|
Post by Philip on Aug 26, 2004 6:33:30 GMT -5
Reply to this locked thread: Modelling Psykers in GURPS: System and Examples Looks like fun. - Psykers are mutants, so normal humans can't learn it by practice. In your description it sounds like anyone can learn it.
- My take: Primary Psyker: Higher P1 ability level than their P2 ability level and in turn higher the P3 level. This means their 'base' is strong enough to support the later abilities.
- My take: Secondary Psyker: P2 higher than P1, P3 higher than P2, etc. These Psykers are 'unbalanced', or 'top heavy'. Because they can't turn of their ability to 'listen' and 'transmit' P1[L4] when dangerous warp entities come by they are open to 'possession'.
I think that being a Psyker should cost very little, at first glance it looks like a god send, but it is really a curse (in 40K). The penalties and problems of using these powers should offset most advantages. The only benefit is that sometimes 'only' a psyker will succeed when others will definitely fail.
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Aug 26, 2004 12:13:58 GMT -5
Reply to this locked thread... Yes, much like some of the other threads that I've posted where I've been typing up a large swathe of information, I've not wanted to have the text broken up until I've finished. Thus the General Chat and the concepts on military tech levels, the GT:FT economy thread, etc. And why in the heck did I post it originally in Factory? Moved... Psykers are mutants, so normal humans can't learn it by practice. In your description it sounds like anyone can learn it. Remember that these are draft notes of ideas on computer and that I'm eventually codifying as 'rules'. Firstly this means that I have not gone into full swing in terms of writing. Concepts can be fragmentary and, indeed, the same can be said for some of the sentences! Secondly, there is only an implication that "anyone can be a psyker" if you don't know the rules system. Remember that there is only so much of the original rules that I can post without infringing copyright (ahem, ignores the partial hypocrisy here). Note the "Cost of the Psyker" (or whatever) section... Creating a character that is a psyker requires the purchase of an advantage (Unusual Advantage (Psyker)) with a requisite points cost. Advantages, or the majority of them, may only be purchased in character generation. Thus if you don't pay the price, you're not a psyker. Thus not everyone can learn to be a pysker... kinda. There is always the Numina. My take: Primary Psyker: Higher P1 ability level than their P2 ability level and in turn higher the P3 level. This means their 'base' is strong enough to support the later abilities. You're talking about something entirely different now, e.g. the idea of something being prerequisite on another thing. As to your difference between primary and secondary... I disagree. There is nothing inherently 'bad' about being a secondary psyker other than vulnerability. I think that being a Psyker should cost very little, at first glance it looks like a god send, but it is really a curse (in 40K). Cost would ultimately be modified by 'disadvantages' selected by the player. Again, this was a draft. One premise is to require the 'advantage' to be paid off with 'Esoteric/Occult' disadvantages, though this would depend entirely upon the type of psyker created.
|
|
|
Post by Philip on Aug 28, 2004 5:35:33 GMT -5
I'm talking about the same thing, just a different angle (ie. the fluff says what happens, and my design takes it into account, but in a different way to yours.)
If you look at what I laid out you'll see that I concur with this statement.
I representing 'primary' and 'secondary' as Imperial classifications. As the Imperium prefers Psyker who are not vulnerable to the warp daemons, they class Psykers with a higher P1 level than P2 level as 'primary'.
Having a higher P1 than P2 level simply means you can disguise your warp signature.
If P2 is higher than P1, then the Psyker can perceive all the effects they have on the warp, and you can't hide what you don't know about.
=Example=
P1@L1 P2@L5 = Vulnerable to possession.
P1@L5 P2@L1 = Very resistant to possession.
P1@L4 P2@L5 = Vulnerable to possession.
P1@L3 P2@L3 = Resistant to possession (see below).
There are no other benefits besides 'resistance to possession' by being a 'Primary'.
=Pocession=
=Door= As a P2 Psyker channels the warp, like water from a tap, a daemon (pure warp essence) can slip through. P2 abilities act as a 'door' to the daemon, the size of the door is equal to the P2 level. So a P2@L1 is a little door P2@L4 is a huge door.
=Look out= If the Psyker has a lower P1 level than P2, then s/he can't see all of the 'door', they have a blind spot as it were. The daemon can use this difference to its advantage, by using its own P1 level to control part of the Psykers own power!
