Spirit Abuse, Minding your Binding Options

[Snow_Fox]

I'm a pracising Wiccan RL so I'll add my 2 cents here but the general rule of thumb is be polite. Treat them as a friend who owes you a favor and you're calling it in, not a Master or conqueor.

there is 1 weird taboo. I do not ask you to believe me on this, but since much of SR's magic theory comes from the same place as modern pagen faiths i would treat it as a pretty good source. Never EVER say thank you. For some reason, and this is consistant in legends myth and folklore, this is the absolute worst thing you can do. The problem is that if you a polite and well brought up this is something you are tuahgt is correct. With years of practice i have learned to avoid this phrase but merely to acknowledge "That is good work" or "this is a better job because you helped" is ok, an acknowledgment of their skill and contribuiton without the taboo gratitude.

I'd love to know the osurce of this taboo. For those of you who don't get what I'm talking about, remember the sotry of the elves and the shoe maker.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

I'm a pracising Wiccan RL so I'll add my 2 cents here but the general rule of thumb is be polite. Treat them as a friend who owes you a favor and you're calling it in, not a Master or conqueor.

there is 1 weird taboo. I do not ask you to believe me on this, but since much of SR's magic theory comes from the same place as modern pagen faiths i would treat it as a pretty good source. Never EVER say thank you. For some reason, and this is consistant in legends myth and folklore, this is the absolute worst thing you can do. The problem is that if you a polite and well brought up this is something you are tuahgt is correct. With years of practice i have learned to avoid this phrase but merely to acknowledge "That is good work" or "this is a better job because you helped" is ok, an acknowledgment of their skill and contribuiton without the taboo gratitude.

I'd love to know the osurce of this taboo. For those of you who don't get what I'm talking about, remember the sotry of the elves and the shoe maker.

My Wife is Wiccan, and she would heartily agree with you...

Keep the Faith

[Draco18s]

I'm not entirely sure how that follows, so I looked the story up (I am not that familiar with it, but I've heard it).

The next day the wife said to the shoemaker. ’These little wights have made us rich, and we ought to be thankful to them, and do them a good turn if we can. I am quite sorry to see them run about as they do; and indeed it is not very decent, for they have nothing upon their backs to keep off the cold. I’ll tell you what, I will make each of them a shirt, and a coat and waistcoat, and a pair of pantaloons into the bargain; and do you make each of them a little pair of shoes.’

The thought pleased the good cobbler very much; and one evening, when all the things were ready, they laid them on the table, instead of the work that they used to cut out, and then went and hid themselves, to watch what the little elves would do.

About midnight in they came, dancing and skipping, hopped round the room, and then went to sit down to their work as usual; but when they saw the clothes lying for them, they laughed and chuckled, and seemed mightily delighted.

Then they dressed themselves in the twinkling of an eye, and danced and capered and sprang about, as merry as could be; till at last they danced out at the door, and away over the green.

The good couple saw them no more; but everything went well with them from that time forward, as long as they lived.

The couple was thankful and repaid the elves, but did not say "thank you" to them. And even though the elves left, the cobbler and his wife still prospered.

(In any case, I do agree with your point, though I am not well versed in the mythology)

[Nifft]

If the Summoner is constantly hogging spotlight time with repetitive spirit use, then that's spirit abuse.

See, this is exactly what I want to avoid. I don't want to say to a player: "Hey, good job using your abilities to make your character effective! As a reward, FUCK YOU, your tools now hate your guts!"

Seriously, if the Sammy were to get very creative with stealth rope, he would not start suffering rope-related penalties.

[Draco18s]

See, this is exactly what I want to avoid. I don't want to say to a player: "Hey, good job using your abilities to make your character effective! As a reward, FUCK YOU, your tools now hate your guts!"

Seriously, if the Sammy were to get very creative with stealth rope, he would not start suffering rope-related penalties.

On the other hand...it can go too far.

[Shinobi Killfist]

On the other hand...it can go too far.

The first story sounds like the GM was just being a dick. If the motor isn't strong enough just tell the player that. The character would know this even if the player does not.

[Draco18s]

The first story sounds like the GM was just being a dick. If the motor isn't strong enough just tell the player that. The character would know this even if the player does not.

I suspect that it wasn't the first instance, the intro says that the player was constantly trying to use his grapple gun for stuff.

