What constitutes "good" Summoner behavior?

What characterizes "normal" (neither notably noble nor nefarious) Summoner / Binder behavior?

What are the hallmarks of abuse?

Thanks, -- N

Abuse is treating a spirit like a slave or a tool. Spirits are intelligent beings, they don't take kindly to being used as sustaining foci or some other utility. Normal summoning/binding behavior is one of respect based on tradition, and isn't particularly general. The normal terms of use of a voodoo practicioner generally involve the possession of themself or a prepared person, not a hostile enemy. A shaman mostly treats his spirits as you might expect, nature spirits who will help him fight or cast spells if he pays their price. Other traditions have other common practices, although exiting the bounds of those practices doesn't neccesarily constitute an abuse, just an abnormality. Basically, it's up to you. If a player is doing something woth his spirits that seems either broken or disrespectful, you are within your rights as a GM to call him on it and have the spirit have an ingame argument with its summoner over proper summoning procedure

My group believes that simply binding your spirits constitutes spirit abuse.

You should correct your group, then. What the books say really doesn't reflect this.

The books do say that spirits resent binding, however. Abuse might be too strong of a word to apply to all bound spirits, but they don't like it at all.

The books say that the standard hermetic tradition is to treat the spirit like a tool. The standard summoning ritual involves the spirit's real name, which is how you're able to attempt to bind it. The spirit isn't a "free spirit" -- once dismissed, it can't come back to the astral or physical planes on its own without being summoned again.

Free spirits, on the other hand, require a trip to the metaplanar realm to find the true name before a binding attempt. And, once their tasks owed are paid off, they're free to go... or to come back and mess with you (although, since you know their true name and are capable of binding them again discretion on their part is probably the better part of valor).

By the RAW, abuse for a hermetic tradition magician is doing something crazy, like feeding on the spirit or draining its essence or something like that. By the RAW, using a spirit as a tool (or using a spirit the same way that a technomancer uses a sprite) is par for the course.

Well, we have one mage conducting what i would define as exceptionally good behaviour, he often lets spirits off even though they still ove him several services, or offer that they can charge more services than needed for a given task. He also likes to play chess with spirits of man, and its sort of obvious that he is going for the spirit affinity quality.
I would certainly classify binding spirits as normal behaviour, even though we sometimes roleplay the stronger spirits (force 4 or 5 and above) as being rather upset about it.
Abusive behavour, would be things like having your spirit do long and tedious or silly and laughable tasks repeatedly, as well as making fun of them or treating them with other kinds of disrespect.

Depends on how you go about it. Abusing a spirit is just like abusing a person. "Hey, Mr. Fire Elemental. See that ocean over there? Go dive in." "Hey, Mr. Spirit. Take this bomb and run into the room over there then push this button." "Hey, Mr. Spirit, get over and carry me to the toliet. I don't feel like walking." "Hey, Mrs. Dikoted Ally Spirit, get over here and have sex with me." Those are all forms of spirit abuse. The act of summoning or even binding shouldn't be unless you're particularly cruel about how you describe doing it.

And Hell, binding certainly doesn't have to be a hostile affair in and of itself, either. Bargaining is a perfectly acceptable form of binding, and it's one I often use particularly when playing magicians with a fey-oriented tradition I created some time back. In a very simplistic nutshell, the magician would coach a fey spirit out of hiding (via summoning), then they'd sit down and have a drinking competition (the cost of the binding materials) while they hammer out the details of the bargain. Whoever managed to not pass out/fall out of their seat/whatever the first won (the actual binding test, with the drunkedness being represented by the drain).

That's stupid. How does your group get around the "only one unbound spirit" issue?

This reminds me of a thought I had a while ago: how would a spirit feel about being bound if it were being Invoked? "I can make you bigger and stronger, but only if you let me bind you."

I'd guess they only have one spirit running around with them at most. I rarely bind its not like you need to bind in order to be successful. A single spirit is a powerhouse in its own right, you don't really need 5 of them at your beck and call.
While I don't agree with there ruling it isn't stupid, its just another way to play the game.

But hey, if you want to keep spirits good will in your favor, you never have to worry about spending money on binding materials, evar!

Dedicated summoners should always take this Knowledge skill at 5 or 6: Keeping Spirits Happy. And in their gear section buy books entitled things like "Guardians: A Summoner's Guide to a Happy, Healthy Spirit." Also, if you fear a GM may have extreme biases against spirit use (such as Tomothy's group) you may need to finagle the points to buy Spirit Affinity for whatever spirit you intend to use the most. Combine all of those things and you can summon a big, bad Spirit of Man, have it cast a burly spell on you (or more), roll your knowledge skill, consult your books, give him a nice friendly Affinity boosted wink and send him off to have the best time of its existance, partying down and loving the universe as it fuels your power. Good times...

