Agility of a Microbe | Internal Morphing « Gaming Outpost Discussions

Gaming Outpost Discussions » Roleplaying Games

Agility of a Microbe | Internal Morphing

(24 posts) (5 voices)

Started 4 years ago by WilliamTWodium
Latest reply from M. J. Young

Tags:

WilliamTWodium
Member

Eric mentioned that he hoped I wasn't taking on too much (regarding this vampire stuff we're chattering about), and it occurred to me that the reason it seems that way is because I'm not doing any of it. Here's to progress.

For my first question: How do I go about determining the agility of a microbe?

Seriously. I need a Bod BRA for a microscopic symbiont, and it's not Strength or Willpower. Strength I figure is 0@1 - not because the thing can actually lift 0.15625 oz, but because at that point we stop caring. Willpower is also 0@1, because while we can forgive a lack of sentience, force of will usually requires at least consciousness. For agility, I'm stumped.

On the one hand, the thing has no limbs. On the other, it could have plenty of cilia or flagella or whatever the fashionable motive structure is on Planet Zimbabwe, Galaxy Twelve. On the one foot, it doesn't do anything remotely like what agility measures in player characters, except perhaps swim through bodily fluids. On the other, it does plenty of other things that player characters don't - reflexive responses to entirely chemical environmental stimuli, manipulation of nucleic acids in host cells to indirectly maintain homeostasis - and if we don't use agility to govern that, what do we use?

Should I just base this call on the thing's physical agility and ignore other considerations? Even then, I'd like some advice on how agile a cilia-flailing single cell is in comparison to, say, your average twen-cen adult swimmer (inside of whom that same cell may be simultaneously flailing).

__

Second question has to do with Bod 13@ Actual Morphing skills.

The distinction in the rules between shapeshifting and morphing is that shapeshifting is superficial - we get the impression that it's mostly external, that the shape is changing but the metabolism is not - while morphing is fundamental, affecting everything from shape right on down to metabolism, blood chemistry, fire-breathing, the whole works. We're told that morphing grants the skilled character the physcial attributes of the form he's adopted - strength, stamina, agility, resistance, density, hand-eye, flexibility. Both skill types seem to assume a change in external form. The shapechanger says, "I want to be dog-shaped," and his skin and bones and muscles move around until he's dog-shaped. The morpher says, "I want to be a dog," and all eleven of his organ systems reconfigure until he not only looks like a dog, he has the sense of smell to prove it.

What about a morphing skill that effects no change in shape?

Obviously, if I have a bod skill that works through a symbiotic link and effects a permanent, fundamental change in the target (beyond simple healing or immunities), it's a 13@ Morphing skill. The question is, how do I determine a baseline? And, how do I balance the skill with others? (If the skill is exclusive to a non-player race, do I need to bother with balance? I'd say yes, but someone might disagree . . .)

Related question. Can I substitute a B13@ Morphing skill for a P0@1 Teaching skill for the purposes of skill acquisition? Could I do it with a B(4@/9@/14@) Symbiosis skill?

Assume I have a symbiont who morphs a host such that he both acquires new bod skills and gains permanent increases in several physical attributes. How many skills does the symbiont need, and how many rolls does it make, and how do I know?

_

I realize I'd thrown out a large number of vague questions, but I hope things will get more specific and/or more clear as we go on.

Tue Nov 20 2007 10:12 am #
Tadeusz
Member

I need answers on this too for MacCallister's world "Only the Insects Survive" which has the verser become a Bacteria Man due to a Donna's Door.

Eric

Tue Nov 20 2007 4:40 pm #
M. J. Young
Moderator

On the agility question, I think you're getting hung up on the limbs. Consider that with hand/eye it does not require that the creature have either hands or eyes, but only that it be able to coordinate body movements with sensory inputs accurately. Even a creature which was just a psionically enabled brain, whose senses were entirely clairsentient and whose actions were entirely telekinetic, would have a hand/eye for its ability to coordinate what it clairsenses with what it telekinetes (although such a creature might have the agility of a tree, which I believe is given in the bias chapter).

In the case of your microbe, I would think the question is, how well can it maneuver itself as it desires? You perceive a creature who responds by attraction to specific chemicals, but the fact is that it responds, and therefore is exercising some sort of low-level volition (making the choice) into a responsive action. To the degree that it is capable of moving toward or away from stimuli, that's the measure of its agility.