=Power tap= So a Psyker rated as P1@L1 P2@L4 has 3 whole levels of P2 power for the daemon to tap into. As these extra levels are P2 they are pure channelled warp energy and the daemon can add this power to any ability it chooses. It can be added to the daemons P4 power as a booster to enable possession, or even complete 'reality jump'.
=P3 controls body= While processed it is the fact that the daemon has a higher P3 (transmute) level that enables the control (if the daemon has a lower P3 ability the Psyker retains control). The Daemon is using it's P3 ability to control the body by force (a good analogy would be telekinetic) The Psyker is fully aware and alert, it's just they can't control their body, voice and become blind to the warp.
=Unnatural= Either way the body is no longer controlled by muscles and nerves, it is being directly controlled by the P3 power. As P3 ability can shift material in any direction, the daemon can make the body move very quickly and unnaturally.
added note Primaries could still be possessed, it just that a daemon get no bonus to their P4 abilities. This would make it hard for a minor daemon to make the jump, but a super powerful greater daemon...
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Aug 28, 2004 7:45:19 GMT -5
LOL... Erm, I'm really not going to be converting everything to be consistent with your system of presentation. If you wish to make analogies from yours to mine then, well, fine. But I'd rather not spend time in this thread talking about your system when we're already doing that on another thread! I would suggest that this is a mistake. Not ony should they still be vulnerable, but having a system where Primary's are always the most powerful is munchkin. There is only one group of people who are 'immune' to possession: illuminatus... Two groups who are 'immune' to possession (gotta love Monty Python) if you include the craftworld eldar, but there's other reasons for that beyond their 'abilities'. But now we're talking about your scheme again... As such I should more than likely close this thread.
|
|
|
Post by Philip on Aug 28, 2004 7:51:55 GMT -5
Primaries could still be possessed, it just that a daemon gets no bonus to their P4 abilities. This would make it hard for a minor daemon to make the jump, but a super powerful greater daemon...
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Aug 28, 2004 8:08:49 GMT -5
Then you should watch it when you say 'invulnerable' then... Sorry, being all morose. Darned American jobs, work permits, etc.
|
|
|
Post by Philip on Aug 28, 2004 8:18:09 GMT -5
I'll change it to 'resistant' and 'very resistant'. new job, good luck!
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Aug 28, 2004 9:18:13 GMT -5
Nah, that's the problem. Darned hard to get work permits and, therefore, likely no job... Well, since we've finished discussing your system again... Integrating the two posts without editing just so that I don't actually double post... Kinda.I'm double posting merely to say that, for some reason, this thread was locked. No idea why even though I 'threatened' to do it... Anyway, since you started this thread, Phillip, perhaps you could care to comment on the content of the other thread and its representation rather than strictly relating it to your system and discussing everything in that context?
|
|
|
Post by Philip on Aug 28, 2004 19:55:39 GMT -5
Right I 've read though the whole lot,
As GURPS is your personal preference I'll miss out my views on the conversion. It reads OK so I'll assume you did a good job at shoe horning 40K into GURPS.
However it doesn't read like 40K, for some reason Psykers seem to be plain old magic uses and it reels like a fantasy setting. As you said, you see 40K as a fantasy setting so I'm sure that this point will not bother you.
I would rip out all the bits to do with deities (The Numina, Power Investiture, Sanctity, Holy Days etc.) as the chaos god have their own rewards, and the Emperor is preoccupied.
I am curious as to your take on what the Psyker is really doing when 'casting spells', and perhaps description of the spell effects in 'warp terms' to give it back a bit of flavour.
I like the idea of 'unlimited mana' as it vaguely fits in with my ideas. I do think the use of the warp itself should be dangerous and a little unpredictable, and not just because of a large amount tapped at once (ie, if you shot fireballs you could burn your hands if you push it, like the overheating on the plasma gun, regardless of whether the Psyker is near their threshold or not).
The Eldar stuff is good (not my interpretation, but it seems reasonable).
