| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, so I've read Pathfinder Horror Adventure, and one of the sections I was looking forward to was corruptions, due to the idea of a person horrifically changing as they try to cure themselves of it. Could base an entire campaign around it, but when I read the actual rules I was disappointed. Not angry or anything, just disappointed because I think that Paizo missed several opportunities here. I just want to list each and why, and generally have a discussion about if they made the right choices and how these things may be improved.
1st Problem: End of the stage is evil NPC.
My issue with this is because it closes off a great story possibility. A story where a good character finds himself turned completely into what he despises and tries desperately to redeem themselves. Similar to a fallen paladin coming back. Or alternatively, a character who embraces the corruption and sees it as a chance to do more good via extra powers or learning more about their enemies. Instead, we got neither, and instead just the 'your-character-dies-pls-reroll-and-join-next-session'. It completely gets rid of the chance of redemption, which really annoys me.
The reasons I think that Paizo did this is because they didn't want plyers going fully corrupt just to gain extra abilities at early levels, but I would argue that giving them crippling weaknesses to go with those benefits would have evened it out. You could even fluff it as the character's mind and original nature rejecting the new form. IF anybody knows another reason, please tell me.
2. Stages of Corruption: I think there are way too few of these in it. it's essentially two stages and then *poof*, evil NPC. A lot of times it seems it can go by very fast, whereas I feel corruption should be slower and more gradual to represent a character's changing views and alignment rather than a quick change that feels like it was as fast as eat magic burger, turn evil. I think either more stages or some other way to draw out the process and show the character truly being corrupted. As is, I think it makes it go too fast.
3. Progression: Possessed does it best. The progression of corruption should have been linked to usage of the abilities granted by corruption, not arbitrary events and situations. Why? Because corruption is the player starting to use their abilities to further the fight against darkness, ignoring the origin of the powers in order to have more power to fight evil, until it becomes less and less about the fight and more and more about the power, or whatever the character grows to crave besides power. That is corruption, the slow descent from noble warrior to foul beast. What the actual rules feel like is a transformation, in that the character is being changed against their will. The Vampirisim and Ghoul corruptions don't feel like you becoming evil is any choice of the character, but rather the fact that you need to feed against your own will, or the Accursed, where it is irrational thoughts caused by the curse that make you begin to corrupt. In neither case is it corruption, it's compulsion/mind control. Possessed is corruption, because it's progression is based around using it's abilities because they make things easier, but at the cost of welcoming evil into one's self.
And that's all I'm going to say for now, need to head to bed soon. These are my personal views on how corruption should have been done, and I have no illusions that they are most likely not perfect, so feel free to disagree but please post why. If anybody from the Paizo staff can post why these decisions were made bout corruption, I would really appreciate it.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
1) I agree that the become-NPC endgame was probably done to prevent people from intentionality tanking their saves and be put on a fast track to monsterdom. But then that is only a suggestion (outside of PFS), in a homegame it'd be perfectly reasonable to let the player continue playing that character if everyone was okay with it.
2) 3 saves actually, since you technically start at Corruption Stage 0.
3) They're not arbitrary, they're linked to the essence of the Corruption. Vampires and Ghouls? Feeding. Liches? Negative Energy. Deep One Hybrid? Being away from the ocean.
2. Okay, three saves nothwistanding, it feels way too easy to become corrupted. Overcoming the corruption should be a long-term goal of a character, the focus of an entire adventure or even campaign, but as it is written it feels like they can change extremely fast.
3. Yes, but then it stops being corruption and becomes transformation. The character transforms into the creature against their will and consent, so I have to ask, how is it any different than being turned into a Vampire/Lycanthorpe/Lich by the methods in-game? Oh, there are some differences in the journey getting there, but the basics are the same, the character being transformed against their will into a creature of evil, and just becoming evil because all creatures of that race are automatically evil.