I imagine that it actually "swims" much better than a human, although whether it swims as well as a fish (which is comparable in how it swims, that is means/method) is not as clear. In the end, it may have an average agility, maybe a bit lower; if it is extremely good at getting where it needs to be, it may be above average.

*****

The morphing question is not so clear to me; let me address a few possibilities, and you tell me what I've got right or wrong.

We are talking about a symbiont which induces a change in a host; however, what makes this different from a usual symbiotic relationship is that the change is permanent--if the symbiont dies, the change remains. In the standard symbiotic relationship, Host does A and Symbiont does B, and Host benefits from B while Symbiont benefits from A. Thus Symbiont is able to take the form of functional wings when Host needs them, but it is Symbiont who is able to fly; Host is only able to induce Symbiont to fly when Host needs it. Your difference is that Symbiont has infected Host in such a way that Host has in essence mutated, grown wings of his own which he can learn to use to fly.

It seems to me that the essence of the benefit provided in a symbiotic relationship is that it is as if the creature used a skill on himself; thus the question is, how would a creature cause a permanent change in his own attributes or skills? The rules don't actually provide for that directly, because it would be something of a game killer for a character to be able to improve his strength simply by deciding he wanted to be stronger. On the other hand, there are ways to do it indirectly and temporarily. Depending on what is being done and how, I'm inclined to think these are rare variants of the 10@ healing and regeneration skills--the Symbiont causes the Host to "regenerate" a pair of wings. As to the use of the wings, either the symbiont knows how to use them and does so on request, or the Symbiont knows how to use them and provides the example for the Host, who must learn to fly based on that example.

I would also say that the symbiont makes one roll for each new bod skill and one for each intensity increase in each attribute. I'm inclined to limit the latter in some way--either it cannot advance an attribute to 3@, or it can only attempt to advance any particular attribute once every two hundred days, or it can advance the attribute quickly as long as it succeeds in doing so but cannot do so again after the first failure. I would also penalize the skill for permanence, but then you'll have to pay attention to your other numbers to make sure that you've got a chance of success with which you are comfortable.

I hope this helps.

--M. J. Young

Tue Nov 20 2007 11:17 pm #
WilliamTWodium
Member

I understood about Hand/Eye, but I wasn't sure how to analogize that to Agility. With Hand/Eye, the key is coordination; I think you're saying that the key with Agility is response, keeping in mind that it's a physical attribute. Correct me if I'm wrong there.

You're suggesting perhaps a 1@3 or 1@4 Agility on average, with exceptionally mobile specimens reaching upper level one. Level two would raise eyebrows, and mid or upper level two is getting ridiculous. Close enough?

___

As for the morphing question:

I hope this helps.

I've been meaning to pull together a question post for bod devices for months now. Everything you said helped with something. Thank you.

We are talking about a symbiont which induces a change in a host; however, what makes this different from a usual symbiotic relationship is that the change is permanent--if the symbiont dies, the change remains.
Yes. To complicate the issue, I want to include some of the regular sort of changes, too. Thus, if the symbiont dies, some of the changes remain, but many of the on-going processes cease.

I raised the question with my vampirism-inducing symbionts in mind; I'll call them vampiria for now, and the condition vampirosis (to distinguish it from vampirism). I want permanent changes to include the increase of several physical attributes and extreme sensitivity to light. I want the standard changes to include increase in two mental attributes, hydrophobia, aversion to garlic, and resistance to light below a certain threshold. I'm not sure yet whether increases in sensory function (auditory, olfactory, photosensitivity) should be permanent or standard. Also, consumption of garlic poisons the vampiria, hence the aversion.

For purposes of balance and in-game logic, I want the permanent advantages to be inseparable from the permanent drawbacks.

I also think it would be cool if the vampiria could "teach" the host body to repair itself, rather than performing the actual repairs themselves. This would have the benefit of raising the host's bod bias and making my vampires more effective, as well as adding another means by which older vampires are more dangerous than others (due to the host's "practice" with regeneration). I might just make it standard, though. It would be simpler.

So, I can use a Bod skill of the symbiont to confer a new skill on the host, in a manner analogous to skill teaching. The question becomes, is this a Symbiosis skill roll which if successful provides an example and an opportunity, or is this a Regeneration skill roll which if successful provides and example, an instructor bonus, and a "teaching" bonus equal to the symbiont's SAL in the Regen skill? Or perhaps a mix-and-match between those two?