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Aug 29, 2004 9:14:26 GMT -5
This is the second reply to this thread since, for some reason, the computer fell over the last time. Darned Always Off Line (AOL) monkeying around with my machine. Time to write it in Notepad and then transfer it across, methinks! So with little ado, onwards... First off, thanks for replying. I know you prefer to post within your own Concept threads and are interested in discussing your own interpretation, as well as trying to convince other people to adopt it (! ), but it's good to stretch ones legs, as it were. It should be further added that this is in no ways a codified version of psyker abilities in the 40k universe at least as in what is applicable to the ASP. Rather, it is merely my interpretation of the 'best fit' from a 'fluff'-RPG interpretation rather than the more usual 'fluff'-wargame or occasional 'fluff' approaches. Right I 've read though the whole lot <grin> To be honest there isn't that much. The core system is all published in GURPS and supporting material and I'm wary of posting it when it is inappropriate to do so. While I do not advocate it unless you already own the book, which you self-evidently do not, there are electronic versions of 2E and 3E material hanging around on the 'Net. I personally have some of these copies but, then again, I own all of the physical books so do not think that in this case it is that bad. If you're interested in the basic system then you can download a "Lite" copy of the rules, either for the Transhuman Space or more generic version, at the following URL: GURPS Lite. As GURPS is your personal preference I'll miss out my views on the conversion. In many regards that is the point of the discussion. If you're questioning the viability of GURPS, a generic system, in application to the 40k universe you're going to have difficulty, moreso if you're advocating the use of another system. I utilise GURPS for a number of reasons, first and foremost of which is the fact that it is generic, but also because it is well supported and can do everything that I want. There are some things that I'm not overtly happy about, but I know that in one of the other products - including the conversions of other game systems and genre - I can find what I'm after. To use the horrendously poor, but quite amusing, joke from Master and Commander, "it is the lesser of two weevils". It reads OK so I'll assume you did a good job at shoe horning 40K into GURPS. The wonders of a generic system is that no shoe-horning is required. The only glitchy system is the concept of the "tech-level" system because of the non-equal and discrete nature of technology as it is represented. But that's a question for elsewhere. However it doesn't read like 40K, for some reason Psykers seem to be plain old magic uses and it reels like a fantasy setting. You do realise that there is a huge swathe of difference between mechanical representation and narrative representation, do you not? That it is description of how things work rather than how people think about it or how they approach it? You mention 'feel' but it would seem that it is more to do with the selection of certain words such as 'spell', or references to 'enchanting' or even 'colleges'. Remember, this is talking about how it is represented in a specific system. No-one, well except 'sorcerers', would refer to their abilities as such. 'Spell' would be replaced by 'psyker ability' or 'thought discipline' (or whatever), and 'college' by 'discipline'. It is not, however, about the words but about what it can do. First and foremost, I question your suggestion of the inappropriateness of utilising 'magic' as a means of representing psykers. A part of this always seems to be in the, if you'll forgive me, shallow equation that "psionics" sounds like "psykers" and therefore must determine a necessary equation between the two. That's fair enough, though. I originally represent psyker abilities as pure psionics but this necessitated the inclusion of some rather 'cludged' rules/mechanics/borrows from other systems to get it to work. This is a second advantage of the utilisation of magic: a continuum is created between 'pskers' and 'sorerers' that would not otherwise exist and, since they're ultimately predicated upon the same concepts, this is again not a bad thing. One thing that you must remember, however, is that the choice of 'magic' is in part a systemic thing. Magic in GURPS requires the 'channelling' of energy to make the 'abilities' function whereas on the other hand psionics requires no expenditure of energy. In this rather shallow observance magic is more appropriate. There are, of course, other magic systems within GURPS, either distinct or as a result of franchises from other gaming companies. One in particular stands out as being particularly useful and that is GURPS Mage the Ascension (which I utilise as the optional Greater Path). This utilises a number of 'spheres' of magick (e.g. Correspondence, Prime, Matter, Forces, Spirit, Entropy, etc.) to define the make-up of the universe. In many ways it is actually more suitable to the 40k universe... the only problem is that it creates psykers that are far too expensive and, in the upper levels, which approach daemonhood in power! (Again, this is not inappropriate... and it is for this reason that I include it as