Wouldn't it have been better to have it like the Possessed, where the character becomes more corrupted by relying on their powers granted by corruption? To see them fall from good through love of what they are becoming and eventually actively pursue it, or become horrified by the path they are taking and do their best to save themselves? Instead, what we get is 'you failed a will save, arbitrary evil change', which removes all the purpose of corruption.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Before Coreuptions the creature killed you and then you got back up as one. Simple as that. Now you get to draw that process out.
You seem to have a specifc idea of what you want Corruption to be, which is different than the final result. Aside from the Posession ALL of the Corruptions are transformative.
I can say I wouldn't want every Corruption to be like what you suggest.
I prefer the options that corrupting you against your will, it makes it all the more tragic.
This is just going to have to be one of those agree to disagree things. I see your argument, but I don't see the forced transformation as more tragic because none of it is the player's fault when they are corrupted in that way.
Every evil act they committed through the corruption can be addressed as the evil fae/vamp/lycan's actions and not his, so there is no long-term consequence to what he does. He get's corrupted, does evil because of corruption, gets cured, right back to status quo +1-2 levels. Does having a character being forced to do stuff against their will be tragic? Yes, but there is already so much for that, from Mind-control spells to the before-mentioned raised from dead as Lycan/Lich/Vamp whereas this could have been more along the lines of characters taking morally questionable actions because they appear easier, but eventually corrupt them and turn out to have extremely steep costs, which is not as well represented in the game. Just a matter of personal taste really.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Long term goal to get clean of the corruption is good, resonant.
The fight is every day though.
Like everything, work with the GM, and your fellow players.
I actually like that the mechanisms for corruption advancement are not the same. If everything worked the same it would start to feel less like a slow, painful curse and more like a Demi-class.
Long term goal to get clean of the corruption is good, resonant.
The fight is every day though.
Like everything, work with the GM, and your fellow players.
I actually like that the mechanisms for corruption advancement are not the same. If everything worked the same it would start to feel less like a slow, painful curse and more like a Demi-class.
Okay, I do not hate these rules, and for the purposes they were intended for, they are fine (although I still feel that full corruption can happen to fast and not being able to redeem after full corruption was a bad choice). What I think is what I meant in the title is that Paizo missed an opportunity to have players/groups tell stories about the temptation of the character through power, intentions pure or not. I thought they were going to go that route, especially with ones like the Hellbound (for which it makes amazing themeatic sense), and was disappointed when they didn't, as I see Pathfinder's Black/White morality system constricting the number of stories that can be told. Would it be too much to have the option for Black and White but also Grey if you choose?
|
|
Okay, I do not hate these rules, and for the purposes they were intended for, they are fine (although I still feel that full corruption can happen to fast and not being able to redeem after full corruption was a bad choice). What I think is what I meant in the title is that Paizo missed an opportunity to have players/groups tell stories about the temptation of the character through power, intentions pure or not. I thought they were going to go that route, especially with ones like the Hellbound (for which it makes amazing themeatic sense), and was disappointed when they didn't, as I see Pathfinder's Black/White morality system constricting the number of stories that can be told. Would it be too much to have the option for Black and White but also Grey if you choose?Long term goal to get clean of the corruption is good, resonant.
The fight is every day though.
Like everything, work with the GM, and your fellow players.
I actually like that the mechanisms for corruption advancement are not the same. If everything worked the same it would start to feel less like a slow, painful curse and more like a Demi-class.
*scratches head*
Actually now that I think about isn't that already built into the Corruptions when you gain a Manifestion level you don't have to take a Gift. If you don't you get a bonus on the Corruption save. So in a sense there is a bit of if you choose to use your powers your corrupting yourself further.
Okay, I do not hate these rules, and for the purposes they were intended for, they are fine (although I still feel that full corruption can happen to fast and not being able to redeem after full corruption was a bad choice). What I think is what I meant in the title is that Paizo missed an opportunity to have players/groups tell stories about the temptation of the character through power, intentions pure or not. I thought they were going to go that route, especially with ones like the Hellbound (for which it makes amazing themeatic sense), and was disappointed when they didn't, as I see Pathfinder's Black/White morality system constricting the number of stories that can be told. Would it be too much to have the option for Black and White but also Grey if you choose?Long term goal to get clean of the corruption is good, resonant.