Or perhaps I misunderstand you. Say the change isn't "wings" and the skill "flying," but that instead the change is "something metabolic" (I'm no doctor or biologist) and the skill is "regeneration" (B10@5 Auto-Healing). Is this the case: an odd 10@ skill permanently changes the host such that he is capable of regenerating (instead of "capable of flying"); subsequently, either a) the symbiont proceeds to regenerate him at need, or b) the symbiont provides an example (with no need to roll further) and the character makes a skill learning roll to learn B10@5 Auto-Healing. If that is the case, then even if (a) is the method used, the verser can now attempt to learn to regenerate on his own even if the host dies, because he's done the regeneration equivalent of growing wings. That seems odd, but I'll buy it. The systems in my previous paragraph, method (b), and the standard "symbiont does it, not you" system all seem more natural, though.

With regard to the attributes: would it be reasonable to use the same baseline effect as for Magic 15@ permanent attribute increases? I'm not sure I'm comfortable with "one intensity per use" regardless of attribute level, although the alternative has its own drawbacks. If I used the M15@ "(RSxlvl)/10 = marks, no partial credit" system, I was thinking "one attempt per attribute per increase in symbiont SAL," that is, the symbiont gets one try, and regardless of success or failure, it can't try again until it gets better at doing it. Assuming constant practice, that's per 100 days at amateur, per 400 days at professional, and per 2,700 days (7.4 years) at expert. That seems more severe than your limitations, but there's also greater potential for attribute increase. Then again, there's less effectiveness at higher attribute levels . . . thoughts?

Also, I take it the attribute skill would be an odd B10@2 Counter Physical Attribute Reduction?

How would you handle a symbiont that enhances the host's senses? Does the symbiont have the skill itself at a higher SAL, and substitute it on a successful (host's? symbiont's?) symbiosis skill roll? That seems difficult to rationalize in the case of vision, but I could see it working for smell. Or does the symbiont actually raise the host's SAL - and if so, would that also be level ten skill, and could it have both standard (meaning on-going, symbiont-dependent) and permanent variants?

Also, this whole time I've been ignoring the multiple-organism nature of this symbiont, treating it as a singular entity. That's a safe shortcut to take, right?

_

(although such a creature might have the agility of a tree, which I believe is given in the bias chapter).

Worlds, actually. I get the impression that the book is laid out in a good order for learning the rules by reading through it, but it's more difficult to find things later - or at least, obscure things like the agility of a tree or the damage system for falling (B4@6 Fall Impact Absorption). You know they're in there somewhere, though, you saw 'em before . . .

Wed Nov 21 2007 6:39 am #
Tadeusz
Member

Rationalizing Sight Benefit--your organism helps the optic part of the brain with additional processing, and better connections. It also could be more software related from the symbiont.

Its of note that Einstein's brain had really large areas (like double a normal person's) dealing with analytical thought. There is more information coming in than can be used adequately, and what is used would benefit from a second layer of analysis.

I could maybe see someone with Depth Perception issues due to a single eye, with better processing, knowing the distance to a target anyways because their brain would put together the location of the sun, and the size of the shadow cast by the target if they were able to make a reasonable guess as to target height.

Wed Nov 21 2007 5:25 pm #
WilliamTWodium
Member

Rationalizing the benefit itself is easy enough (though thanks, I hadn't thought of the brain connection in this particular case); it's just that the standard way bod devices work is that the symbiont uses a skill on the host's behalf, and it seems weird to have an eyeless microbe with a 2@10 SAL in various visual perception skills. That's part of what makes me want to look for a different mechanic - perhaps a B10@9 "Counter Blindness" that works on the assumption that human eyes could be a lot better, and the symbiont doesn't know the difference between "less-than-perfect-but-average" and "impaired". That's weird too, though.

Rationalizing is one of my strong points, actually. I intend for the symbiont to boost An-Mag, and I've got an explanation for that, too. It's a little fuzzier around the edges, but hey. So is An-Mag.

Wed Nov 21 2007 8:45 pm #
Tadeusz
Member

A lot of symbiont SF stories tend to deal with the effect of a symbiont as 'it makes you do what you do better.' Others, and this is on more shaky logical ground, tend to say it knows whole new organ and body structure plans that are better for a humanoid...but as you point out that is illogical in the extreme....which doesn't necessarily halt writers.

I think a lot of people have no real conception just how complicated the body is.

Hope this helps.