the optional 'greater path' in the descriptions in the other thread.) Thus back to GURPS Magic. Quite simply, and within the system, it mimics the function and descriptions in the 'fluff' - as well as paying 'homage' to the origins of psykers from WFB - as well as operating continuity between the disparate representations. Furthermore, it also caters to the "Numina", those individuals who acquire their abilities as a direct relationship to a god or Warp Power. In terms of specific representation, what difference is there between someone described as a Pyromantic (which is catered for) whose abilities are divided up into 'thought forms/discipline' like "Shape Fire"? How is that in any way different to merely a low-level application of psionic pyromancy? There are, however, obvious sticking points such as 'matter transmutation' which do tend to crop up in the Elemental spells. However, rather than invalidating the idea it just means that the 'spells' must be discriminated against depending on GM fiant, 'appropriateness' to the feel of the universe (i.e. psionic aspecting) and so forth. As you said, you see 40K as a fantasy setting so I'm sure that this point will not bother you I see, and try to incorporate, sci- fantasy. GW itself is beginning to convert it to a 'fantasy' setting with the whole War in Heaven mythology. The utilisation of magic is merely a systemic representation of psykers, the most appropriate to bring over the feel. Of course, if I was utilising another system - say, Rifts - the incorporation of 'power points' into the psionic system would already be there. Indeed, if one looked at that system one could see that there really is little difference in the way that psionics and magic are represented (other than the more 'esoteric' effects of magic). I would suggest that, perhaps, getting hung up on the idea that magic must automatically equate to “non-psyker” or even just generically 'fantasy' in the exclusion of the 40k universe is merely your own prejudices and preferences. Yes, there are some sticking points but self-evidently there are those in a psionic system assuming that you are not, of course, pulling out generic concepts out of thin air…
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Aug 29, 2004 9:14:53 GMT -5
I would rip out all the bits to do with deities (The Numina, Power Investiture, Sanctity, Holy Days etc.) as the chaos god have their own rewards, and the Emperor is preoccupied. Except it makes a whole lot of sense when you consider the 'fluff'. When thinking about the RPG aspects it is useful to think about the potentials of things, rather than specific interpretations. Roleplayers have a tendency of thinking outside the box of the game and moving beyond it in unpredictable and often fascinating ways. It is merely the mechanisation of the 'chaos gods and their rewards' (which sometimes includes the transmission of psyker-like powers, the concept of "Priests of Chaos", and the idea that location can have an effect, which self-evidently it does. Holy Days you've got me on, though it could be appropriate to the Star Child/Emperor. As to the pre-occupation of the Emperor... think Star Child and Sensei. I am curious as to your take on what the Psyker is really doing when 'casting spells', and perhaps description of the spell effects in 'warp terms' to give it back a bit of flavour. Please note again that these are just mechanics. Narrative determines the 'flavour' not strictly the rules. In the finalised description, reference to 'spells' wouldn't be made such as on, for example, a character sheet. Rather, you would describe Biomantic abilities, or Telepathy abilities... or whatever. Ultimately a psyker is concentrating on a specific effect by shaping their thoughts and, then, utilising the warp to create that effect whether it be starting a fire, telepathically communicating with someone, or ripping a whole through to the warp... It's all the same. The 'spell' is merely a representation of the development of a specific mental discipline to generate said effect and the psykers own facility with it. It is no different than, say, the concept in GURPS Psionics where a "Psychokinetic" may develop to various extents such abilities as 'Levitation', or 'Telekinesis' or even 'PK Shield'. There are no 'components' that you see in some magical systems, although they can obviously be included such as the ritual elements employed in the clairvoyant activities of the lady Inquisitor from the Ragnar novels. Basically it creates a flexible and continuous system. I do think the use of the warp itself should be dangerous and a little unpredictable, and not just because of a large amount tapped at once... This is another mechanic thing. Failure to correctly visualise your 'thought pattern' for an appropriate ability sometimes leads to 'backfire' with various effects and is a separate issue to channelling energy beyond your Threshold. Canonically for GURPS these are on a critical failure of the roll to determine success of casting the spell. For example (and this is not the complete table): 3d6 | Result | 3 | Spell fails entirely; caster takes 1d6 of damage | 4 | Spell is cast on spellcaster | 5 | Spell is cast on one of the caster's compansions (roll randomly) | 6 | Spell is cast on a nearby foe - roll randomly. | 7 | Spell produces only a whining noise and an awful odor of brimstone. | ... | ... | 18 | Spell fails entirely. A demon (see p.113/B154) appears and attacks the caster. This will not happen if in the GM's opinion, the caster and spell were both lily-white, pure good in intent. Instead, roll again. |