The fight is every day though.
Like everything, work with the GM, and your fellow players.
I actually like that the mechanisms for corruption advancement are not the same. If everything worked the same it would start to feel less like a slow, painful curse and more like a Demi-class.
*scratches head*
Actually now that I think about isn't that already built into the Corruptions when you gain a Manifestion level you don't have to take a Gift. If you don't you get a bonus on the Corruption save. So in a sense there is a bit of if you choose to use your powers your corrupting yourself further.
Okay, that's a little better. Again, I think that these rules are fine, I just see where Paizo could have maybe opened up some more opportunities for stories, which is ultimately a good thing. The more stories you can tell with your system, the more broad appeal it has to the market, and the more people may become interested I playing the system. Hence why things like GURPS is so widely used.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would work with the GM to se if he is OK with good roleplay and the character actively trying to fight for his mortal soul helping mitigate a mere dice roll. Of course falling into the temptation of using those nifty powers isn't going to make it easier.
I seem to be becoming less disappointed with this product. Odd.
If it makes you feel better Sai there's gonna be three more in Horror Realms, and hopefully more down the road as wel.
I'm glad about that, as I like the concept even if I think some of the implementations miss the opportunity. I'll be happy to see more, but I think the biggest missed mark was Hellbound. When some of the most popular stories in history are of how the Devil/his minions tempt people with great power, how was that not the basis for Progression, instead of occasionally doing his dirty work for him?
I would work with the GM to se if he is OK with good roleplay and the character actively trying to fight for his mortal soul helping mitigate a mere dice roll. Of course falling into the temptation of using those nifty powers isn't going to make it easier.
I seem to be becoming less disappointed with this product. Odd.
Actually, I am the GM :) I am planning a PbP campaign very much in the grey about monster-hunters who become afflicted and must try to cure themselves before they are corrupted to evil, mixed in with some good creepy horror. I don't want to use some of these on them because they just feel a little too forced for me. Probably will repurpose so that there are more stages and that corruption is more reliant on the character's usage of abilities, but the framework is good. Also, the product isn't bad, in my case it was too much self-hype that ended up causing that disappointment.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
*offers hugs*
*accepts hugs*
Thanks
|
|
Is evil the only kind of corruption? it seems odd with the Good/evil Cosmic balance. There isn't a way to make an antipaladin into a loving cat person instead of a puppy kicker... it seems like a disappointingly narrow field for the corruption rules if they only go towards evil.
A good Corruption would be interesting I suppose, but none immediately come to mind. That and this would probably fall into "why don't the Celestials create their own Worldwound" territory?
Is evil the only kind of corruption? it seems odd with the Good/evil Cosmic balance. There isn't a way to make an antipaladin into a loving cat person instead of a puppy kicker... it seems like a disappointingly narrow field for the corruption rules if they only go towards evil.
Sorry for the double post, but that is a redemption story that would not fit within the current corruptions, since they are mostly fluffed as unwilling transformations that force the character into an alignment that Good by nature would not do, as that would violate free will. Redemptions should be a choice made by free will
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wasn't saying good would cause it necessarily, nor was I talking about a natural redemption... I was referring to a Zygomind/stepford wife kind of transformation for Evil campaigns to pitfall into.Is evil the only kind of corruption? it seems odd with the Good/evil Cosmic balance. There isn't a way to make an antipaladin into a loving cat person instead of a puppy kicker... it seems like a disappointingly narrow field for the corruption rules if they only go towards evil.Sorry for the double post, but that is a redemption story that would not fit within the current corruptions, since they are mostly fluffed as unwilling transformations that force the character into an alignment that Good by nature would not do, as that would violate free will. Redemptions should be a choice made by free will
That is actually quite horrifying. Good idea. Can you hear us Paizo? Make this a thing! His is the perfect thing for evil overlords to try and slap on each other. Objection to your idea removed sir.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
M1k31,
(How can such a short name be such a pain to type)
A Christmas Carol could be seen as the Corruption of Scrooge by the forces of Goodness.
