Speech Impediment - 50 CDP (That bypasses the 200 CDP Drawback cap, no less!)
If a person takes one, its usually with the idea of “I don’t really want to be the party face”. But once they have chosen one, why not just go all in? Then you only have to find 40 CDP of Drawbacks to be at the cap. And you even got another 50 free CDP from the speech Impediment, since once you have the others, its really not adding any more penalty to you. If you have all the others, you are already so penalized that you won’t even try to coerce someone.
I can understand by taking a few of them as they can be complimentery to one another, e.g. visual deformity on the face is so severe for a Remnant that it affects his speech to create an impediment. Also, if they would be nervous and shy because of their physical appearance so I can see them also taking that. However, the arrogant drawback is probably for someone who can speak well, looks well and carries an air of confidence and then some.
Of course, players who have taken these drawbacks will also have to roleplay these characteristics in their dialogue and actions so it would also mean that they probably are looking at also a negative 5 on their initiative (reaction check) as they would be hesitant to go into any combat situation. These characters will also defer their action on segment 3 or move into a more protected location and wait to see how it comes out before using their dice pool in segment 6.
so it would also mean that they probably are looking at also a negative 5 on their initiative (reaction check) as they would be hesitant to go into any combat situation. These characters will also defer their action on segment 3 or move into a more protected location and wait to see how it comes out before using their dice pool in segment 6.
There are drawbacks that do what you are describing: Cowardly and Slow Reflexes. But those aren’t what we are talking about here. I’m not sure how you made the leap to apply those effects to this situation.
Someone can make a Remnant that has lived his life outside civilization (Unsophisticated), only recently learned the basics of the language spoken in that area (Speech Impediment), thinks that he is better than everyone else because they couldn’t survive everything that he has (Arrogant). He thinks people are out to get him (Nervous Disposition) and has scarring on his face from a battle with a monster that emitted strange radiation (Visible deformity). That description fits the archetypal “barbarian”. I am not seeing any reason why that character would be at all hesitant to enter combat. From a logical perspective, he seems more likely to be looking out at all times for combat, and ready to jump into the fray at a moments notice.
I’m not saying that it wouldn’t make sense that a character could have -coercion and the drawbacks you describe, just that the two are not neccessarily correlated.
I have a few draw back hoarders in my party, they lost one already. I play my arrogant to the limit of getting to fight with the other party members.
When I GM I insure that those draw backs are played if not they get bad karma rolls when I feel like it. You want to get draw backs and play weird guys be my guess, but play hem else you will feel my wrath you CDP hoarder!
I’m not saying it can’t be worked around. I’m just a bit boggled as to why it was decided that there should even be a way to get yourself a total -12 to coercion.
It seems like there should have just been one drawback to cover those: Socially Inept. You could then say you are socially inept because of any of those reasons.
That is if you want to get to the -12 total and totally gimp the social aspect of the player, any GM with a social campaign should either refuse such a build our plan a timely death for the player.
There is still an acceptable level of unplayability! lol
so it would also mean that they probably are looking at also a negative 5 on their initiative (reaction check) as they would be hesitant to go into any combat situation. These characters will also defer their action on segment 3 or move into a more protected location and wait to see how it comes out before using their dice pool in segment 6.
There are drawbacks that do what you are describing: Cowardly and Slow Reflexes. But those aren’t what we are talking about here. I’m not sure how you made the leap to apply those effects to this situation.
My GM’s interpretation may not be the interpretation of MSL but in NeoPangea, the world is different so I can overrule the book’s interpretations.
Someone who is arrogant is so full of over-confidence would never be nervous. In fact, they would fake their way through any unfamiliar situation; they would feel annoyed, agitated, angered and frustrated if the rest of the party does not support his or her PoV (Point of View) and loves conflict. On the other hand, someone who has a nervous disposition, and stuttering with a speech impediment is going to be second-guessing themselves. You cannot have one with the other as these two characteristics contradict themselves. (It may not be in the errata but it’s in mine.)
only recently learned the basics of the language spoken in that area (Speech Impediment),
Broken language is not considered a speech impediment, IMO. Besides, verbal communication is probably not as intimatidating as the enemy’s body language would be conveying. Size would definitely matter in this regard.
