OK, I don't know if anyone is still reading this forum, but since I finally have time...


I'm looking to make rules for my fantasy and it's daughter sci-fi game where warriors and wizards are primary character types. It will to a point be cinematic, most heavily influenced by WarCraft III and Diablo II. SF version will be basically the same only with power armors and Warhammer 40K added to the list of inspirations. There is little difference between the two, only in the future the paladin would wear a power armor and instead of archers there would be energy bolt pistols.

But before that a bit of history. I've officially stopped playing Dungeons & Dragons some ten years ago, when after GMing an entire session of Mage: the Ascension I realized that I had never looked inside the rulebook. After that myself and my players never wanted to bother with D&D anymore. After about a year we got bored with streets of various US cities and we wanted some good ole high fantasy. For purposes of that game I've created a quick conversion called Dungeon: the Dragon, storytelling game of subterranean exploration and reptilian horror. Behind the funky title there was a decent system that featured warriors, priests and wizards, paladins, druids and rangers as main character concepts. Best of all it needed no classes or levels.

When I got to creating Dungeon: the Dragon I quickly realized that Mage's Paradox system didn't fit into the genre, so it was replaced by Vampire's blood points. Blood pool was merged with Willpower and renamed Mana. I know, nothing original really, but it worked. For warriors, barbarians and dwarves I've fitted Potence, Celerity and Fortitude with activation cost of one Mana and with addition of Honor trait they were set. I also quickly realized that Spheres needed to be broken apart, so Forces were divided into Fire, Lightning, Sonic and so on and also fitted with same activation cost. Under influence of Mage: the Ascension wizards were allowed to tweak their spells and combine Powers (Spheres) as they liked. Power levels were assigned to signature spells and based on that any new spell would be assigned a casting level. For instance:

Fire
●      Burning Hands
●●     Flame Bolt
●●●    Fireball
●●●●   Dragon's Breath (sustained attack against multiple opponents)
●●●●●  Fire Elemental

and for instance if a mage wanted to cast Flame Wall or Fire Wave these would be level 3 since they pretty much attack once, while if he wanted Nova it would be level 4 since it attacks consequently.

It didn't take me long to make similar templates for other "spheres".

Lightning
●      Shocking Grasp
●●     Charged Bolt (simple attack)
●●●    Lightning Bolt
●●●●   Blue Dragon Breath
●●●●●  Lightning Elemental

Doom (signature spell of dark elf priestesses)
●      Withering Touch
●●     Magic Missile
●●●    Doom Bolt
●●●●   Rack (as in torture rack)
●●●●●  Black Hole (Orb of Annihilation)

There were minor differences between the spheres. For instance fire was easier to block, while lightning was easier to dodge, where doom inflicted aggravated damage, but was limited to NPCs. Surprisingly the formula more or less worked on non-wizardly spells as well.

Control Plants
●      Grass Memory, Slow the Prey
●●     Branch Attack
●●●    Threes Attack
●●●●   Wrath of the Jungle
●●●●●  Wake Ent

(Don't be surprised that all spheres are combat oriented, it was after all D&D conversion.)

At one occasion I had a guy who wanted to play Egyptian-like priestess who had Insects power and on the spot I created the spell list.

Summon Insects
●      Annoying Flies
●●     Hornets' Nest
●●●    Giant Swarm
●●●●   Creeping Doom, Giant Ants
●●●●●  Giant Wasp

Then there came WarCraft III. For a while all was cool. Initially we were thrilled how similar our powers were to ones seen in the game. Thrall's Chain Lightning was, as far as we were concerned, a variation of Lightning Bolt, Blizzard and Frost Nova were easy enough to be simulated by Cold Sphere and all spheres had at level 5 an infernal. And while the system worked well for wizards (it wasn't too hard to imagine that Archmage could cast Frost Nova if he wanted and that Lich could cast Blizzard), problems arose when we came to night elf campaign. Unlike the Druid (Keeper of the Grove) neither Priestess of the Moon nor Demon Hunter struck us as wizards (or even warwizards who knew only fire spells and nothing else), but simple warriors who could for whatever reason cast one single spell (that is one spell from Fire spell list) and no other. So the question came, should I force wizards to learn individual spells and say that Priestess of the Moon and Demon Hunter simply learned only Flame Arrow and Immolation respectively, whereas Blood Mage knows a whole bunch, or do I simply give Priestess and Hunter some sort of discount (say half a price per dot / damage dice pool)?