[Saint Sithney]

See, this is exactly what I want to avoid. I don't want to say to a player: "Hey, good job using your abilities to make your character effective! As a reward, FUCK YOU, your tools now hate your guts!"

Seriously, if the Sammy were to get very creative with stealth rope, he would not start suffering rope-related penalties.

There is a difference between being effective and ruining everyone else's fun. Why is it that everyone seems to assume malice when a GM talks about trying to cool out an abusive player? It's like people can't wait to imagine some sort of exception so that they can argue that it ought to dictate the rule. Spirit abuse rules were created specifically to keep players from abusing spirits, not characters. It should basically be assumed that a character who is a world class summoner should know how a Spirit wants to be treated. The characters don't just cash in magical points to know how to do things; that's the players. Characters have dedicated huge amounts of time and energy into these pursuits, and so it follows that they know what they are doing. Players should try to roleplay this, but if they're not there yet as players, a GM shouldn't need to penalize anybody. However, if they are to the point where they know how to roleplay it properly, but they're still causing problems within the game, no amount of ghost etiquette is going to change the fact that they're making the game less fun for everyone else involved.

Now, before you go back into defensive mode, if you aren't making the game less fun for other players, then this doesn't apply to you. As far as I'm concerned, if everyone's having a good time, then no spirits are being abused. If you are stepping on everyone's toes and going overboard on every run, then cut that shit out already. Otherwise, "spirits" are going to get pissy. If you summon a Spirit of Man and tell him to cast a combat spell for you, even though it's not the Spirit which fills the Combat role for your tradition, well, that's a spiritual faux pas, sure, but it's not abuse until it becomes a habit. If you need to send your tradition's Combat Spirit on a suicide attack so that your team can make their escape, then so be it. Do it again and again and, yep, that's abuse. Time to think up a better plan, guy.

Also don't know how you can take me saying "repetitive" and turn that into "very creative" in your mind. If a Rigger decided to solve every situation by dropping five Aztechnology series 5 Iron Bombs on the complex (which would cost as much nuyen as a single Force 4 Bound Spirit btw,) then, yeah, eventually there would be repercussions. Same as if the Sammy decided to "get very creative" by using Ringu (which would cost as much as a single Force 5 Bound Spirit) to insta-kill every single threat that came along. There's a difference between using something and over-using it. That difference is abuse.

[The Jopp]

There is a difference between being effective and ruining everyone else's fun.

I am quite certain that that isn't what they mean by spirit abuse.

Spirit abuse for a magician is treating a spirit badly, what you describe is character or equipment abuse.

Yes, we change the condition for the run if the sammie is using his LMG as a solution for everything, or the mage calling down a F5 spirit on everything or the hacker hacing everything - but that is completely different from what spirit abuse is all about.

It's more akin to a magical version of child abuse or domestic violence - not how often a player makes his character use the same equipment over and over again because the GM hasn't managed to be creative enought to force the players to think.

BUT...

I do agree with you that if any player takes the limelight every single time and everyone else plays card while said character cleans house then something must be done - punishing the player because they use the tools at their disposal might be wrong though.

[Shinobi Killfist]

I suspect that it wasn't the first instance, the intro says that the player was constantly trying to use his grapple gun for stuff.

And?

Who cares if the player loves his grapple gun. Why should a GM get a bug up his ass because a player found a gimmick they thought was cool. Oh noes one of my players is trying to have fun, I got to stomp on that. Given that another player drives his motorcycle up 6 flights of stairs to his apartment every day it does not look like they are going for a totally serious game, so grapple gun guy seems to fit in fine.

[Nifft]

There is a difference between being effective and ruining everyone else's fun. Why is it that everyone seems to assume malice when a GM talks about trying to cool out an abusive player?

Because it's idiotic to punish a character in order to combat a player's social problems, and it seems like there's no other use for the "spirit abuse" rules.

If you've got problem players, talk to them or give them the boot.

Also don't know how you can take me saying "repetitive" and turn that into "very creative" in your mind.

I didn't. Those were two separate paragraphs. I did turn "repetitive" into "effective", because you assume the same trick keeps working.

But fine, let's go with "repetitive": how many bullets is it going to take before the Sammy gets a penalty for his boring and repetitive and spotlight-stealing use of a big gun to shoot people? Assume he always uses EX-EX bullets just for extra repetitiveness.