... thinks that he is better than everyone else because they couldn’t survive everything that he has (Arrogant). He thinks people are out to get him (Nervous Disposition)
It wouldn’t work because you would be playing fearful and over-confident all the time. There is no on-off a disposition is an ongoing psychological condition of ALWAYS looking over his shoulder, watching his back. It’s on the verge of paranoia and people who are fearful don’t have much confidence and certainly not enough to be over-confident. They are hesitant and thus this is where the -5 on the reaction check would come in because they’re stuck in their fear, their anxiety in trying to figure out what they should do. Not until push comes to shove will they react and do something. Some whose nervous disposition is so bad, it can be paralyzing. This type of RP does not have moments as anyone can have moments of arrogance or anxiety. Drawbacks like these are underpinnings of the player’s character RP that exists on varying levels. These are challenges that my players’ characters would have to deal with throughout their sessions of RP over a very, long period of gametime.
I’m not saying that it wouldn’t make sense that a character could have -coercion and the drawbacks you describe, just that the two are not neccessarily correlated.
Some can be and some can’t but not all together and the description of your archtypical “barbarian” could have that description but it not be enough to warrant to be entitled to all of those drawbacks. Besides, to RP that consistently would be more trouble than it’s worth. LOL
I was going to say, if you pick that many social disadvantages, that’s giving a strong signal to the GM that he should put you in social situations - the same as if you picked a bunch of social advantages. It shows you’re interested in that area of the game and displaying the weakness of your character in that area.
I was going to say, if you pick that many social disadvantages, that’s giving a strong signal to the GM that he should put you in social situations - the same as if you picked a bunch of social advantages. It shows you’re interested in that area of the game and displaying the weakness of your character in that area.
The only problem with that, is that with a -12 to all your rolls, any social situation is not going to stay social long. You’re probably going to end up in combat. That’s great for this one character, but more than likely, we aren’t talking about a solo campaign. Now, regardless of whether the other characters would have liked to resolve the situation socially, they now no longer have that option.
Also, please take a moment to consider something outside of your usual playgroup. For AO to grow as a game, there needs to be successful games at conventions between complete strangers. If someone walks up with a character with -12, the Warden does not just get to go tell him to take a hike. And if he has to bend over backwards for Mr. -12 coercion, the experience of the other players may very well be negatively effected.
If you like this game, you want as many people playing it as possible, because that means Mindstorm sells more books, which lets them make more books. And I for one am craving some new books for this awesome system.
For gaming conventions however those that would introduce new players are no more than 2-4 hours long. There are social skill checks that doesn’t necessarily involve the whole team and coercion is just one social skill. As you said, zergling in your first post, that this type of player to be picking this combination of drawbacks, say, the “nervous disposition, physical disfigurement and the speech impediment” would RP not volunteering to be the “public face” or point man for the team, in this scenario. The team would like probably someone else who is either Grigori or Lesser Grigori for their special abilities or a Nephilim, just based on physical size would have more of an advantage. If coercion is the social skill that’s being used, I can’t see the player volunteering their character with a “-12” penalty to be the point man in this case.
Now, in a PW (persistent world) setting, there’s going to be more chances to be using social skill checks and as a character, the player would use other methods of convincing. I think it would be a special case basis and as a GM, I’m already thinking of a one on one, (PvP) scenario where he would have a moment to make that coercion check after working on his opponent for a long time in a verbal conflict situation to the point, there’s been a series of successful persuasian checks and the opponent’s emotional status change has been affected. Yet, it’s up to the other player too whether he wants his character’s mind changed or not. It’s all a matter of give and take.
Before I start, I just want to thank you all for your input. I know that some of the discussion could be read as a bit adversarial, but I really appreciate your input in helping hash out this issue so that GMs in the future have somewhere they can look to if this becomes a problem for them. If the best solution we can reach is that there should be a gentleman’s agreement that characters don’t take more than 2 of those then thats fine with me. I just think its something that the community needs to have thought about.
That said, on to your points:
A) “Its just one skill.”
Coercion is a field actually, which encompasses pretty much everything social (Bluff, Intimidate, Negotiation, Persuasion). The character would have a slightly better intimidate thanks to visible deformity, but we’re still talking about a -7.