The issue was exacerbated when I tried to run Ars Magica in World of Darkness, where mages must learn spells. For instance, casting a Tracking Flame Bolt of course should be harder and needs to be learned, but simple Flame Bolt? Or, for instance attaching Fireball to an arrow so it can explode on the other side of city walls? Or Flame Bolt that comes from the skies like in Master of Magic rather than from the caster (and therefore avoids obstacles)?

And so on.


I'd appreciate any answer regardless if it's in terms of nWoD, oWoD or Scion, as it's not difficult for me to convert between the three.
This message was last edited by the user at 12:44, Fri 01 July 2011.

In reply to Tzuppy (msg #4):

I suggest you keep the same power structure, do not alter costs for the spheres themselves, instead present a piecemeal option for gaining 'spells' or whatever you call them. Borrowing an Option from new WoD given in Hunter Witchfinders, or Mirrors - allow players to purchase a merit called Spell. And its cost is a number of merit dots equal to the discipline dots of the desired spell, plus 1. This means to learn Flame Strike - essentially Burning Hands delivered through a Weaponry roll - would be a 2-dot merit. Ensure to disallow players to purchase any of the scaling benefit sphere levels without the previous levels, such as 3rd dot of Potence before purchasing the 1st and 2nd dot - instead he'd have to purchase a 2 dot merit, then a 3 dot merit, then the 4 dot merit to actually gain Potence 3.

This has the quirky effect of giving a multiclass-ish system with slightly less experience cost than actually learning the discipline, at first at least. At the tail end, is a more expensive cost - by virtue of the fact that each Spell merit is separate from the next, even if they are related to the same sphere. That is, a character with both the Spell (Fire 1) and Spell (Fire 2) merits had to buy a 2 dot merit and a 3 dot merit, unable to use the 2 dot merit to just add a dot. This cost system ensures the cost is always close to right, but warn your players this method of learning powers, while time-effective (truly, one could singly purchase Aura Perception without having Heightened Senses), comes with the caveat that you'd actually have no dots in the sphere mentioned in the spell's dice pool, and so would add 0 to the dice pool when it mentions '+ Fire'. Thus those who want to get every Fire dot via the Spell merit are actually getting screwed over, and should just start by purchasing the actual Fire dots instead at roughly the same experience cost - but now for dabblers: this is an ideal option.

NOTE - With this system, the situation can arise if you don't give everyone Mana, where the resource the character needs to use the power is not present. So how does a fighter with no Mana, but possessing the Fire 3 spell via the Spell merit, cast his spell?
He would probably spend 1 Willpower instead of 1 Mana to use it. Mana costs get converted to Willpower, and Willpower costs get converted to Bashing damage.

Wow, almost a year between posts!  But you made it back.  Good work so far. :)

babyJebus, excellent suggestions. Thanks.

Now let's do some crunching.



Stunts. It's a name that encompasses spells, weapon maneuvers (that fighters learn) and everything rogues do on regular basis.



I'll have to take a look at those then. Lately I've grown lazy when it comes to following RPG releases. The only thing that I follow (and that barely) are titles mentioned in GPIA and Wanted GMs forums. That's why the only RPGs I got in last several years are Houses of the Blooded and Blood & Honor. And I'm yet to read them.



That's why I hang around nWoDers. In my oWoD mind a Sphere is a prerequisite for a spell, while nWoD is all bout merits. And here and there there are actually some useful ones that go beyond what oWoD calls backgrounds (contacts, allies, resources and such).



