Binding Contract vs. Player Character

[Saeros]

This is the great thing about these boards - ask a question and you get a multitude of good responses to choose from!

I agree that corruption tends to be about the otherworldly / eldritch, but the RAW implies that people can get it for doing evil. It is perhaps too strong of a penalty for breaking a binding contract. But since it can be removed, it is not necessarily a long-term problem. However...

The idea of treating binding contract as an obsession I think is great. I had not thought about that for non-Sorcerors, but I think it fits well. Now what kind of penalty / bonus to give for the effected character? -1 to Saves / Attacks when not pursuing the contract; +1 when actively working on it? I don't think you want to make it too strong a penalty / bonus, just something to make the character want to complete the contract. Perhaps keep it in place for a period of time if the Temptress dies at the hands of the PC to prevent 'accidents'?

 

[Apple]

Uhm corruption? Really? For not doing what a whore tells you to do in order to f**k her? I think thats waaaaaaaayyyyy too much.

Think about it realistically for a second, it's NOT something that would actually work on most people. Even Kate Bekinsale, Megan Fox and Keira Knightly lathered in oil and jumping on a trampoline aren't going to get me to do a whole heck of a lot. This is a power that is meant to work on "other people", i.e. NPCs, because heroes can make them do things, which is why it's a diplomacy roll and not a CHR check. For PCs though, no, it's not going to really motivate them unless they want it to.

I think it could make a good plot hook but thats about it. As for penalties, the enmity of the tempress would be all of it, but considering by the time she can binding contract she probably has an entourage, high-ranking friends and tons of money and other resources to bring to bare on the PCs... having her enmity could be a very bad thing indeed!

 

[Krushnak]

hell hath no fury like a woman scorned

 

[Saeros]

Uhm corruption? Really? For not doing what a whore tells you to do in order to f**k her? I think thats waaaaaaaayyyyy too much.

Well, somebody must have a very high Will save! If a beuatiful woman doesn't corrupt you, then I don't know what will. Stories going all the way back to Adam and Eve have women corrupting the men.

I agree that a corruption point for failure might be too much, but we should also not read too much into what one point of corruption can do. A single point of corruption causes minor problems at most, and can easily be remedied by the exenditure of a fate point, or some form of atonement. The character needs to have many points of Corruption before the horns start growing out of their heads, and I think it might be best to distinguish between normal corruption and eldritch corruption in those cases.

But as I mentioned, I think I am going to go with applying the rule of obsession to the character as that seems to fit more with the ability.

I think it might be a whole other thread to talk about what abilities are meant only for PCs. The game sets out a framework for cooperative play, and if you want to say the rules for PCs are different than the rules for NPCs that's fine, but it doesn't tend towards edification...

 

[Apple]

I agree that a corruption point for failure might be too much, but we should also not read too much into what one point of corruption can do. A single point of corruption causes minor problems at most, and can easily be remedied by the exenditure of a fate point, or some form of atonement. The character needs to have many points of Corruption before the horns start growing out of their heads, and I think it might be best to distinguish between normal corruption and eldritch corruption in those cases.

As there isn't any limits set on Binding Contract (because it's not meant to be used this way), if you apply corruption points then a temptress could have someone pretty horny pretty fast. Slap 10 binding contracts on them (no time limit is stated, but say 1 minute each) and bam! Their soul is possessed by a demon unless they rob and kill their own mother and give everything to the temptress. :twisted:

 

[Demetrio]

a temptress could have someone pretty horny pretty fast

But surely that's the whole point of the class?

 

[Saeros]

As there isn't any limits set on Binding Contract (because it's not meant to be used this way), if you apply corruption points then a temptress could have someone pretty horny pretty fast. Slap 10 binding contracts on them (no time limit is stated, but say 1 minute each) and bam! Their soul is possessed by a demon unless they rob and kill their own mother and give everything to the temptress. :twisted:

Since a failure by the Temptress means she can not try again for 24 hours to apply a binding contract, I would make the assuption that she can only use this ability once per day, or at least once per day per opponent. Otherwise she just walks through town and after a couple of hours has half the population groveling at her feet. I would also assume, and again this is my interpretation, is that she can only have one Binding Contract with person at a time, although she could have binding contracts with a multitude of people.