Wed Nov 21 2007 9:03 pm #
M. J. Young
Moderator

From Scott:

You're suggesting perhaps a 1@3 or 1@4 Agility on average, with exceptionally mobile specimens reaching upper level one. Level two would raise eyebrows, and mid or upper level two is getting ridiculous. Close enough?
Yeah, normally--unless you have microbes that with B8@3 windriding skills who can steer themselves on the air currents to reach their desired target. (Airborne microbes normally reach hosts entirely by chance.)

So, I can use a Bod skill of the symbiont to confer a new skill on the host, in a manner analogous to skill teaching. The question becomes, is this a Symbiosis skill roll which if successful provides an example and an opportunity, or is this a Regeneration skill roll which if successful provides and example, an instructor bonus, and a "teaching" bonus equal to the symbiont's SAL in the Regen skill? Or perhaps a mix-and-match between those two?
I think you answer this for yourself in the subsequent material, but yes, whichever seems to fit what's happening. The symbiosis roll usually means that the connection between the two is "working", however it's supposed to work--such as that the host has induced the symbiont to do what it's supposed to do. An example would be, symbiont controls the wings but host controls the symbiont, so the symbiosis roll has to be made (by whichever has that skill) for host to get symbiont to use wings, and then symbiont rolls its fly skill to see whether it does so successfully. The double roll makes the symbiotic approach less reliable than having the abilities yourself, but usually this is compensated by giving the symbiont an extremely high chance of success at performing the skill.

I like your suggestion on the increasing attributes. In particular, since the verser is likely to have this symbiont for a very long time, preventing it from being a thirty-day shortcut to 3@10 attributes is important.

And I think yes, Counter Physical Attribute Reduction.

On the senses, I won't say that neither of those options does not work. My thinking is that the symbiont is probably enhancing the ability within the nervous system (rather than in the organ), and if it makes its successful symbiosis roll the effect is to provide a positive sit-mod (perhaps RS=SM) on the sensory skill in question.

--M. J. Young

Thu Nov 22 2007 1:20 am #
WilliamTWodium
Member

My thinking is that the symbiont is probably enhancing the ability within the nervous system (rather than in the organ), and if it makes its successful symbiosis roll the effect is to provide a positive sit-mod (perhaps RS=SM) on the sensory skill in question.

Does the symbiont need some secondary skill to make this possible, or is this part of the definition of its particular 4/9/14@ symbiosis?

In the description of B0@1 Chemical Sensitivity, it's suggested that a level two SAL is much more discriminating than level one, above and beyond the difference in chance of success (which implies the same for B0@1 Olfaction). Is it reasonable to rule that a significant positive sit-mod to one of these skills (+20, say) could confer a similar improvement in skill's results? For some reason, I really like the idea of a vampire being able to tell sucrose from fructose from glucose from artificial sweeteners, and regarding those last with the same repugnance as a bowl of holy garlic-wafers.

And I think yes, Counter Physical Attribute Reduction.

Would it be better to generalize all physical attributes to the same skill, to divide them into groups (e.g. strength, constitutions, dexterities), or track a separate skill for each attribute? I'm inclined to generalize.

I forgot to mention "prevents aging." For a bod-based means of nullifying aging as it happens, are we looking at a 10@1 "basic needs" skill or a 10@3 oddball variant of Repair Non-Kinetic Damage? This isn't important for a verser, but it might be for an indig. Maybe.

For symbiont-induced changes in the host's nutritional needs, do I need a B10@1 skill, or can I assume that everything's peachy until the symbiosis skill fails? This seems like the difference between an Infested Vamp who only drinks blood (the latter) and an Infested Vamp who gets by on blood most of the time but every now and then binges on salad (the former).

Regarding the permanence penalty for the attribute increases: the psi method (P14@5 Alter Abilities) suggests a -20 penalty, but the magic method (which includes permanence in the bias, M15@7) does not. I suppose this is more analogous to the psi skill than the magic, but in light of the one-attempt-per-skill-increase limitation, -10 seems reasonable.

With the -10 sit-mod, a 1@10 Bod BRA, and a 10@ Bod bias, improvement of attributes beyond 2@10 by this skill is impossible - RS of 85 is out of reach by a solid fifteen points even with a 3@10 SAL. I can live with that, but I have a question: if a character has been improved by this method to 2@10 in an attribute, does that constitute sufficient alteration to allow him to improve his attribute into the third level by means of an (extra)ordinary training program? The rule is that normal humans can't reach level three without unconventional help; I guess my question is about whether it has to be direct help.