Don't worry, I grew up playing oWoD. I know what sequential buy is.



And without actually introducing classes, which is very important to me.



Jebus, I think you're actually complicating here. I'll show you how we could streamline this.



These zero dice pools are what I intended to avoid in the first place.

Here's my system.


You separate Sphere rating and Sphere dice pool. Or, rather say that Sphere dice pool comes for free with Sphere rating. So, if you purchase Fire Sphere you get your dice pool equal to the sphere rating and that's it. Non-wizards can under certain conditions learn spells (as stunts) and if they do that they learn only that spell and cannot vary it or improvise new spells. When a character learns first stunt in a sphere he or she gets one dot in dice pool for free. Later they can increase that dice pool with experience or freebies at half a cost of increasing Sphere rating. If a character learns multiple spells from a same sphere he or she uses the same dice pool.

Wizards get certain core spells for free when they purchase a sphere and then later they can learn or improvise certain complications. Learning means that they pay for the complication with experience, while improvising means that they either get increased mana cost or difficulty.



I've actually thought about that, but in the end if WarCraft III can live with Mountain King and Weapon Master having mana, so can I. In the end, everyone expends Willpower which can be called Fate, Mana, Blood, Inspiration, Essence, whatever. In effect that's just a measure of stunts the character can pull per adventure.

From Diablo II I took an option that Paladins can convert health levels into mana, but that's really a highly specialized power.
This message was last edited by the user at 17:35, Fri 01 July 2011.

In reply to pdboddy (msg #6):

This is what I had planned this thread for last year. It's just that because of my work I never found enough time to post.

OK, the spell system seems nicely done so far. Now I need some ideas how to add Temptations (in Judeochristian sense) to the game mechanics.

In reply to Tzuppy (msg #9):

Elaborate please. How do these differ from the 7 Deadly Sins?

The point is not that they necessarily differ from 7 deadly sins (although I'm tempted to add a sin or two), but that we need to measure these sins. Let me be more precise.

I need the system for a near future game where cybernetic implants, plastic surgery and genetic engineering are (relatively) commonplace.

So, suppose I have a warrior who uses cybernetics to gain Epic Strength, he is clearly opening himself to sin of Wrath. Alternatively a singer who uses plastic surgery to increase size of her boobs and scientist who uses genetic engineering to boost his/her intelligence are opening themselves to sins of Lust and Pride respectively.

Now I don't want to make these practices necessarily sinful, but I do want to make such people more susceptible to sins, either making them less resistible to sins or having them suffer more serious consequences once they do sin.

In reply to Tzuppy (msg #11):

I disagree with that viewpoint on the relationship between implants and sinning; in fact, I disagree with the Morality system's take on degeneration and derangements in general - I find that additional options are the way to go if one wants to simulate the decline of a character into madness, rather than forcing decline to always carry varying forms of insanity. I digress however: The only relationship I see between augmented strength and sinning is if the possessor of such implants shows the same disregard for life as someone who needlessly kills a subdued enemy (for example). This (the loss of Morality) should be made no more difficult to resist for a character with augmented strength than for one without. It is simply easier to kill someone when you hit with Brawl + 6 dots of Strength rather than Brawl + 5 dots of Strength.

While I think the effect that is appropriate is already there.. if you desire to make it further impacting despite the reasons I advise against it, then so be it: * To make character with cybernetics more susceptible to sins: make cybernetic gear take a die (or dice) out of the dice pool rolled to resist degeneration (remember this is usually 1 to 4 dice inversely correlated to the severity of the "sin", so taking 1 die out is very impacting and will result in much faster degeneration)
* Alternatively, to make the consequences of sinning greater for those with cybernetics: make cybernetic gear take a die (or dice) from the character's effective Morality when rolling for derangement (which follows a failed degeneration roll, and will result in far more derangements developing as a result of lost Morality).

