Okay, I'm going over the Banishing rules with a new player, and we stumble across something interesting.

If you do well enough on a Banishing test, you can take control of the spirit. This means, you could potentially command and bind a type of spirit you cannot usually summon. Correct so far? And said spirit keeps all his powers, right?

Now here's the kicker. Can it keep the Possession power?

If it does, you can theoretically command it to possess you, and do (roughly) what you want it to. If you can't, it's relatively useless, since it cannot materialize to use its powers on the physical plane. The Possession power is part of the spirit's abilities, after all.

So, what happens when you steal a Possession spirit?

Discuss.

I don't think I would want to command a spirit that I had just "stole" to possess me without the Channeling Metamagic, which I for one would never let a non-possession Mage learn in the first place.

Yes, you could gain access to a possession spirit this way. Very nice toy, certainly worth a slot on your list of bound spirits.

You will likely not want to buy the channeling metamagic, so how about preparing a mini-drone vessel?

As far as I know, the Spirit retains all their normal Powers and other stats when taken over by Banishing. So, yes, you could indeed have it possess your character, if you were so inclined.

Unless their previous master abused them, most spirits won't take kindly to another master stealing them and forcing them into service, more so if the spirit is from another tradition then the magician. Expect such spirits to use edge on summoning and binding resistance tests, and to subvert orders.

Here is a question, is you stole a bound spirit that you couldn't normally summon...say an invoked guidance spirit, could you build an ally spirit with one of their powers...say astral gateway?

If you are stealing invoked spirits, you are clearly a god and command the astralverse

In truth, though, doesn't the rules on Ally Spirits state that it can have any power from spirits you can summon? The inability to summon said Guidance spirit seems the rub.

And if you manage to successfully banish a spirit without knocking yourself the fuck out, let me know.

Which is why dedicated spirit thieves do their research and gather information about magicians who treat their spirits badly.
Knowledge skills such as Mages Who Abuse Bound Spirits, Badass Mages From Other Traditions Than My Own or Spirits Looking For New Employment may come in handy.^^

This is a pretty gray area, but I believe that while one can Banish any spirit, the ensuing opportunity to Summon is still restricted to spirits that are part of the summoner's tradition.

The text under "Banishing" on page 180, SR4 says, " can make a Summoning Test against the spirit before it departs." Three points must be considered.

1) Let's assume the spirit is one of the 5 types allowed by the magician's tradition. If the spirit has been summoned by a Possession Tradition mage, then after being Banished it will automatically go into the Astral Plane. It can't exist on the Material Plane outside of a vessel. What is to say that the Summoning from a different tradition would not transform the spirit into a Materialization form as part of the process? The whole discussion of what spirits really are argues that it could be that the form of the spirit is determined at least in part by the character of the summoner.

2) A Materialization Tradition Mage would not have the ability to control, direct or manipulate possession. Any more than she could deal with Sprites.

3) The Summoning Test is described on page 179, SR4. It says, "A magician may only summon spirits of her tradition." You may very well make a Summoning Test, but if the spirit doesn't match your list of 5 types, you will fail. It won't come to you. End of story.

Peter

No, the developers have right come out and stated that you can play Pokemon with any and all Spirits, even those your character could not normally summon himself.

Fortune, any chance you can tell me where the developers said that?

Also, cool quote from Rommel. Any idea where he said that? I'd like to get the context.

Peter

I'm looking for the thread.

As for the Rommel quote, sorry but I have no idea. I read it in a book as being credited to him, but it lacked context.

Here's a couple of threads ...

Can you bind a spirit from another tradition?

Banishing (not this thread!)

In case you were not aware of it, FrankTrollman wrote the Spirit chapter for Street Magic.

Though it must be said that not everything the Frank says he intended was approved to be in the actual rules. (It sometimes would have been better if it had, mind you *cough*bloodzilla*cough*).

At any rate, I don't think it's unbalanced under most circumstances for a materialisation mage to banish and control possession spirits or vice versa. The effect of this when you have a team containing both kinds of magician however, might be a bit more interesting, as they try to swap spirits with each other.

Khadim.

I would think that "swapping" spirits back and forth willy-nilly would count towards abuse.

Good idea.

I don't know. If summoning in itself wasn't abuse, then why would "swapping" be abuse? Why would the spirit care which silly human gave the orders if it was amenable to taking orders in the first place? (This assumes a less 'personal' relationship between summoner and spirit. If the flavor of your magical approach involves bargaining or wooing the spirit for favors, I might see them as viewing the banishing/summoning [bait-an-switch?] trick differently.)

Also, in this scenario, which mage would pick up the bad reputation - the acquiring mage or the mage who gives the spirit away?