Thu Nov 22 2007 8:30 am #
M. J. Young
Moderator

My thinking is that the symbiont is probably enhancing the ability within the nervous system (rather than in the organ), and if it makes its successful symbiosis roll the effect is to provide a positive sit-mod (perhaps RS=SM) on the sensory skill in question.

Does the symbiont need some secondary skill to make this possible, or is this part of the definition of its particular 4/9/14@ symbiosis?
I think on this point it's a matter of what you think makes the most sense for this symbiont relationship. If you've got a skill that fits and you want it to be an A+B situation, use it; but it's not unreasonable to make some of the effects of symbiosis a single-roll situation. It is, after all, the equivalent of a device. We make the user of the gun or the wand or the orb roll to activate the device, but we don't usually make the device roll to do what it does. Bod devices are different when they are working like djinn or robots: we make the character roll to control the djinn or robot, and the djinn or robot roll to perform the skill. However, the direct effects of most devices are presumed to work if the device use skill works.

It's thus up to the designer: is this simply activating the bod device, or is this commanding the bod device to do something that the device chooses to do?

Is it reasonable to rule that a significant positive sit-mod to one of these skills (+20, say) could confer a similar improvement in skill's results?

It's certainly reasonable to do this, but I'd make it RS=1/2/3 which works (the same as RS=S/D/N or RS=DC) with the bonuses at 51 and 81. Part of that is that I try to keep a lot of the super stuff in the realm that only those who are good at it have the super results, and only when they get good rolls; part of it is consistency, that the referee need only remember one set of break points.

On some of your questions, I'm brought back to something stated in the rules: there are always many different ways to achieve the same result. You can fly with wings, rockets, levitation, balloons, and many other ways. No way is best; each has advantages and disadvantages. You are particularly good at perceiving the consequences and implications of each variant, so trust your judgments on them. There aren't a lot of things I would say don't work, only things about which I would say that doing it that way opens possibilities you might not have considered, and in your case you've usually already considered them.

Remember that creatures that are not human can have 3@ attributes. Horses and elephants usually have 3@ strengths, for example. If your creature has been altered in a fashion that makes him inhuman in some way, he can achieve inhuman levels of ability. I don't know if your program includes that, but it could.

You might also consider conditions that would give positive sit-mods to the attribute improvement skill. For example, let us suppose that the attribute in question is strength. By the numbers you give, -10SM+1@10BRA+2x10@bias+2@10SAL=60%. The host can reach a 2@10 strength doing nothing at all. You could then note that if the host becomes involved in a double doubled exercise program targeting strength, this gives a substantial sit-mod, perhaps as much as +50, to the symbiont's skill, because conditions are entirely favorable for increasing the host's strength. The roll still might fail, of course, but the chance of success is there.

--M. J. Young

Thu Nov 22 2007 8:35 pm #
WilliamTWodium
Member

You might also consider conditions that would give positive sit-mods to the attribute improvement skill. For example, let us suppose that the attribute in question is strength. By the numbers you give, -10SM+1@10BRA+2x10@bias+2@10SAL=60%. The host can reach a 2@10 strength doing nothing at all. You could then note that if the host becomes involved in a double doubled exercise program targeting strength, this gives a substantial sit-mod, perhaps as much as +50, to the symbiont's skill, because conditions are entirely favorable for increasing the host's strength. The roll still might fail, of course, but the chance of success is there.

That sounds perfect. I had considered positive sit-mods, but I hadn't come up with much in the way of things that would provide them. Thank you.

The wand vs. djinn analogy is also helpful. I've been thinking of this from the perspective of the symbiont trying to keep its host alive rather than the host trying to take advantage of the symbiont's abilities.

From that second perspective, if the symbiont is acting of its own accord in a particular circumstance, then for the purposes of the action at hand the host needn't even have a symbiosis skill at all, yes?

Thu Nov 22 2007 9:12 pm #
M. J. Young
Moderator

Yes. The host's use of symbiosis skill is about the host using the symbiont, and thus about getting the symbiont to provide the benefit or perform the skill; the symbiont is an independent creature doing things for its own benefit, and its actions are treated as if it were an independent character, using the symbiosis skill when it wants/needs to communicate with or control the host. Anyway, something like that. I don't know that I've ever actually used one in play myself (and at this point I can hear John Cross asking why I have the rules if I don't use them), but that's how they're envisioned.