Believe me, I understand your concerns from a point of view of our modern world, however, the game I'm designing will have some serious medieval religious overtones.



Now that is not something you can pin on me.



Now this may sound like an obvious question, but I'm gonna ask it anyway. Why don't we write these additional options ourselves? Please elaborate what you had in mind.



I wouldn't say it's that simple. I'd say that a character who has his strength increased will start enjoying that strength and lose some of that God-mandated humility required for a servant of God.



Of course you do understand that had I thought this was enough I'd never open this topic for discussion, don't you?



Ah, that Morality roll. Frankly I was never too keen on nWoD Humanity, so I've pretty much forgotten of the mechanic. I guess I'll have to reread these rules.

Still this did jog my imagination. One way to do it is require character to beat number of successes off an implant roll. For instance if character has Epic Intelligence +3 when he resists a sin he'd need to beat one success plus successes from three dice. Not exactly what I'd call a neat mechanic, but it's a start.



This one looks better. A glitch in thought processing implant (or just faulty wiring) gives you a derangement. Now that's some proper science fiction.

Still, I'll have to remind myself of one other source of potential inspiration. Torment from Demon: the Fallen. Anyone still remember this one?

I appreciate the offer, but honestly I'd rather not when the Atrocity rules from Danse Macabre suit my campaigns just fine. I use a reflavored version of Atrocity dice for every game I run. In my nWoD Force-user template for example, I call them Dark Side dice instead, for M:tAwakening, I call them Hubris dice instead.

I suggest you get your hands on Danse Macabre and have a look at the section on Atrocity. It is a rather interesting way to simulate a descent into darkness rife with insanity or tangible evil (as desired).


Its not a neat mechanic at all, since all nWoD dice pools are reduced according to difficulty before being rolled, then every roll has the same target (one success). Break this basic design rule and you've strayed from the biggest strength of the new World's dice mechanic. Instead, consider penalizing the dice pool by a number from 1 to 5 (perhaps, base it on how much of their total Size has been modified - therefore a slightly altered character would take only a -1, but a damn near full "cyborg" would take a -5 penalty).


I like this one better as well. Its also very thematic to explain implants as removing one's connection to her humanity due to the installation of cybernetic implants. This one seems much neater in my opinion, using the same 1 to 5 penalty described above.

Of note, is that any of the campaigns in which I allow cybernetics do so at the cost of magic power. That is, the more cybernetics a character gets, the less potential with regards to magic the character gets. This would fit very well in a game in which the human spirit and its connection to the mind of God is an established theme.



I recently began studying it. It has served as material for antagonists in mid- to upper-tier V:tM campaigns. Torments could make an interesting mechanic certainly, and tie in well when it comes to template choices; I am interested to know the relevance to the points being discussed right now though. If you meant to shift topics to using Torments (unrelated to cybernetics), I am interested to hear that connection as well.

I think I have it somewhere. Can you give me a page number?



You're forgetting that I don't run nWoD. I'm using your suggestions to design oWoD/Scion rules for my game. Frankly one of the reasons I don't play nWoD is this excessive simplification of roll mechanic damages the game. Of course, that's just my taste.

Despite all this I strongly appreciate your suggestions and so far you've been fantastically helpful in terms of creating game I like.



After rereading my post, I noticed I forgot to post the dice mechanic, but you'll probably hate it. I don't know if anyone else is reading/following this thread and I will post it upon a request.



That's exactly why I began this discussion. What exact rules do you use?



The relevance is that I need a Damnation game mechanic. Cybernetics are intended to make it worse, but everyone is susceptible to it, priests and paladins especially.

Page 165 - Atrocity in Requiem

Right, right: crap - I actually did forget that! Our tastes are not that different, but then I will refrain from any negative comments about old World's mechanics as we continue this discourse.

Thank you. And you're welcome.

Ahhh haha! I can see why you might think that: but hell, I still play oWoD (specifically V:tM) to this day. So go ahead and present your mechanic for derangements. I won't be a hater (heh).


