Higher Purposes. Purposii? Purpodes?

[finn]

Originally Posted by martinl

Contrariwise, this leads to the weird situation of PCs "test slapping" folks to verify they aren't demons and similar shenanigans.

I would not tell them whether they got the bonus unless their attempt to harm the subject, or the subject's attempt to harm them, was serious.

However, if a Holy Warrior picks a fight with a suspected demon/undead, fights seriously for a couple of turns, and than steps backs and says "it is clear that you are not a demon/vampire. I can tell from how you fight/how my blade reacts etc.", I think that would be cool and allow it.

In such a case, I would probably only tell the Holy Warrior when the bonus mattered (the bonus would make the difference of a hit or miss, or a damage roll was rolled with full ST), or if the Holy Warrior made a Per roll after each turn with serious fighting starting from the 2nd.

Originally Posted by martinl

Is it too severe to require both the intent and the reality? PC has to think it is a demon and it has to really be one? The first allows you to call on your holy blessing, the second allows the blessing to actually work.

That is another option, and should work because the player generally calculates their own target number to hit, as well as the damage roll. If they added the bonus when rolling, that includes the declaration of "intent". The GM can step in and declare when the PC can't actually get the bonus.

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Bruno

Slap The Devil Out Of Them is a 12 point power-up :)

Behind the scenes: It buys off the -10 penalty for trying a task virtually instantly (one second) as a Hard Technique, and a perk for the Unique Technique

My version cost around 41 points... Perk to avoid the ritual aspect and 40 points to cover the -10...


But I also like yours. Not sure I like it completely removing the need to perform (long-form) Exorcisms on people ever again... hmmm.... can the Holy Warrior slap a building?

*SMACK* "This house is clean!"

[Joe]

Originally Posted by martinl

Is it too severe to require both the intent and the reality?

That's the option I'd go for - i.e., the holy warrior has to be facing his chosen foe, and know it.

This ruling might seem overly strict, but in actual play I don't think it would really prove much of a limitation. Plus it has the benefit of giving a clear and simple answer to the edge cases.

It also prevents other problems.
If you go with "Higher Purpose works because the of the nature of the foe, whether or not the PC knows about it" then the GM has to remember which PCs have Higher Purpose, and of what kind, and track that for them. I try to minimize that - better to have the players each be responsible for their own sheets, as much as possible.

If you go with "Higher purpose works because the PC believes it," then you create a perverse incentive for players to claim that their PCS identify pretty much everything as their chosen foe. In some groups, this wouldn't be a problem, but in other groups, it might be.

Anyway, the "both" solution avoids all that.

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Joe

If you go with "Higher Purpose works because the of the nature of the foe, whether or not the PC knows about it" then the GM has to remember which PCs have Higher Purpose, and of what kind, and track that for them.

That's really not that hard.

Plus side when the Player discovers they've actually been killing [Higher Purpose Foe] and their Advantage has been serving them, they don't begin to feel they've wasted however many points on an Advantage that keeps serving no purpose due to "disguised" foes.

[ArchonShiva]

If you want to go “because the PC believes it”, you can combine:
1. treating it like an accessibility limitation/unplayed disadantage: If you keep using it all the time, you owe some points!
2. Having the GM step in to evaluate the PC’s belief based on the PC’s actions: If they waste their alpha strike throwing holy water at it, they may just are earned that +1...