Cheers, -- N

[DireRadiant]

If you've got problem players, talk to them or give them the boot.

What if I want to do neither of those? Could the GM's implementation of certain in game elements come in to play? How is potential spirit abuse and it's consequences for a mage different then adding just that smidgen bit of firepower or armor to that Security Goon for the HMG wielding Troll?

[HappyDaze]

But fine, let's go with "repetitive": how many bullets is it going to take before the Sammy gets a penalty for his boring and repetitive and spotlight-stealing use of a big gun to shoot people? Assume he always uses EX-EX bullets just for extra repetitiveness.

For me, it was SnS that got repetitive and abusive, right alongside Stun Bolt.

[Nifft]

What if I want to do neither of those? Could the GM's implementation of certain in game elements come in to play? How is potential spirit abuse and it's consequences for a mage different then adding just that smidgen bit of firepower or armor to that Security Goon for the HMG wielding Troll?

If you're using in-game elements to solve meta-game social problems, IMHO you're just making more problems for yourself. In your example, you've made the Troll's tactics slightly less effective, but you may have totally hosed the pistol-wielding Face and anyone else who is a secondary combatant.

You haven't shifted the spotlight.

Cheers, -- N

[Ol' Scratch]

What if I want to do neither of those? Could the GM's implementation of certain in game elements come in to play? How is potential spirit abuse and it's consequences for a mage different then adding just that smidgen bit of firepower or armor to that Security Goon for the HMG wielding Troll?

People don't really learn much when you solve every problem by being a dick. Especially if the problem is that you're perceiving the other player as the one being the dick. All it does is build up animosity between the GM and the players rather than actually doing anything to improve the situation.

If the player is playing a character who intentionally abuses his spirits because it's appropriate to his character and tradition, that's one thing. The consequences are appropriate and expected. If the player is just doing it because he doesn't quite understand the repercussion, and is likely doing lots of other dumb things because of that lack of understanding, then that should be resolved by... you know... actually talking to him and explaining things.

Roleplaying games aren't GM vs. Players. They're a form of shared storytelling. Character conflicts should be a part of the storytelling, not one side of the game table waving their dick around and acting holier-than-thou.

[Nifft]

For me, it was SnS that got repetitive and abusive, right alongside Stun Bolt.

Those certainly are powerful, especially in combination.

People don't really learn much when you solve every problem by being a dick. Especially if the problem is that you're perceiving the other player as the one being the dick. All it does is build up animosity between the GM and the players rather than actually doing anything to improve the situation.

If the player is playing a character who intentionally abuses his spirits because it's appropriate to his character and tradition, that's one thing. The consequences are appropriate and expected. If the player is just doing it because he doesn't quite understand the repercussion, and is likely doing lots of other dumb things because of that lack of understanding, then that should be resolved by... you know... actually talking to him and explaining things.

Roleplaying games aren't GM vs. Players. They're a form of shared storytelling. Character conflicts should be a part of the storytelling, not one side of the game table waving their dick around and acting holier-than-thou.

Bingo.

- - -

Alright, it seems like there's nothing in-game which could count as spirit abuse (except for Spell Binding, which a mage shouldn't ever use anyway since Spirits of Man exist).

Am I right that being "disrupted" isn't actually harmful to a spirit, so using a spirit as a decoy isn't particularly dangerous to it?

Thanks, -- N

[HappyDaze]

Alright, it seems like there's nothing in-game which could count as spirit abuse (except for Spell Binding, which a mage shouldn't ever use anyway since Spirits of Man exist).

Not all magicians have easy access to Spirits of Man.

[DireRadiant]

People don't really learn much when you solve every problem by being a dick. Especially if the problem is that you're perceiving the other player as the one being the dick. All it does is build up animosity between the GM and the players rather than actually doing anything to improve the situation.

What if I was introducing Spirit abuse as a story element?

There is a major element of the role playing game that has absolutely nothing to do with the mechanics. If I wanted to strictly model a game world mechanic a table top RPG is not the first tool I would consider for this.

Everyone replying has made an assumption I am suggesting the spirit abuse option as a mechanic I would use to punish a player. What if I am using them to provide a dramatic element for the PC? This isn't any different then if I am presenting a NPC to the players. The NPC could be helping or hindering the PCs. The vast majority of the game mechanics revolve around combat. Does this mean all NPC must fight the PCs all the time?