I begin with a Size 5 individual as the basis for this equation. I then rate the Size of cybernetic upgrades from 1 to 5. Spheres of magic power are rated 1 to 5. A character may possess, but cannot use, more dots in a sphere than the modified Size of the individual (that is, base Size 5 - Cybernetics Size). A character may spend 1 Willpower to circumvent this limit for the rest of the scene.

Example: Jared has several cybernetic upgrades and is learning to use the sphere of Fire (its rated at 4 dots currently). The Size rating of his cybernetic upgrades is 3. Thus, while he possesses 4 dots in Fire, he must spend Willpower (once for the scene) to use more than 2 of those.

This will feel contrived if the game is about vampires. It will, however, be fitting for a game where the power is flavored as coming from connection to the gods - something like Scion, or Mage (a bit of a stretch, but possible with the right wording). Probably will work for your game too, from the sounds of it (yea.. I peeked at your recent post in Game Ads ;) ).


Interesting. Any details you are willing to disclose? :)

I got it, I got it, I got it, Eureka, I got it... Thanks, mate.

I don't have time to write detailed rules right now, but I got everything. Will post when gamemastering duties permit.

I know you guys have been waiting for this (or at least you, babyJebus).


Divine Intervention

Yes, in my game you can pull a Divine Intervention. Rules are quite simple actually. Every character has 2-3 Faith Points. Spend one and guess what?

Divine Interventions come in three basic forms:

1. Narrate how one single attack (no matter how many damage it rolled) had no effect on you. Depending on how blatant the intervention was longer it takes for you to regain the Faith Point. (Did I say that Faith Points are b**** to regain?)
   
2. All dice on one roll come up success. No need to roll. You better have a damn good reason or I'll smack you up with Sin (think of it as Mage Paradox). You narrate the results, of course, and again depending on how blatant you make the Intervention you get the point sooner or later.
   
3. Something equally outlandish happens. T-Rex stumbles on its own leg and breaks a hip, Archangel Michael shows up on Moon with flaming sword in his hand, you activate ancient alien artifact which melts ice in Mars's core which releases enough oxygen to provide the entire planet with breathable atmosphere in time so you and your whore don't suffocate or something similar.

Heroics

You spend a point of Willpower and you narrate how heroic your character is. ("Three guys on one, that's not really fair, is it? Four on one, now that's better.") Of course, if I think you went too far, I'm gonna smack you with Sin (again Paradox). You wanna pull that crap Neo and Trinity did at the end of Matrix without power armor??? No problem, 5 temporary Sin each. Of course, you can always spend one Faith to invoke the outlandish clause (above). Hopefully Morpheus will be worth all you suffered for him.


Implants

You can spend Willpower as above to activate your implants, but implant use is also addictive, so you have one other option. You can instead take one temporary point of Sin. Why? Well, you simply gave in to temptation of being better than mortals. That way you weaken your connection to God. God, being merciful as it is, routinely forgives things like that as long as there are no consequences. For instance, you use your iron hand to bust somebody's skull open, well the God will notice that regardless how you activated your iron hand. Alternatively, you might enjoy using your implant that allows you to see through walls and God may forgive this. But find out something you were not supposed to, such as that your neighbor is having an affair by elicit means -- be it phone tapping, hacking or above mentioned implant, and God will take notice (and smack you some more).


Sin

There are two kinds of sin. Lesser is the Sin in Thought and greater is the Sin in Deed.

(There used to be also a Sin in Word, but since the Church has accepted Freedom of Speech as a Christian value this sin has been abolished... Or at leased it was merged with Sin in Thought. But, considering how Sin in Thought is by definition private, and therefore outside of purview of the Church, it's solely between a person and God (and therefore unknowable to other people). As such people are not permitted to judge other people by either their words or perceived thoughts, but their deeds alone.)