Obviously the standard table is for a 'fantasy' game and you can change the specifics. That's easy, however, and not something which in any way invalidates the chosen form of representation. Indeed, it becomes that much easier to represent things like 'daemons' in a magic system since it automatically assumes the existence of such! The Eldar stuff is good (not my interpretation, but it seems reasonable). Did I post anything about the eldar? As a bit of a prequel, all that is going to happen is that the eldar have a pathological aversion to actually channelling past their Threshold and, indeed, would prefer not to even get close. The real problem comes in terms of representation of the Seer Runes: are they 'batteries' providing a constant, and more than likely low, amount of energy or are they 'power stones' providing a similar function to the Force Rods=power stone analogy made previously. But these are, of course, just broad guidelines. Equally valid is, for example, the concept that "Necromany/Daemonology" is not taught in the scholastica psykana and the restriction to 'mind'-orientated spells... If you're familiar with other RPG's you'll note that magic systems also employ this as a means of having 'psionics' (e.g. Shadowrun and the Psionic-aspected mage in Magic in the Shadows a particularly interesting book and genre showing what you can do consistently in a sci-fantasy environment).
|
|
|
Post by Philip on Aug 29, 2004 14:31:52 GMT -5
I understand what you are saying, and your going to have to forgive the spare reply as I'm working at the moment and just having a quick break.
=Magic= I agree with much of what you said,as a base mechanic the majority of the GURPS system it is fine. However the problem here (for me) is the 'sugar coating'. This is, I hasten to add a personal preference, and relates to my own desires to build a system.
At the moment you are down playing the non-mechanical side, I would suggest it would be more efficient to work on both together, or to work out and define Psykers before hand to make the later conversion straightforward as possible.
=My thoughts= I see the warp is neither psionic or magic (yah, I know). As mentioned in another thread I made a point about souls (the Necron concept) being a function of the warp.To expand upon this idea, the mind on the warp side it what is channelling the energy. This makes sense as those without any presence in the warp can't be Psykers. this gives me the idea that it is the 'soul' doing the business.
Why is this important? I think it then gives a better idea of how to approach the 'Psyker powers' in 40K.
If say, for example: these Psyker powers are fundamentally an ability of the warp, how much control does a person really have? Are they just a leaky tap?
This example poses some interesting questions, and gives ideas on how to go about designing the system. In this example it could be a suggestion that fine control would only come at the highest power levels and at the at lower levels it would be very hard to control indeed. It may be that a person has to 'hold back the flow' like a dam and it costs them physically to do so: in fatigue (can't sleep or they release power) and it preoccupies there thoughts (concentrating on keeping the tap turned of). In this instance letting go is a relief, blasting all a sundry with plasma bolts until your hands bleed is the way to go. Only problem is when the witch hunters turn up...
=In game= From this example you see that a Psyker could be fundamentally different to a magic user or a person with psionic abilities. In this particular example, being a Psyker is not good, but a huge curse. It would also be difficult to use, but could be represented.
They could have very low awareness (perception) due to being preoccupies and any skill use counts as a 'using two skills at the same time' with a correspondingly huge penalty. They may have a drug habit to inhibit neural activity, and many psychological disorders relating to persecution complex.
So why take a psyker? Well when it flow it pours! As soon as they can let rip they can do like nothing else. To a party they are usually 'dead weight' getting them into trouble etc. but when it kicks off the psyker can blast the crap out of anything (even ignoring the opponents armour etc).
This particular design of psyker is little more than a walking heavy weapon. Very handy to have, but the player will have a huge temptation to release that power.
This would be just one of many options of many different types of Psyker. I hope this gives you an idea of the angle I'm coming from, that magic/ psionic in essence do not fit, but the machincs could be moulded to fit without problem if the concept is clear.
=Fitting in the fantasy= As you are aware of my ideas, you'll notice than many 'spells' from a any fantasy setting wouldn't fit in with my ideas. I did note that you do make a point that the 'spell lists' will be trimmed and I'm glad to here that. The main problem with the fantasy feel is that it is putting powers which I think are far too difficult for a Psyker to accomplish, and steps outside the sphere of warp like effects.