Where this gets really abusing (from a balance angle) is once again spirits of man. If you swap an F6 spirit of man you could also give it two spells that cost you money and time (re-binding) rather than karma.

Well it's very much a flavour issue. I agree that summoning could be considered unpleasant (and in some circumstances, I would have a spirit resist it with Edge), but I just regard the banishing process as definitely unpleasant. There's no requirement to view it like that, I just see it as such.

As to who gets the bad reputation... well even a Force 3 spirit is as smart as most people you know. I'd say the spirit will be irritated by both mages if they're friends and deliberately arranging to swap the spirit with each other. But as you say, it's a flavour thing, though imo a good one.

K.

I don't know enough to go one way or the other, but would swapping really constitute spirit abuse? Particularly if the spirit is then well-treated and seldom used?

Context is everything, and this would be an area where I'd look to the traditions involved as a guide. A Shaman entrusting an ancestor spirit to the service of a respectful Buddhist ally might have different consequences than a Nahuali lending a manifestation of his spirit twin to a Hermetic who views spirits as simple astral constructs.

What we have to consider here is that the team in this example would have access to both types of spirits anyway.
I can imagine some examples where it would really expand the team's abilities, e.g. only one of the mages would have to pick up the invoking metamagic.
In the case of, say, a Hermetic with CHA 1 and a Houngan with CHA7, it may also be useful to hand spirits over to the houngan to have a more well-rounded arsenal of spirits at hand, as the Houngan could bind 6 more spirits than the Hermetic.
No need to run around with 1 materialization and 7 posession spirits when you can arrange something more flexible, right?

However, effects of this would be pretty minor.
Yeah, the houngan could have a spirit of man sustain 2 F6 natural spells on him.
But this would also be the case without handing over control and the spirit's spell selection wouldn't change, either.

Balance wise, i don't see much of an issue here, with very minor exceptions, the team's ressources stay the same and what little improvement is achieved is just an acceptable and certainly not unbalancing effect of good teamwork (and keep in mind that it involves buying up a skill a lot of players would normally ditch).

As far as the fluff is concerned, however, keep in mind that being banished is painful to the spirit.
Such attempts should ideally either be reserved to emergencies like averting a magical threat or be combined with efforts to appease the spirits for their discomfort, by offering sacrifices to them (above the point where sacrifices are a part of Binding anyway), fulfilling tasks in their interest and so on.

If such preparations are met, i see no problem with swapping spirits within the team.

However, deliberately giving away spirits becomes potentially nasty when you include people outside of the team.
Say, a kind of Hermetic slave trader ring who sells spirits of man to traditions who normally cannot summon them (man, this thread gives some great ideas for my next group of magical villains).
This, however, is certainly an area where the trader (and, most likely, also the customer) run a high risk of acquiring the Spirit Bane quality or at least spirits using their Edge on a regular basis to resist summoning and binding.

To be fair, I have never seen Frank misrepresent actual canon rules. If he has a problem with the rules, he is not shy in voicing his opinion, along with possible solutions. But when he posts about an alternate way of doing things, or a house rule, then he always clearly delineates it as such.

*you throw a pokéball at enemy trainers Pokémon*
*Enemy trainer slaps the ball away*
"Hey! no stealing"

Ah, I didn't mean to imply that he had. It's only with your post that I've realised how my comment is likely to be interpreted. I have always found Frank absolutely scrupulous in distinguishing house rules and suggestions from RAW. I was only intending to counter any notion that just because Frank as a sometime developer says on these boards that he does something, doesn't make it official (same for the other devs, actually). But following your links I see that he's talking about the situation under RAW, so it's valid to say that and my comment is likely to be misinterpreted. Frank is a very good guide to what RAW actually is (as well as a wonderfully vocal discusser of what it should be).

Apologies for putting things so very badly. I didn't follow your links originally.

K.

No harm, no foul!

Does it actually say that? I mean, you can Banish all day without ending up on the Naughty list; why should Banishing to capture be so much different?

Context is everything, the abuse isn't using banishing to capture a spirit, it is summoning spirits for the express purpose of allowing a second Mage banish them.

Offer the spirit a Karma point or two if you feel the need to appease it.

Yeah, but how does the spirit world count intentions? Heck, how does the GM? Unless two players say outright: "I want you to summon a spirit so I can banish it into my stable", how do you judge it as deliberate or not?

I've always had a little issue with the Naughty list. It's extremely subjective, doesn't say if you can work your way off of it, doesn't really say spirits will do to the abuser (other than a -2 penalty) and basically only exists as a sword of Damocles to hold over the character's head. I can see it for someone who, say, keeps using spirits to sustain spells long-term, but even then there should be a graded penalty rather than a on/off switch.

I would think that when two Mages are playing pokemon with each other on a regular (or even semi-regular) basis the intention is fairly clear.