Allow me to give an example. Suppose a person goes to a bar and then gets drunk and has sex with a stranger. That by definition is a Sin of Lust, but more importantly it is a Sin in Thought. It inevitably weakens the link between the person and God and therefore makes the person more susceptible to possession by a shaitan. But should no shaitan be present and the person gets away with it (and therefore there are no consequences), the God routinely forgives that. However, should the person be in a relationship, and therefore cheats on his or her spouse then it is not a mere Sin in Thought, but rather a Sin in Deed. And as such nothing can undo it. Therefore it is exceedingly hard to obtain forgiveness, without at least some sort of redemption. Following the earlier example the way a person might be forgiven is to get a divorce and suffer anguish of solitude for a while and then he or she might get redemption.


Anyway, back to Neo and Trinity. No matter what stunts they pull, should they litter their path with bodies of innocent security guards, or worse even the loyal Imperials they may invoke divine intervention to absolve then from their Sins in Thought, but no just deity would absolve them of their Sins in Deed.

Therefore no amount of Willpower or even Faith can absolve from your Sins in Deed. You must seek means to rectify the situation, but there are no guarantees that that will be possible. After all, how can you bring someone back to life?
This message was last edited by the user at 11:22, Wed 10 Aug 2011.

All this seems to make my head spin as I am unfamiliar with Scion and any similarities that might exist between your post and the published system (Are there similarities I wonder?). The heavy religious connotations/denotations that are present make it more difficult to accept as a person (I am agnostic). Lastly, some of the statements you made (while in-setting or not I cannot tell) seem to be laden with the belief that they are fact, rather than opinion - equally off-putting to me as a designer trying to swallow the whole thing. And while there are many things I disagree with in your last post; I will just pick the one things I find it easiest to target (since it ends the post and seems most final in its statement).

"Therefore no amount of Willpower or even Faith can absolve from your Sins in Deed. You must seek means to rectify the situation, but there are no guarantees that that will be possible. After all, how can you bring someone back to life?"

This paragraph sounds extremely uppity and not flexible enough for satisfying roleplaying. What about the idea that mistakes (and shit) happens, or that people change, or are misled?

NOTE: While I agree, noone is brought back to life through events after the fact, one can still do things to mitigate their wrong-doing and show a change of beliefs. I can think of ways both in-character and out that ought to be worth something for the character. What if, after murdering someone, the character's player agreed to lose all the dots and experience spent on Resources 5 to give all the character's  worldly belongings to the family of the deceased, pulling them from poverty to riches they would otherwise have never achieved? Or how about if she asked her God for forgiveness and permanently lost a Willpower point to show she meant it? Or what if she turned herself in to the authorities, admitting all fault and taking the consequences of that (likely imprisonment, but possibly facing death or banishment) - or similarly, visited the deceased's wife, saying "I killed your husband, and for that I am truly sorry. Still, I would understand if you wanted to kill me for your loss; do as you wish with me." and then handed the wife a lethal weapon and knelt before her to accept what may come.

These all seem like perfectly reasonable (and really dramatic and interesting) ways to make the situation very serious in its consequences, reinforcing the themes present in a horror game about religious tenets, all while avoiding the hard-liner position the rules you posted are taking (and, I might add, are the mechanics present in the Atrocity system). It only seems to prevent inventive roleplaying, and muck up one's ability to have a good time; the opposite of a good rule set in my opinion.

Perhaps: lighten...up? (if not in the interest of being open-minded; then in the interest of fun)

I must admit that I thought (and actually still do) that religious overtones of my game are no heavier than those of Vampire: the Masquerade, Mage: the Ascension or Demon: the Fallen (not to mention Mummy: the Resurrection and some other lesser games and/or accessories). If I made some comments that are problematic in your world-view, I'm sure you have come up similar comments from White Wolf in games you have presumably purchased.