--M. J. Young

Thu Nov 22 2007 10:14 pm #
Tadeusz
Member

I'm running Symbiont Academy at RPOL right now, and about to bring out my first Symbiont enhanced individual.

Unfortunately my supply of clue on how to work this is limited. I'll have to reread the previous posts to see what I can glean.

Happy Thanksgiving.

Thu Nov 22 2007 10:32 pm #
WilliamTWodium
Member

Unfortunately my supply of clue on how to work this is limited. I'll have to reread the previous posts to see what I can glean.

Basically, it's this. Imagine a well-equipped sci-fi warrior. Now take everything he can do and make it a bod skill and replace all his equipment with the symbiont.

I've been coming at it with an oddball slant, trying to define an internal bod device - like asking "what if all the high-tech bounty-hunter's gear was actually nanotech that operates from inside his body?" The analogy isn't perfect, but it shows how unconventional some of the mechanics we've been hammering out here are.

Marvel's Venom and Carnage wear alien symbionts that provide certain constant benefits - like a soldier wearing body-armor and a radio receiver, but bod. As long as nothing goes wrong with the symbiotic link (anything that would call for a reroll and result in failure of the symbiosis skill), those benefits are assumed to be in place. Anytime the host wants the symbiont to do something in particular - like when Carnage turns his hand into an axe blade - the host rolls his symbiosis skill to communicate the command, and the symbiont performs the skill. The only difference between that and the soldier firing his blaster is that in this case, it's the blaster that's aiming.

That's an overview of what I understand, anyway. The hope is that with that as a start, you'll have questions that MJ can answer.

Fri Nov 23 2007 1:03 am #
Tadeusz
Member

I got that part, thanks. Its the interface where story hits rules, and the specific details of exactly how this or that symbiont works that I might have a problem with.

AKA Eddie Brock wore the Venom 'suit' after Spiderman rejected the alien symbiote. Earlier Mr. Fantastic used sonics to get Parker and the symbiont separated, and then Mr. Fantastic stored the symbiont in a glass tube in the Baxter Building, (at least I think it was probably the Baxter Building). Of course, the symbiont escaped and found Brock.

What you said does help because its a nice clear explanation.

I'm not sure I need to ask MJ questions on Symbiont Academy now with your explanation to fortify moi. Let me see about trying to write it up, and that will no doubt yield questions.

Now with "Only the Insects Survive" the Verser arrives, and becomes a Bacteria Man. They communicate by smell among other things. They don't have human methods of communication.

I think they are much larger than typical bacteria as they can use small insects as battle tanks.

I guess the verser loses his original sight abilities temporarily as his new body has no eyes...unless you want to give them eyes anyways unlike everyone else....which might be a good idea.

I need to reread the above posts so that I can know how to stat the other Bacteria Men, and how to stat the various battle tank beetles and the like.

Fri Nov 23 2007 1:20 am #
WilliamTWodium
Member

I was worried that I was getting too basic and telling you things you already knew quite well. I'm glad you were able to scrape some use out of it anyway.

It seems like whether the verser has eyes would depend on whether he's just shrinking to their size (and thus is composed of really, really tiny cells?) or if he's being re-created in a body like theirs (which wouldn't have eyes if theirs didn't). I guess he could be re-created in a body similar to theirs which would none-the-less retain the capacity to perform all of his old bod skills. That's more work for you, since you now have to stat both the bacteria men and the new creature the verser is becoming, but it has the advantage of not denying the verser access to skills which are otherwise possible in the universe. If you did this, he would have eyes of a sort - not the quite the same kind he had, but close.

Fri Nov 23 2007 3:51 am #
JohnA1nut
Member

I haven't really been following this thread. Over my head. I did want to make a point. I've been told that if a cockroach were 6 feet long, it would be able to run at over 200 miles per hours. I don't know if that is something you need, or if you already have it, but I thought I would give it to you.

Fri Nov 23 2007 4:22 am #
Tadeusz
Member

Admirably stated, Wodium, on multiple levels.

John, its good to offer such things. Worse that can happen is I say, 'nah, thats not really what we need'. As it is, I will possibly bring this point up with McCallister, the inventor of this setting, and see what he makes of it. It could add a very interesting, and hectic variation on what people expect....or he could think its something that takes us away from where we want to go. I think we'd thought a bit about some of the Inverse square law things like the strength of ants which is kinda related. So, we'll see....the image of a Bug Autobahn where superspeed insects with superstrength whizz about is pretty wild.