Heck, in Bill Murrays final monologue in Scrooged he talks about getting addicted to the Christmas Spirit, "You're going to want it the whole year around..."
M1k31,
(How can such a short name be such a pain to type)A Christmas Carol could be seen as the Corruption of Scrooge by the forces of Goodness.
Heck, in Bill Murrays final monologue in Scrooged he talks about getting addicted to the Christmas Spirit, "You're going to want it the whole year around..."
Unlike most Pathfinder Corruptions, Scrooge makes the decisions to turn good, while most Pathfinder Corruptions force the afflicted to change alignment against will.
Did he make a decision or did he fail a saving throw?
Did he make a decision or did he fail a saving throw?
This actually exemplifies a bit of what I was talking about earlier. How much weaker of a tale of redemption does Christmas Carol become if Scrooge changed alignment because he failed a saving throw instead of him choosing to become good? It implies that he didn't choose to become good, it was chosen for him. So no, I do not believe that he failed the saving throw.
This actually exemplifies a bit of what I was talking about earlier. How much weaker of a tale of redemption does Christmas Carol become if Scrooge changed alignment because he failed a saving throw instead of him choosing to become good? It implies that he didn't choose to become good, it was chosen for him. So no, I do not believe that he failed the saving throw.
He was guilt tripped into becoming good. That is not free will. That is failing a save.
I don't currently have this, but I wonder if it includes a Political Corruption?
I don't currently have this, but I wonder if it includes a Political Corruption?
Hellbound is pretty close. It's like "Become a robber baron capitalist" in a nutshell.
Yes Saithor, I agree that failing a saving throw has no charm. So roleplay or memoir it as that tragic moment of weakness. Rebuild your shattered resolve, go back to the fight.
We are not going to get rid of the dice, and after playing Amber Diceless with a rather arrogant GM, I am fairly sure I don't want to.
I chose a Christmas Carol because everyone knows it. I am not saying that viewing it in game terms improves the story.
A digression, because I love digressions, I suspect there is a special place in Hell for those people who feel the need to fit every piece of heroic literature into their chosen rule system, especially those who insist on making sure that the heroes are always just a little weaker than their own characters. I feel better now.
As for Political Corruptions. Oh my goddess, NO. This is already divisive and acrimonious enough as it is.
Yes Saithor, I agree that failing a saving throw has no charm. So roleplay or memoir it as that tragic moment of weakness. Rebuild your shattered resolve, go back to the fight.
We are not going to get rid of the dice, and after playing Amber Diceless with a rather arrogant GM, I am fairly sure I don't want to.
I chose a Christmas Carol because everyone knows it. I am not saying that viewing it in game terms improves the story.
A digression, because I love digressions, I suspect there is a special place in Hell for those people who feel the need to fit every piece of heroic literature into their chosen rule system, especially those who insist on making sure that the heroes are always just a little weaker than their own characters. I feel better now.
As for Political Corruptions. Oh my goddess, NO. This is already divisive and acrimonious enough as it is.
Hmm, you have a point, I just think that when the person themselves makes the hoofs of their own free will, the feelings associated with the way they are going (jubilation a or tragedy) are much stronger because they chose them without massive influence like the Corruptions progression system. I think it's much more tragic for a hero to fall by embracing dark powers in an attempt to save his own people vs. them being turned because their mind wasn't strong enough.
Uh, the digression is a good one, not sure if you did it because something I accidentally implied?
Oh the digression was from a VERY old write up on why Gandalf was just a 5th level Wizard. Total disregard of the mythlines of the story, to get a clever result. Basically a lack of respect for the subject matter. It still is my benchmark for the practice. My bastardization of A Christmas Carol brought it to mind.