Healing is a prime example: reasonably rapid regeneration over time (inc. immunity to infection) I don't mind, but instant healing I do. I think the ideas behind any system should be well thought out in advance and then matched to the machanics. Hence my work on designing the concepts behind these systems.
At lower level the Psyker has no sophistication, they are no more than 'blasters', it takes a lot of evolution to become like the Eldar.
=GURPS= I don't think that GURPS is a terrible system, its been around a while and has a good fan base, but I do think that you are going to have to think very hard about what it actually happening within a Psyker before you write down the Psyker Ability table.
In summary, system is OK need to sort out background before working on the Psyker abilities.
*Slurps the last of now cold coffee*
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Aug 29, 2004 16:13:09 GMT -5
I really am stumped about how to reply to this thread. Maybe it's thinking too much about proper work that has done it to me, but I'm reading the last post and going "Whaaa?" I can only once again reiterate that while it is fascinating to see you developing your own interpretation, I'm not going to suddenly shout out "Eureka" see the light of day and convert to your way of thought. I fundamentally disagree with the 'discrete' method of your representation of pyskers, although that is in part because it is absent of the assumptions of an RPG system... at present it merely is a means of codifying what does not need to be codified since the 'fluff' on psykers has always been reasonably consistent. And while we're at that, again I'm really not that interested in trying to make 'my' system fit into your scheme, Phillip. When I see a good idea I'll jump on it like a cougar on a rabbit. When I see it. Pre-eminence of the narrative... I really do think that you're missing the point with this one. The narrative is always pre-eminent and is also used to define the mechanics. But in this case it is merely getting the mechanics to conform to the 'fluff'. They do this... with care. Necron thread... I'm sorry, but I doubt that I'm going to spend any time there. I've read through it, disagreed with nigh on everything and felt that anything I could contribute would be negative and therefore not worth the time of typing. Regardless of how fast I type. Fantasy 'feel' and psyker powers... Hmmn, you're bringing your own limitations into things now. You're healing example kind of shows this prejudice since that is another thing that kind of conforms to narrative, not strictly mechanics. ... Arggh. I give up. Too stressed to talk about your intepretation in relation to this mechanical representation at the moment. I'm obviously too brain-fried to see what you're writing as anything other than an attempt to convert me in some form of epiphany to your way of thinking, more so when I do not agree with the greater majority of your concepts or, at least, the way in which you represent them. Thinking very hard... Please credit me with 'thinking very hard' in the first place. I've gone from one side to the other numerous times and it normally doesn't help with being told that you're thoughtless... AARAAGGHGHGGHHGHGHG... Now I'm being nasty. Sorry. Sorting out the background... There is nothing to sort out with psykers, or at least that much! They've always been fairly consistently represented except through the individual baggage that people bring with them... I guess I'll just give up. ASP=fail/missing the point... Damn, where is that red wine. Not allowed to drink it, but I think I might now. <sigh>
|
|
|
Post by Philip on Aug 29, 2004 16:27:54 GMT -5
I didn't mean to cause you a brain a schizoid embolism, honest! I was just showing an example of the design process, as I do it all day, I thought you my like my take. I not trying to convert you to my system (as there would be no fun left for me ). Cheers! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Aug 30, 2004 3:43:48 GMT -5
Over-react+Kage=that post. Even with that said, I do know about the design process funnily enough. I've been doing it for a long time, both academically and otherwise. It still seems that you're confusing the mechanics and the narrative, though. Your problems would be solved merely with a few changes of words, i.e. selling it to an individual with a marked preference. In other words, it's in the spin. If I was to produce this commercially (which I couldn't) then things would be markedly different in terms of that spin. But then again it would still likely use the same basis... RPG'ers are used to dealing with things which refers them to other things without overt 'pretty text' to obfuscate that fact. Heck, even if I was doing a commercial product utilising GURPS I'd still use magic... or if not GURPS I'd fall back to magic as a means to explain things. But once more if you look at the first post on the other thread it says that magic is the assumption and I'm not overtly fussed to continue discussing it...
|
|