Goes hand in hand with the Hacker's Knowledge: I saw it on the Matrix skill.

Generally...

Don't use the spirit as cannon fodder.
Don't drain the hell out of them.
Don't abuse them on extremely long services.
Don't give them impossible tasks. (count the grains of sand on that beach one at a time)
Bitchslap and abuse anyone who says grounding out rules are good... (many spirits died in the old days due to astral mages abusing them as dual-natured anchors to fireball mundanes from the safety and security of the astral plane).

I even go so far as to actively release or heal a spirit when it's hurt (sometimes both).

Hey now, it was an awesome idea and it did limit the use of foci. Yes it was prone to abuse with spirits(which was abusive to spirits) and required the DM to play the spirits are pissy with you card and hope the player cared. And sure when there is a blatant rules abuse built into the system something needs to be done. So yes it should have been fixed/removed in order to make a better system. I just wish they had gone with fixed instead of removed. I actually would have liked if they had made it so grounding was still in, but you could only ground spells into targets with the astral link. So you could ground from a focus into whoever it was bound to but no one else. AoEs did not bloom in the physical world the only person hit was the person who bound the focus. then I'd go so far as to say the same astral link exists in bound spirits.(maybe even summoned ones). It would curtail some of the power of mages, spirits, and foci all of which could use some power curtailing.

Well just imagine you were a spirit. What would piss you off?

I'm going to bind a spirit of man and a spirit of woMAN using copious edge in down time. Okay, both of you need to sustain these killer spells. Other than that I want you to have crazy mad sex for all time. I have done the research to ensure that you are both hot for each other (knowledge skill) I have also given you both some extra services beyond the spells to ensure you are both going to have the best several decades (hopefully) any spirits can have.

Well you either limit yourself to one unbound spirit or you bind spirits and be prepared for any potential repercussions down the road.

Considering that the Binding skill itself says "the Binding skill is used to ask/demand long-term services from a spirit the magician has already summoned," I doubt all spirits consider binding to be distasteful. It doesn't have to be demanding or forceful (especially if done in a method similar to the one I pointed out in my previous post).

A few small notes from someone who usually dont summon spirits.

Spirit abuse is something that also applies to Watchers. There are several accounts on the abuse of watchers who has been thrown away like so much cannon fodder to test wards, assault spirits (gang bonus in astral combat) and in previous editions become lightning rods for grounding spells (much cheaper that spirits).

Spirits and watcher might not be cross with you right away but might start with taking orders literally and interpreting them slightly differently from the summoner.

A few examples.

Mages might want to be very explicit in their instructions to their spirit so that they don’t start talking to the guards at the complex it is supposed to be scouting – after all, if the mage didn’t tell the spirit to be covert then the order won’t qualify right?

Or the watcher told to keep someone under observation was not supposed to sit on the targets shoulder chatting away about the mages nightly habits…

Giving a spirit the order to confuse a group of enemies does not mean that the spirit ISN’T free to give them additional powers as well…like concealment, unless told.

Which means that the more abused the spirit the more wordplay it might use to twist every order of the mage, until he starts to become nicer.

Okay, so let's see:

Positive:
- Letting Spirits go early (with Services remaining)
- Going to the Metaplanes to chill with your Spirit buddies
- Asking them if they have any requests & fulfilling them
- Healing them when they're injured

Neutral - Positive:
- Using Stun damage (instead of Physical) when fighting Spirits
- Releasing them from service when they're injured

Neutral:
- Binding them

Neutral - Negative:
- Compelling eternal service from a single Binding
- Letting them be destroyed in dangerous combat

Negative:
- Spell Binding them to death
- Using them as disposable diversions & magical trap detectors


Thoughts? Thanks, -- N

And I am going to kill myself and hope I come back as a Spirit of Man.

I like that... elegant...
I used a similar method with my necromancer, but yours is VERY elegant, especially for "Fey" spirits... Kudos

Keep the Faith

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

If the Summoner is being a huge dick to spirits for no real reason (counting sand et cetera,) and it's something which has zero effect on what's actually happening in the game, then I wouldn't even bother acknowledging it with repercussions. ("Sure. That happens. Whatever. Now, about that truckload of Clippers barreling toward you...") If said behavior was taking up game time and affecting play, then it's a case of the former.

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

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 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)

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.


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

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?

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

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

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.

Those certainly are powerful, especially in combination.


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

Not all magicians have easy access to Spirits of Man.

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? It doesn't take mechanical rules to figure it out.

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.

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.

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...

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


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

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.

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