Eric

Fri Nov 23 2007 5:41 am #
WilliamTWodium
Member

I saw an in-depth article about movie-monsters from this perspective somewhere; it went into hard science and the mathematics of things, muscular cross-sections and structural integrity of bones and weight increase by volume . . .

I think maybe Graeme linked it during the gather? I saw it around that time, anyway. I'll see it I can find it again.

Fri Nov 23 2007 5:46 am #
johnosevens
Member

Honestly, the whole Venom/Carnage thing was what I had in mind from the minute I first saw you guys mention Symbionts - that and Dax from Star Trek: DS9 - but I've never been able to stat them in any game system... ever... O.o; so I guess the best I can add to this one is Good Luck...

Fri Nov 23 2007 9:39 pm #
M. J. Young
Moderator
If the verser is to be converted into a different kind of creature--put in a different body--I'd prefer that it be done by one of several recognized methods, in part so that the player has some clue what has happened:
- Zygote him in--have him be born as this. This requires a bit of work figuring out the equivalent of gestation of a microbe, and it also requires addressing the question of how the verser returns through stages to human form over the next few universes, but it is consistent with what is already in game.
- Have some attack skill used against him which wrenches him from his body and puts him in another. This has the disadvantage that he should be able to resist the attack, and whatever means is used to do it might be used by him to get back in his own body (which he should be able to sense because of the scriff in it), but the clear advantage that whenever he verses out of the microbe world his body goes with him (although he'll still have to figure out how to get his spirit from the microbe to the body).
The idea that a person is simply changed to another creature by fiat, without some sort of pseudo-rational explanation, leaves me cold.

--M. J. Young
Fri Nov 23 2007 11:28 pm #
Tadeusz
Member

Its a powerblock, MJ. If you enter, you have to conform to this pattern. Which would allow at least some versers to resist--especially if they were aware. You could give the verser a resistance roll on an 'as a spirit' basis.

This tool of the Donna's Door falls under the 'expand the tools available' doctrine. I've been mentioning Gabby's Gate or Donna's Door for....at least a year. It also falls under the 'encourage the new player to game design' doctrine. Its a special tool for special circumstances, to be used advisedly. This also falls under the 'every story is true somewhere' Multiverser motto.

I would say lay out your concerns with it if you still have them...game balance and player freedom issues basically I think as a warning to GM's, and then go with it.

Sat Nov 24 2007 3:03 am #
WilliamTWodium
Member

As far as I know, powerblocks prevent skill use, not types of existence. I'd assumed that Donna's Door was something more complicated than a powerblock for which I'd never heard the explanation.

Perhaps the ruling power initiates the attack, and if the player successfully resists he verses into a different universe (i.e., conform or go elsewhere, with resistance being the latter)? This has the advantage of letting you cook up super-high stats for the attacker and leaving the verser with a low chance of resisting while still allowing him that chance. Few players will gripe about failing an opposed check.

Another advantage of this is that you have a definition of what happened to him, and thus a defined set of effects that can reverse it. (If you like, you can powerblock any such effects within the universe to preserve your scenario - that's what powerblocks are there for.)

Sat Nov 24 2007 3:37 am #
M. J. Young
Moderator

Scott's right--powerblocks prevent the use of specific skills. If you created a world in which only specific life forms could exist, then the verser simply could not exist there unless he had the skills needed to become that life form himself, or some other being used a skill on him to form him thus.

I'm certainly not saying that something like this gate is impossible--only that it falls under the category of a skill exercised by some powerful being, possibly a supernatural ruler of the universe. The verser would in essence be attacked by the skill, and would either be changed or resist it.

You could make the universe completely uninhabitable by any creature like the verser, but that gets tricky. For example, The Architect and Michael di Vars obviously both have skills that enable them to survive in inhospitable atmospheres, so one of your simplest tools (oxygen deprivation) is not going to get them. You could make it a sort of stall scenario situation--the character is "attacked" by the morphing skill that will conform him to the universe, and if he resists that, he is then "attacked" by whatever the ruling deity has in his arsenal, until he is eliminated from what appears an otherwise barren universe.

You can still make this a Zygote variant, that the verser is born a member of the indigenous race; you just have to work out the transfer process that restores him to his original form, and consider how he manages to incorporate skills learned in the one form when he returns to the other.

--M. J. Young

Sun Nov 25 2007 9:59 pm #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.