 2 and burn one, you have to buy your next point as if it was point 3.

I personaly don't use this as I find the karma cost of edge is signigant enough in itself. If a player wants to continually buy and burn edge he is free to, but will pretty rapidly fall behind the other PCs.

[Cain]

I didn't say 'not possible' I said improbable. And while I won't call you a liar, some of the results you are quoting are statically very, very improbable.

Again, I've personally witnessed a player who *twice* summoned and bound/invoked Force 12 spirits. All without burning Edge. Now, let's say he goes for it a third time, and this time blows the roll. Should he be banned from burning Edge to succeed at a task he's already accomplished?

As to the cheesyness of the GM burning edge to negate a players burn, come-on. The player is blatently twisting the rules in order to summon a spirit way more powerful then his character could normaly have. Whats more, a force 12 spirit is a incredibly powerful being, on par with a dragon or even a great dragoon.

That's kind-of the GM cheese I'm referring to. You're blatantly favoring the spirit, and twisting the spirit of the rules to make the game go the way you want. A force 12 spirit is decidedly not on par with a Great Dragon; Buttercup is more than Force 12, and she was beaten by Dunkelzahn.

The waiting game is a logical alternative, I grant you. But remember that a bound spirit is forced to obey and prevented from overt attack or refusal of directions. If the GM plays an ornery, troublesome spirit looking for a chance to stick it to the Man, there is lots of opportunity for fun role-play and interaction on the part of player and GM. There is also lots of opportunity for the kind of cheese you decry.

There are fewer opportunities for GM cheese, though. Sure, twisting it's orders is fair game, but realistically it'll be up to the roleplay between the summoner and spirit. In my case, the player actually did a fair job of interacting with the spirits, and had Spirit Affinity with their type as well. They had fewer reasons to rebel than, say, a lower-force spirit who he's got a Bane against.

Ie, if you need 15 hits, and you have 15 dice, no problem, but if you need 16 hits, and only have 15 dice, yes it would be possible to do it with edge, but i'd say that it isn't probable, so no burning edge to buy it.

The issue here is that any roll that you might burn Edge on, you probably will have already spent Edge as well. So, you have the theoretically unlimited success problem again. Also, what happens if they burn Edge just because they're close, or because they really want to go from a marginal success to a Critical one?

For example, let's say you need 16 successes, and you have 15 dice with Edge. You roll and get 14 successes-- not enough, but only just. So, you burn an Edge. By your rule, you can't do that, even though you only needs 2 more successes.

Or what happens if the player successfully summons the spirit, with 1 net success. That gives him one service; but he decides that's not enough, and burns an Edge to gain 4 services out of it. What happens then?

The fact is, it's impossible to draw a statistical line between the possible and the impossible. Luckily, there is a clear line in this case: Assuming Magic 6, you cannot burn Edge to get a Force 13 spirit, no matter what.

[Dragnar]

I didn't say 'not possible' I said improbable. And while I won't call you a liar, some of the results you are quoting are statically very, very improbable.

Yes, they are, I know. Even with the millions of dice rolls I've witnessed, some of those were still absurdly unlikely, which is why I brought it up in the first place. Maybe my group is karmatically biased towards extreme rolls (I've seen a player fail every perception roll on three different characters for almost one real life year). I could still tell you the exact circumstances of each of these rolls, you never forget those wierd happenings.

At some point you have to draw a line and rule that some results, while technically possible, are not something a character realisticly 'hope to achieve.' Comparing the odds in some cases it would be just as reasonable for my character to go by a lottery ticket, then burn a point of edge for critical success on the drawing. In fact in some cases the odds are probably considerably greater for hitting the jackpot then resisting damage greater than twice your pool.

I agree in general, I merely pointed that it's highly subjective where you draw the line. You wont find an answer in the rules, you'll only find it in dialog with your group. I'd have no problem playing in a group with a much harsher interpretation of that rule than the one I'm used to, I'd just like to know beforehand.

Which is why I think a simple and reasonable rule of thumb as to when to allow the critical success rule would be, you can apply it whenever your dice pool is at least equal to your threshold. Beyond this, you have liitle hope of success.