I know I have. But being a roleplaying game, it is by definition make-believe, a kind of what-if? situation. What if human belief shaped reality? What if you could turn into a panther? What if I was a ghost venturing the realms of shadow? What if... I'm sure you recognize the White Wolf games I was referring to. In this game some of these questions are:

What if citizens of a state were rewarded by God for leading just and moral lives by making that state prosperous and powerful? What if merciful God didn't like humans who thought that could make its creation even better? What if instead of impersonal and unworshipable "reality" protagonists were punished by a sentient (although somewhat lenient and inert) deity?



I do not hide my religious beliefs either. I am a worshiping Christian (of Eastern Orthodox denomination if it makes a difference) and some of my religious, political and similar views did make their way to world of Pilintor. And like a painter who draws Crucifixion and a director making movies about things he likes, I too write stories and create games about things that inspire me.

That being said, I never preach. I never ever write stories or design games in order to promote my world-views or (God forbid) persuade people to convert to my religion. I never thought that I'd need to write this disclaimer:




Now, please, reread my posts in light of this disclaimer if you need to. I believe I may have caused you a grief and I never wanted that.



For some reason (perhaps the reaction to my perceived preaching) you take my words too literally. I'm sure had you read this passage in a White Wolf book you'd guess the author would eventually recant some of it when it comes to details of sin mechanic. Of course I haven't typed these details, yet, so your point may be understandable.

The main point was that players should take Sin dead serious.

The secondary point was to give a sort of example (which I probably should have given) that should for instance a corrupt imperial governor put one of their comrades in jail, they shouldn't just bust him out with all guns blazing (although considering the firepower they have, they probably could). That approach should be considered a last (and not particularly pleasant) resort (if for instance their comrade was innocent all along and would be hanged in the morning) and even then they should make an effort to minimize casualties among jail guards, who are imperial soldiers (or policemen) after all.


There is one question in particular I'd like to hear your opinion on. Does my sin mechanic look any more strict or serious than Torment in Demon?

---

But rather than discussing space marine ethics (or even ethics of a just God) I was much more interested in your thoughts on divine intervention and heroics rules.

Ah, yes that makes things much clearer sir! I am glad to see that it was more of an in-setting or in-character view than a strict mechanical paragraph on how things would be handled. I definitely agree with malicious wrongdoings committed while in-character carrying serious consequences; its has long been a view of mine that such a thing is paramount to an effective storytelling experience which surpasses that which is most easily relied upon in d20 games.

As for your parting question.. I unfortunately have not yet had the pleasure of running an actual Demon campaign or participating in one. I have only read it, and viewed it in limited spurts. However, researching it again, and thinking on it, it doesn't sound like (with this clarification) that your right/wrong handling is any different. In short: I think you have a good handle on how deep the rabbit hole should go, and I lurk about in the Stellar Infantry Chronicles with interest.

I read Atrocity in Requiem yesterday. I was actually astounded how similar my rules were to what they wrote. Of course I can smell a strong DRYH (Don't Rest Your Head) influence on White Wolf rules there, but that's a matter for another discussion. In this game I actually hadn't planned "evil makes you stronger" approach (as in 40K), but that's still a thought.

My rules are somewhat less edgy, but it fits the benevolent lenient deity.

In reply to Tzuppy (msg #22):

RE: Atrocity
Yea, it's good for that theme of "being evil means you don't necessarily do it better in the long run, but you get things done". The drawbacks for rolling a 10 using an Atrocity die are key to making the Atrocity dice mechanics worth using - otherwise it's just added dice to players (and a lost opportunity as a storyteller).

Now that I'm actually posting on this forum...

Any thoughts on leaking power armors?

Dramatic Failure?

Good idea, but I was looking for something that happens more often. Kind of like when people shoot at you.

Not sure if it was mentioned, but Mirrors: Bleeding Edge gives great ways to add cybernetics to your sci-fi game. Or look towards Shadowrun for the same sort of deal.

Shadowrun is pretty broad term (for someone who never played the game). Should I look at the main book (and what edition) or at some particular accessory?