But I am no longer suggesting the point of corruption is a good option, as I think the rule of obsession is a better idea, although that too needs refinement.

 

[Clovenhoof]

Saeros: from your recently opened thread about social skills in general I get the feeling that you may have misunderstood my issues with the BC ability in particular. I'm posting this here in order to leave the other thread on topic.

My beef with Binding Contract (and maybe other social abilities) is not that it could be used to force a PC into doing something against the player's will. That's not the point. The point is that some of those abilities are _more powerful_ than actual Magic, because many characters don't even theoretically have the chance to defend against such attempts.

Magic of any kind ALWAYS grants you a Saving Throw. And ALL characters have a Will Save, and everyone is able to boost this Will Save by way of feats and securing other bonuses. And I mean everyone. Also, boosting your Will is always a good idea because it is used for so many things; most magic spells, plus fear and terror checks, etc.

Opposed to that, the only defense against Binding Contract is a Diplomacy check, and that is plain unfair because most characters couldn't get that skill high enough if they wanted to, simply because it isn't a class skill for them. And even if they are able to buy those ranks with their INT points, it's still absolutely no relation to sacrifice, say, a fifth of your total skill allowance just for the chance to defend against ONE ability of ONE class (and still you won't have a chance because Tempresses get an arseful of bonuses to their Diplo check). It's a terrible waste. And that's why this feature is bad design, and why I say it should allow a Save.

 

[Vortigern]

I would tend to agree with Cloven that things in the 'special ability' category should 'usually' be opposed by saves of some kind.

 

[Saeros]

I agree. The diplomacy check is not a good way to resolve this. I think the Will save vs DC (10 + 1/2 Temptress Lvl + CHA Bonus) is a much better way to resolve the issue.

I think I do understand your concern about this ability, and your comments and the comments of others have helped me to clarify how I want to handle this in my game. I think if you look at what I have posted in this thread you will see that I have been taking everyone's ideas and trying to come up with a system that will work.

I certainly appreciate your input, and my thinking on this issue is very similiar to yours at this point. The other thread was in response to a couple of issues that were raised, not just yours, and I hope no one has taken offense.

 

[Clovenhoof]

Don't worry, no offense taken. Just wanted to clarify this, and if we're all on the same page here, all the better.

 

[Saeros]

Just a follow-up...

We finally got to the scene where the Binding Contract might have come into play. The temptress had no need to use this ability as the PCs immediately declared they would help her with no promise of rewards of any kind.

It was a great debate anyway! Thanks to everyone that contributed!

 

[Rodericus]

Greetings!

I specially enjoy the Temptress and the Noble as specially good NPC´s and roleplaying characters.

The binding contract ability is particularly good for my gaming group who enjoy the roleplaying opportunities this arise, but it is important to actually develop the relationship between the Temptress and her/his "victim" (instead of simply rolling dice).

We assume that the "binding contract" ability is performed during several hours of interaction, it´s not just a wink of an eye and sheer willpower vs. charisma, it entails the ability of the temptress to seduce, exploit the character´s weaknesses (psychological most of them) and a whole lot of endorfins!. At the same time the reactions of the Temptress on a failed roll should be very interesting, bordering on the obssesion trait for schollars ("No one has ever denied me something!").

When we use it in my group (on the PC´s), we usually target the weakest character or the best-roleplaying Player, so to actually flow with the game.

Finally, in order to be used, this ability requires a coherent context, as said before, it is ridiculous to expect this ability to work in the middle of a battle or with all the players hating the Temptress´s guts!

Good luck!

 

[David St-Michel]

Personally, I would roleplay the entire attempt to get the player into the Binding Contract.

Screw the roll or whatever. It's like having someone sign a contract for a music gig on a Diplomacy + Cha mod. VS Profession : Musical instrument (electric guitar) + Wis mod. It's senseless.

RP through it.

 

[Rodericus]

Agreed!!