B) “Don’t make them the point man then”
If you let them complete skirt social situations, they got a ton of free CDP. One time in a con game, thats probably not that big of a problem. I would be more worried about it setting a precedent that the players see than actual damage to that game session.
That said, on to your points:
A) “Its just one skill.”
Coercion is a field actually, which encompasses pretty much everything social (Bluff, Intimidate, Negotiation, Persuasion). The character would have a slightly better intimidate thanks to visible deformity, but we’re still talking about a -7.
Yes, the Manipulation skill is based on Presence but persuasion is not covered as I see it, IMO. When you have to use Coercion, it’s more of an aggressive negotiation tactic. It’s much more hostile used against PvEs (Player vs. Enemy aka NPCs). Not all checks are in the book just as there are not all weapons, wielding spells, etc. It’s a CORE rulebook. Persuasion would probably be a straight wisdom check.
B) “Don’t make them the point man then”
If you let them complete skirt social situations, they got a ton of free CDP. One time in a con game, thats probably not that big of a problem. I would be more worried about it setting a precedent that the players see than actual damage to that game session.
He may get a ton of free CDP at the beginning but over time in a PW setting, someone who doesn’t stand out, will have to compensate in other ways to earn that CDP. As I’ve mentioned jokingly, probably if someone wants to PL (power-level) their character in my world, they will have to RP for it. If they can RP those qualities consistently, they’ve earned it. And by allowing other players to demonstrate their strengths if they did focus their CDP in those ranks of Coercion, he’s being a team player.
Zergling, in a PW setting, you have to look beyond the character sheet and back to the character concept. In fact, as a GM, for one player, I suggested he take one or two other complimentary drawbacks because he never realised what the RP opportunities were there for him when he started to describe his character’s backstory. I hope when we resume NeoPangea that character comes back because I can see great things in that character’s development to overcome those drawbacks. But this is why, when I have initial interviews, with players, it allows me as a GM to get to know the players’ characters and to be able to write for them adventures that will cater to their strengths as well as their weaknesses.
Yes, the Manipulation skill is based on Presence but persuasion is not covered as I see it, IMO. When you have to use Coercion, it’s more of an aggressive negotiation tactic. It’s much more hostile used against PvEs (Player vs. Enemy aka NPCs). Not all checks are in the book just as there are not all weapons, wielding spells, etc. It’s a CORE rulebook. Persuasion would probably be a straight wisdom check.
I guess I am just not understanding what you are saying here.
Looking at the skill page of the character sheet, in the upper right hand corner, is the Coercion Field. The coercion field is made up of the following skills Bluff, Intimidation, Negotiation, Persuasion. The penalties apply any time that one of those skills are used.
Sorry, yes I meant Manipulation instead of Persuasion. Persuasion doesn’t exist as a skill in AO, which I guess was your point?
It seems a little odd for there to be this elaborate skill system…and then to bypass it when it comes to persuasion? It seems far more likely to me that “persuasion” was just split up between the skills in the Coercion field, not that its handled some other way entirely.
As I said before, it’s a CORE rulebook. Not everything is in there or else, the book would be as large as a set of Library of Congress Subject Headings.
Coercion is a set of skills as I said before are better used for PvE but if you’re doing more of a PvP in a PW setting, you do need something a little less aggressive, IMO. That’s the beauty of AO however the system is flexible just as it is to create the characters as long as it’s still reasonable and agreeable to both the player and GM. Coercion are last-ditch attempts. After Persuasion, if that doesn’t work, a player may escalate to using Coercion tactics of either trying to manipulate, bluff, intimidate or negotiate. It’s sort of, the “Look, we need to ....” stage of an arguement before one ends up in mere contradiction, which isn’t an argument, according to Monty Python.
Anyhow, to get back onto topic, if someone who had these characteristics could still face being in a one-on-one situation where he could still be able to persuasion check and not face a penalty as it’s just merely stating a case without getting into verbal conflict. The nice thing is that when such a character overcomes that drawback, it’s part of character development that’s RPed. The player would get CDP for that roleplay and he would lose that drawback eventually if there’s a pattern established as his self-confidence would replace his nervous disposition. After roleplaying one’s character for some time, players do care what happens to them. It’s moments like those in gaming that just want to make you as a GM want to cheer. *insert smiley tearing up with joy icon here*