This is a perfectly fine way to handle it, just not the only one. It irks you most, that a person could potentially automatically succeed in highly improbable tasks. It irks me more, that a person coud potentially not get the expensive automatic success in a task I've witnessed him succeding "naturally" already.
My Problem with that rule aren't the situation it applies to, but the ease of use and cheapness of invoking it. A character custombuild to abuse it pays almost nothing for automatic critical successess, so our group limits the amount of hand of god-invocations, not their effect. Different tastes.

[MaxMahem]

I agree in general, I merely pointed that it's highly subjective where you draw the line. You wont find an answer in the rules, you'll only find it in dialog with your group. I'd have no problem playing in a group with a much harsher interpretation of that rule than the one I'm used to, I'd just like to know beforehand.

Well I disagree, I think the intention of the rule is pretty clear. You can invoke it in only in situations where you still have hope of succeeding. Which to me means situations which the odds are slightly less then astronomical. There are plenty of things that are technically possible, but the odds for it are so long they are not things I could hope to occur. Surviving 30P drain is clearly one of those things. Its basically the magical equivalent of a THOR shot or some such.

And your right, while I don't think this is a rule who's interpretation would come up very often, I would be sure to let a player know that he would not be able to burn his edge to survive the binding drain before he tried it. Then again, any player trying such shenanigans is obviously up to no good, and so might deserve a little bit of my wrath.

This is a perfectly fine way to handle it, just not the only one. It irks you most, that a person could potentially automatically succeed in highly improbable tasks. It irks me more, that a person could potentially not get the expensive automatic success in a task I've witnessed him succeeding "naturally" already.

Oh just to be clear, I don't give two shakes as to how you handle the rule with your group. My only issue is with people who take a rather twisted view of the rule, and then proclaim it broken based upon this twisted interpretation. If the ability to the utterly, utterly improbable for a point of burnt edge is working fine for your group then by all means, please continue.

My Problem with that rule aren't the situation it applies to, but the ease of use and cheapness of invoking it. A character custombuild to abuse it pays almost nothing for automatic critical successess, so our group limits the amount of hand of god-invocations, not their effect. Different tastes.

I've never had a problem with the frequency of this rule being invoked. The karma cost for re-buying edge is non-trivial. And for most truly unpleasant abuses multiple burns are required. which raises the cost significantly. Burning edge is one of the few assets a player spends karma on that is totally disposable. Unlike virtually everything else you buy with karma, the karma wasted re-buying edge gives you nothing besides that individual action it was spent for. Making that success a pretty expensive one indeed.

[Whipstitch]

I really do wish people would quit trying to do the really out there stuff with spirits though. I'm afraid of rolling up a Magician for a PbP game or something and making the GM feel uncomfortable when he realizes I want to gun for Invocation and around/over a dozen dice for a particular Spirit type because he's worried that I'll make something truly ridiculous. By my way of thinking, it's actually much more practical to Summon, Bind and Invoke a few Force 3 Plant Spirit in order to always have a few excellent well-rounded regenerating Spirits with multiple services and Powers on call than it is to try to and come up with some Force 8+ Wrecking Ball of Doom.

[pbangarth]

I'm with you Whipstitch, on the value of Invoking lesser force spirits. More services, that take less time to 'recharge' with a rebind and less cost to do it.

And of course, you can have one possess your character to make him more likely to survive the Invoking of the Wrecking Ball of Doom. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

Peter

[Tyro]

I'm with you Whipstitch, on the value of Invoking lesser force spirits. More services, that take less time to 'recharge' with a rebind and less cost to do it.

And of course, you can have one possess your character to make him more likely to survive the Invoking of the Wrecking Ball of Doom. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

Peter

Thirded. Also, if you really want a single uber-spirit, go on a Familiar ordeal (or research the spirit formula yourself) and get yourself an ally spirit.

