Humans vs fallen.

From the new book, "introverted" humans have 60 creation zeal and "distinctive" or "extroverted" humans have 50 creation zeal. "Normal" humans are referred to as having even less. My thoughts would be a normal human would be sitting at around 3,3,2 or 4,2,2 for archtypes with a fair bit of their build going into resources and professions.

While crucified not only are you "human", I believe you are the equivalent of mortally wounded - archtypes essentially drop to 0. Your techniques disappear, your faint memory of heaven and past lives fades completely and your connection to purgatory is violently severed. Essentially it is complete and total helplessness while experiencing a violation more horrific than a human could imagine.

Crucifixion was discovered by the Divine, and if properly done (as discovered by the Faithful) doesn't "turn" you human, but it does bind you to the World of Clay. Without proper attention, and if done properly, you will die the Final Death. If properly crucified, you will die of thirst after three days, or if cut, you may bleed to death. As Dave said, your connexion with the Symphony (and therefore access to your Techniques) is severed, as is any relationship you might have with Purgatory. I don't know that your Archetypes essentially drop to zero (I haven't seen that anywhere yet), but your memories of heaven and divinity certainly fade.

For Branding, you only have to spend a minimum of 1 hour on the cross.

Characters who are crucifed are Forced to take a Traumatic wound, and must make a Lingering Trauma test with a variable difficulty. Characters who have the Crucified Vice should also have a Setback. Characters with the Crucifixion Rite Preeminence *must* take a Setback.

Dropping to 0 may have been the wrong wording. My understanding is that you cannot initiate any challenges and must relent to all challenges done against you.

Hrm. I'll check on that. I know that's certianly the case when you take your final Mortal Wound in any area...

On a slightly different note, though thugs are kinda impressive they are still nameless entities, so they take more damage from us uber l33t f4ll3n making them far less scary, despite their four physical archetypes.

I'm going to look to see if this is in the new rules as well, but in past editions, "nameless" characters went down like a hooker at a blowjob convention.

It's listed in the combat section. Nameless characters take damage equal to your maximum number of Offensive Maneuvers. At the very moment I'm unclear if this requires an OM expenditure as I've seen in the past, but that's the section I'm referencing.

Dave, you've once again made my day.
And yes, nameless characters *should* take a number of wounds equal to your OMs (without you having to spend them)...at least, that's certainly how it works in downtime.
I think because nameless characters have no DMs to spend it's just assumed that you do 'full possible damage' to them.

In all the mass combat I've ever done, that's exactly how it works. A group of fallen can mow through a large group of thugs in no time if the dice are friendly.

Well, I can understand that perhaps you can't initiate challenges when you're supposed to be almost dead, but I would very much like to hear that that doesn't apply in *all* situations where you're relenting to challenges. Because things are much more fun when you can swing your fist at people even if OOC you know you're not going to hit.

Laura, I'm not sure what you're asking.

If you choose to 'relent' to a challenge, essentially that means you choose to fail the challenge. So if you're going to try to hit someone, you can't 'relent'. You can declare less of your Dynamic Body if you'd like, but you can't 'relent' if you've initiated a challenge.

You can always choose to 'flail helplessly' (that doesn't require a challenge, and you should act it out), or you can choose to relent to a challenge made against you (if I declare I'm hitting you, you can relent and allow me to hit you (take a wound); otherwise you can hit back (Dynamic Body), attempt to soak the damage (Defensive Maneuver), or you can attempt to run away or dodge (Reactive Body).

I'm just not understanding where the 'relent' things comes in with you trying to hit someone.

So you can't try to fail to hit someone. Like, say, someone is suffering mortal trauma so they have to relent all challenges, and somebody is bugging them, they can't swipe at them? I mean, the player knows they have to relent all challenges but the character might still try to strike out.

If you're going to say that when you declare you "flail helplessly" that's basically the same as initiating and then relenting a challenge, then I would agree it's pretty close, but it loses a little something in the translation, and it's also not nearly as fun because now everybody knows that you didn't initialize a challenge and can guess why.

Hrm. Again, I'm just not sure I'm a-hittin' what you're a-pitchin'.

If what you're trying to do is 'flail helplessly' but you're not in a state where you must relent to all challenges and cannot initiate challenges, you can always declare your action, and use fewer Prowesses. There's always a one in six chance you'll still win, though, even if you don't want to.

I just don't understand the theory behind initiating a challenge and then relenting. I don't think you can do that in any game I'm aware of...I think I would recommend initiating the challenge and then doing the test with, as I mentioned before, 1 Prowess.

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned in the way I'm about to mention it and I'm feeling too lazy to look so I'm going to give my opinion anyway. Sorry if I'm repeating.

If you have to relent to all challenges then you can hardly start one. If you could, it seems to me that the way you relent to a challenge you want to initiate would be to not initiate it in the first place. Either you take the action or you don't.

That doesn't mean that you can't flail about attempting to hit someone when you know you can't. However, it does mean that you would *never initiate a challenge* for it, instead *roleplaying* being ineffectual at striking someone. Not everything in the game has to be based on a challenge. So if you have to relent to all challenges, but are still able to physically move, then go ahead and swing at someone and voluntarily miss - no challenge needed.

Thank you, Alan. That is, I think, precisely the point I was trying to make.

cenobyte wrote:Thank you, Alan. That is, I think, precisely the point I was trying to make.

My pleasure. I thought it's what you wanted to say, but I was getting bogged down in the language you and Laura were using and wasn't entirely sure.

I think there are two separate points. "Relenting" when initiating challenges under normal (no mortal wounds or trauma) circumstances and what happens when a character is suffering from mortal wounds/trauma.

To the first point, I think challenges should only be used if the players involved disagree on the outcome of an action. If character A tries to punch character B and both players A & B feel the scene would be better if character A misses, then there is no need for a challenge. So in effect character A is initiating a (small "c") challenge but Player A wouldn't be initiating a (big "C") Challenge because there is no need for a mechanic when narration and roleplaying resolve the interaction better.

In the case of Mortal wounds or trauma, I think the implication is that even the character wouldn't be initiating shit. With mortal wounds, even flailing around would be beyond their power. I usually think barely conscious guy on a gurney from medical shows when thinking of mortal wounds. For Mortal trauma, I think the breakdown would also preclude even the attempt at violence. With Mortal trauma a character is so broken they have lost all sense of will.

and somebody is bugging them, they can't swipe at them?

It's Jill's call in Jill game but if it was me, I would exactly. At Mortal trauma a character won't have the drive nescesary to lash out. At mortal trauma, someone can stand behind you and flick the back of your ear over and over and over and over again and you just wouldn't care.

I concur with Dave on this one. If you've taken mortal Trauma, you're utterly incapable of dealing with the real world. It behooves you (heh) to try to deal in any logical way with your surroundings.

If you've taken Mortal Wounds, you *cannot* initiate a challenge. At all. If you flail about wildly with your Mortal Wound(s) crossed off, you'll bleed out.

Likewise, if you have Mortal Trauma, and you try to initiate a challenge, your brain will begin leaking out your nose.

To be absolutely clear: If you have taken your final Mortal Wound(s), you cannot do anything other than bleed out. If you have taken your final Mortal Trauma you cannot do anything other than bug out.

Yes. We were talking about what happens when you take your *last* mortal wound.

I'm sorry; I thought that was clear.