When the PCs abuse their Mr. Johnson we all know how that is going to turn out don't we? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) It doesn't take mechanical rules to figure it out.

[Ol' Scratch]

What if I was introducing Spirit abuse as a story element?

That doesn't have anything to do with the meat of what I said in my previous post. That's a part of shared storytelling. Pulling the "spirit abuse" rules out just to teach that player who's annoying you with how they're handling their spirits isn't -- it's jumped to a me vs. them mentality. Especially if that's your only action, with no attempt to explain to them why or how they're doing something inappropriate.

[DireRadiant]

That doesn't have anything to do with the meat of what I said in my previous post. That's a part of shared storytelling. Pulling the "spirit abuse" rules out just to teach that player who's annoying you with how they're handling their spirits isn't -- it's jumped to a me vs. them mentality. Especially if that's your only action, with no attempt to explain to them why or how they're doing something inappropriate.

Aha, I looked back through the thread at my original quoting, and I see what you are responding to. I should have been clearer to begin with. If a player is being a problem I always talk to them, or throw them out. But part of the talk discussion might be pointing out if the player is being abusive in the game and staking their claim on "It's mechanically allowed" argument that the GM has more options then the player to be abusive and we don't want to go down that path. That's not really the point I wanted to make though. Poor on my part I screwed up.

My main point is that my use of the Spirit Abuse option is a game story decision and is not driven by mechanics in any way whatsoever, and it does not need to be mechanically driven any more then NPC decisions.

[Draco18s]

Am I right that being "disrupted" isn't actually harmful to a spirit, so using a spirit as a decoy isn't particularly dangerous to it?

Ever seen Fullmetal Alchemist?* How upset did the homunculi get at their creator for having to regenerate?

Hint: not at all. They got mad at the people causing them pain.

So, yes, a spirit will get miffed at getting disrupted, but it is unlikely that it will get mad at its summoner for it (unless the spirit is clearly out-classed and wouldn't have any net effect on the opponent; eg. throwing a F2 spirit at the Damage Sponge Troll wielding the HMG).

*Better example: the newer Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood, where it happens more often and makes more sense. Not-a-spoiler: the homunculi have philosopher stone "cores" that provide them with the equivalent exchange to be semi-immortal. Mustang actually rips Lust's stone out of her chest in an attempt to heal Havok, but she just regenerates around his hand.

[Saint Sithney]

Alright, it seems like there's nothing in-game which could count as spirit abuse (except for Spell Binding, which a mage shouldn't ever use anyway since Spirits of Man exist).

Am I right that being "disrupted" isn't actually harmful to a spirit, so using a spirit as a decoy isn't particularly dangerous to it?

Thanks, -- N

I provided a perfectly legit in-game example of Spirit abuse - using a Spirit to perform actions outside of its Traditional role. It is something which would put a spirit off, and, if done often enough, would lead to repercussions.

And, yeah, spirits don't like to be disrupted. No one likes to take a beating. If a mage is sending Spirits into combat to get beat down over and over again, then that's going to cheese the spirits off. Though, honestly, he should just be summoning more powerful spirits...

[Nifft]

I provided a perfectly legit in-game example of Spirit abuse - using a Spirit to perform actions outside of its Traditional role. It is something which would put a spirit off, and, if done often enough, would lead to repercussions.

If my tradition is Hermetic, is it "spirit abuse" to treat them as more than mere tools?

And, yeah, spirits don't like to be disrupted. No one likes to take a beating. If a mage is sending Spirits into combat to get beat down over and over again, then that's going to cheese the spirits off. Though, honestly, he should just be summoning more powerful spirits...

Well yeah. Ineffective spirit use is really its own punishment.

Still, I could see a Combat spirit being happy at the chance to test itself against a superior foe... or at least, I could see that argument being, since the book doesn't say either way.

Cheers, -- N

[Daddy's Litt...]

In Shinto you make a point of saying "thank you." Not doing so is considered rude and pretty much ensuring that in future the best you can hope for is that the Kami will ignore you.

[Yerameyahu]

Everyone has their own completely arbitrary customs. As long as your character follows his personal completely arbitrary customs, everything's fine.