[Whipstitch]

The more services bit is a big one; I don't see much point in going through all the effort of binding a high powered Spirit if the cantankerous bugger only owes you a paltry couple of services to begin with. Let's face it, the big reason to call upon a such a high powered Spirit is usually because of the sheer tanking power it offers; the big dicepools are nice, but at the end of the day, such a critter is probably going to be overkill for anything but combat (and likely even that!). If the only thing you're going to do with such a monstrosity begins and ends at "Sic 'em!", then I don't really see the point in binding as opposed to summoning on the fly or just prior to the run to begin with. I mean, yeah, sure, it sucks to risk heavy drain in the midst of or just prior to a run, but in many ways it's just as viable a tactic as risking your life and blowing wads of Edge on binding such a freakishly powerful critter in your spare time.


But hey, don't mind me. Feel free to return to your regularly scheduled but largely academic flailing about.

[Cain]

Well I disagree, I think the intention of the rule is pretty clear. You can invoke it in only in situations where you still have hope of succeeding.

Wrong again. I know you're going to point a finger and yell: "Collaborative Gamer! Heretic! Unclean!", but this is clearly a decision to be made based on group consensus. It's another house rule, and it needs to be understood up front.

And your right, while I don't think this is a rule who's interpretation would come up very often, I would be sure to let a player know that he would not be able to burn his edge to survive the binding drain before he tried it. Then again, any player trying such shenanigans is obviously up to no good, and so might deserve a little bit of my wrath.

First of all, how would you know if said player was planning on burning Edge? Like I said, I've seen a guy summon and bind/invoke two rating 12 spirits; I've personally bound a force 10 spirit. And what happens if the drain is minimal? If all he needs is two successes, but critically botches, why can't he spend Edge anyway?

You're throwing arbitrary levels at us, not hard statistical guidelines. If you can show us a point where the odds drop off significantly, you'd have a case.

[pbangarth]

You're throwing arbitrary levels at us, not hard statistical guidelines. If you can show us a point where the odds drop off significantly, you'd have a case.

It is difficult to develop a table of statistics, because the abilities of the mage, both in the Binding Test and in the Drain Resistance Test are so variable. I've made up a partial table for a conjurer of mine, but realistically, I avoid pushing the limit because the incremental improvement in power is not worth the risk. And I hate the idea of burning Edge.

Peter

[Cain]

That's rather the point. Arbitrarily saying: "You can't burn Edge to beat 15 successes!" when you're throwing 51 dice is patently absurd. I'm no mathematician, but if you're going to be unilaterally throwing down limits like that, you need to have more justification than your gut instinct.

[MaxMahem]

Not to be a jerk, but Cain your still on ignore so if your responding to my posts, I ain't seeing it, and am not really interested in what you have to say.

[pbangarth]

That's rather the point. Arbitrarily saying: "You can't burn Edge to beat 15 successes!" when you're throwing 51 dice is patently absurd. I'm no mathematician, but if you're going to be unilaterally throwing down limits like that, you need to have more justification than your gut instinct.

I'm not the one who said you can't burn Edge. I'm the one who said if the magician can choose to burn Edge, so can the spirit he's trying to bind. And the GM is the one who is required to make that decision for the spirit.

I agree with your point that if the GM decides there are limits on what is legitimate, he should have some idea of why he picked the limit he did. Sitting down and generating a table of dice pool vs. average hits would be one way to set up a framework on which to base that decision. I'm sure there are others just as legitimate.

Peter

[Cain]

I'm not the one who said you can't burn Edge. I'm the one who said if the magician can choose to burn Edge, so can the spirit he's trying to bind. And the GM is the one who is required to make that decision for the spirit.

I agree with your point that if the GM decides there are limits on what is legitimate, he should have some idea of why he picked the limit he did. Sitting down and generating a table of dice pool vs. average hits would be one way to set up a framework on which to base that decision. I'm sure there are others just as legitimate.

Never said you were. It seems to be Max who doesn't think it's GM cheese to burn Edge willy-nilly, but since he's not going to defend his arguments, we'll never know.

On the other hand, I know that I'd personally be reluctant to have an NPC ever burn Edge. If the players pull it off, they should get it. There should be consequences, of course, and the loss of karma is a big one. I personally think that the waiting game is the better option for the spirit.

And you're right, of course, that there could be many solutions to the "No hope of achieving" problem. I think that all of them are going to require group consensus, honest discussion, and open communication. You'll also need something more than a gut feeling, or a flat formula that doesn't take into account situational modifiers. You need something solid.