So long as you are consistent, then a player can make their decisions accordingly. If a player knows that spirits deeply resent being summoned just so they can be banished again, then the player has a clear choice as to whether to engage in such behaviour or not. The issue is your line: "doesn't say if you can work your way off it, doesn't say what spirits will do to the abuser..." etc. Why doesn't it? A player can ask their GM what happens if they keep upsetting the spirits they summon? Is there a way I can redeem myself? And other such questions. And the GM will answer. What is unfair is when a GM conceals or misrepresents information that the player character should rightfully have and where the GM forces a player down a route where they should have a choice. Neither is the case here.

Now you and I have had many arguments before so I'll anticipate your response and reply to it. Your usual complaint is that this is subjective and purely in the hands of individual GMs to interpret and thus open to abuse by vindictive GMs. I will make my normal counterpoint that expecting the person who decides on the number and type of opposition to be constrained in their ability to punish PCs by rules clarifications is hopelessly misplaced. The problem of a bad GM is not one that is resolved by throwing more rules on the fire. In fact, going beyond what is in the book on this subject would begin to infringe on different groups' ability to interpret spirits in different ways. Whether, for example, banishing is a painful process that a spirit resents or nothing special is a flavour call that varies from game to game. As the banisher is reducing the spirit's services to its summoner, a better interpretation might be that the spirit appreciates being freed from its bondage. The important things are that the GM is consistent in the game and those characters that ought to know how it works (e.g. magicians), do know how it works.

As a corollary on the above, I think a GM should pay attention to the positive aspects of spirit personalities. If a player knows how a spirit thinks, what it resents, etc. then they should also know what it likes. One of my favourite play incidents was when a powerful Beast spirit (I think it was Force 5) was unleashed to attack some security guards on a run (1 service). The spirit enjoyed itself so much that it stuck around after its service and continued rampaging through the compound chasing down terrified guards. In my game, if you task spirits with things that are in accord with their nature, you can expect better results (e.g. they might spend Edge on things they enjoy). The players know this and act accordingly. Playing spirits with personality, motivations and dislikes adds a lot to this aspect of the game. But it is something that by its very nature is subjective. You can't specify what a spirit always will and will not like if spirits are individuals that the GM plays as real characters.

My thoughts,

K.

I appreciate your treatment of spirit personality, Knasser. I agree wholeheartedly that if they can be annoyed, they can also be pleased. It must have been fun to watch the 'puppy' play with the guards.

Peter

Actually, I'll go the other way on this one, and say that it's difficult for good GM's to know when to apply the penalty, as well as knowing what's fair and balanced. I'm not arguing that the penalty is unfair, I'm arguing that there's no guidance on when to use it. If someone mistreats a spirit once, is that enough to land the character on the Naughty list? What if he seriously mistreats one spirit? There's a difference between a little guidance, and none whatsoever.

I do, however, wholeheartedly agree with your suggestion to play up the positive parts of a spirit's personality. Too often, only the negative aspects are focused on.

Keep in mind one key fact about spirits, you can ask them what they want and what they think of you(you can even use a service to force them to tell the truth). Now, that hermetic mage might laugh at you for treating a spirit like an equal being with feelings, but you can ask a spirit what they think of doing a task, and if you are in their poor graces, what would make them like you again.

I think the key thing to keep in mind is that every spirit has a personality thats based on spirit types, tradition, and associated spell type. Combat spirits, reguardless of spirit type, will rarely have a problem fighting for the mage as long as they aren't being used as cannon fodder, but they might tire of helping you sneak around and manipulate people, even if they have the powers to do so. On the other hand, a manipulation spirit would prefer it when a magician uses them to avoid direct conflict.

Just remember that unless what the character does is extremely bad, they should get a warning before spirits put the player on their black list. They shouldn't just start misinterpreting orders and spending edge to resist the player at the drop of a hat. On the other hand, if the spirit likes the player and the player does things that the spirit specializes in, they can expect better service quality and the spirit using edge on the summoners behalf.

Fair enough. I tend to talk from the viewpoint of an experienced GM who is content to fill in a fair bit of flavour himself. A few more examples would probably not be a bad thing, but ultimately it will come down to how the GM chooses to role-play the spirits. Spirits are intelligent beings and they should show some variety, at least from type to type and tradition to tradition, that's the main thing I emphasise. Balance I try to preserve through presenting a sufficiently rich nature for the spirits so that a magician PC can choose how to exploit that nature for gain or suffer from going against it. So long as players are aware of what their characters would be aware of, and the GM is consistent in application, things should be fine. That's why threads like this are good - they prompt us all to think about these things in advance so we can have that consistency rather than change later on when we realise we want something different.

My usual answer after a successful Banishing is to take control of the spirit then ask it about its previous summoner...

True. The thing is, I've recently gamed with a few newbie GM's, who may not know when to use the penalty properly. More guidance from the book would be helpful. I'm also uncertain on how to use it, although I have a fair idea.

There are a lot of people here who take a lot of viewpoints. I can't remember who said he'd have a high-force spirit fight the mage no matter how it was treated, but I thought that was excessive. I think every spirit should be treated individually, and based on how the roleplay is going. I like OOB's point about giving the character a warning first. I also think that it should first start with the spirit types that have been most misused, kind of a "spirit bane" penalty. To redeem yourself will require a visit to the spirits native Metaplane, to perform an act of contrition.

But this gets away from the question. Is Banishing painful enough to land you on the Naughty list? And what about swapping or stealing spirits? Is that going to be problematical? What happens if the other guy had been mistreating his spirits? There's a lot of maybes here, and I'd like to find some consensus.

While I agree with the idea of coming up with a consistent guideline for new GMs, I also really like the idea that spirits be made more individually and less personally (and, when appropriate, reflecting the personalities of the summoner and the area where the summoning took place.) My favorite canon example of this was the Seattle Guide write up on the bar The Rubber Suit, which was set up like a diorama of a city, and had hearth spirits that looked like Godzilla and had flame projection power.

My personal opinion would be that the banishing trick by itself wouldn't be sufficient cause for addition to the Naughty List, but that individual cases could vary based on circumstances. Under no circumstances would I penalize the player for just one offense, and the player would get plenty of in-game warning signs before any action was taken.

• After cajoling and pleading I convince Dambala to send his avatar to aid me in my current struggle. I then explain to the spirit that what I really need is for him to agree to work with my friend Hermetic Harry. Being blind to the true nature of the Gods Under the Sea, Harry will be unable to help much unless he gets the divine inspiration that only the snake loa can provide. Dambala may be mildly annoyed at being transferred over to work with a disbeliever, but won't hold it against his favored child (me).
• After cajoling and pleading I convince Dambala to send his avatar to aid me in my current struggle. Once he is bound into the agreement, I invite my customer in. "Go ahead and take him, you can make him do that divining you needed." Dambala feels betrayed that I've lied and misrepresented the bargain yet again, and vows not to be swayed by my false promises next time.

[EDIT]
If you were looking for a single mechanic to take the ad libbing out, maybe you could base it on a die roll to identify the flavor of the spirit.
Roll a single die.
Subtract 1 from result if

• Summoner attempts to use spirit for long-term sustaining.
• Spirit force is higher than summoner's magic rating.
• Summoner regularly does 'spirit swapping'.
• Summoner actions resulted in more than a half dozen of his spirits being destroyed in the last month.
• Summoner is summoning in an environment aspected against the magical paradigm (e.g. nature spirit in a toxic domain.)

Result < 1: Spirit is hostile, and only aid the character because it is bound to do so. Spirit will resist attempted bindings using edge, and will actively seek to undermine the character's desires by using loopholes in the wording of his commands.
Result 1: Spirit is sullen and resentful. While the spirit doesn't hate the character personally, it does hate to be compelled. Spirit will occasionally interpret commands in a way that undermines the character's desires, but will not go to the lengths of actually expending Edge to resist anything.
Result 2: Spirit is impatient but not hostile. Spirit will fulfill the caster's commands in the quickest possible way involving the least expenditure of effort or risk to itself. (e.g. Instructed to 'Guard me', the spirit uses the spirit power Guard and then retires to the astral plane. The spirit won't stay near by to guard the summoner physically unless specifically commanded, and may consider it another service.)
Result 3: Spirit is professional, and impersonal. Spirit interprets instructions in a reasonable manner for it's force rating. Spirit doesn't use edge to either help or resist caster.
Result 4: Spirit is professional, and impersonal. Spirit interprets instructions in a reasonable manner for it's force rating. Spirit doesn't use edge to either help or resist caster.
Result 5: Spirit is generally friendly, and courteous. Spirit will use appropriate tactics, but won't use edge for the character's sake.
Result 6: Spirit is friendly, views the trip to the material plane as an adventure, or for some reason feels it 'owes' the summoner. Spirit will use the best tactics available, based on it's knowledge and intelligence. Spirit will occasionally use edge on actions to aid the character.

Nice... but I dislike the idea of any mechanical restrictions for "spirit swapping". I dont see much function in Banishing if you dont use it for swapping and playing pokemon.

There is actually a use for Banishing - hit the spirit (with or without a weapon), and you use Banishing + Willpower to do (Charisma)P damage to it. Of course, it's still easier to just to use manabolt on it, but this way you won't be leaving an astral signature behind.