On the willingly going down the path, I wonder if there could be a non-munchkinable way to forego the saves to help ensure his success before his inevitable doom. Agree that that would be a better story. I would certainly allow it in a game I GM'ed, but I could assure you that the end would be a scary race to finish your quest before Corruption finally took you.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd sincerely say that the corruptions are the second most disappointing part of Horror Adventures in my eyes.
The fluff is mildly interesting, I love the Hive one for example, but the mechanical side of it is basically uninteresting, gives niche powers for painful drawbacks, built for one specific 'story' (Oh no, you got dipped in alien goo/poked by a hag/fiddled by a golem, better do something about that before it consumes your soul) when Corruption should be more about the temptation of power and dangerous offerings for great strength, for example any horror sorcerer or dangerous cult leader in literature ever.
And the 'become an NPC, do not pass go, do not collect £200' is just absurd, part of horror has always been terrible things happening and living with the consequences. As it stands the consequences are the GM taking away your character and you make a new one, you're effectively dead, move on.
Meanwhile the current corruptions are more along the lines of 'meager power for huge drawbacks, oh and become an NPC if you're weak willed or play a character that becomes a lich/werewolf/shadow tainted'
Incredibly disappointed.
BLloyd sums up my opinion perfectly. Corruption should be about temptation, but Corruptions as written are too punitive to be tempting and too fast to feel like a proper descent into darkness either.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is evil the only kind of corruption? it seems odd with the Good/evil Cosmic balance there isn't a way to make an antipaladin into a loving cat person instead of a puppy kicker... it seems like a disappointingly narrow field for the corruption rules if they only go towards evil.
Cosmic balance? In a horror game?
Oh, you poor, innocent soul.
:P
Well that's just my opinion on what would have been more interesting.
That said the blog post that talks about corruptions certainly makes them sound a lot more like a back and forth, power but also drawbacks with a risk of losing control, it certainly didn't give me (or anyone else I know) the impression that they'd just be elaborate save or die effects. Doesn't help that the blog spends most of its word count talking about all the stuff corruptions let you do.
That and when in promotional material Paizo talked about vile corruptions as a much more negative and painful variant it sort of implies that the regular ones aren't nearly wholly punitive and that they'd exist in some sort of middle ground.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
*Groan*
One of the alignment debaters made it into our thread. RYSKY! I told you to board up the old vent, dammit!
I'll get the broom...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Or Corruptions are supposed to be like curses. Which the designers have said is what they'd be like sdy one.
Where is everyone getting the "they're supposed to be like temptations" from?
Simple.
We already have a thing for curses. They're called curses.Corruptions are, by their name and nature, meant to be corrupting, they're meant to be game changers, to twist your character in new, interesting directions.
I'd honestly want to see corruptions doing real funky things to characters, they're a tool for the GM already so it isn't as if they could be abused by players, corruptions that give unique, horrific abilities or cause your character to gain templates would be totally within the realms of reasonable, in my opinion.
For example, imagine a corruption that lets you become a kind of Fisher King only to slowly turn you into a Dread Lord. There are perfectly good, in character reasons why even a good aligned king could be tempted by that sort of power, being able to guard his subjects better through accepting that from now on he's going to be just a touch closer with the land.
And then slowly, over time the land begins to sicken, as he ages.
So he accepts a little more power and twists the deal, so his health is one with the lands, each feeding each other, the land grows healthy, he becomes virile and returns to health.
War comes and he's suddenly in a position where the land is being wracked and looted, so he accepts that the only option is to kill the invaders, bury them in the land, to feed it and grow strong again.
And as the land drinks the blood of the invaders and defenders alike, he starts getting thirstier and thirstier for something other than water, for revenge, for blood, for pay equal unto the ones that have butchered his people and ravaged his body/land.
So he quenches his own thirst in battle and from it gains enough strength to drive the invaders out, never really realizing that ten years ago when he first chose to become the Fisher King, it would lead to him butchering a surrendering, trapped force, bringing the mountains that are his hands down upon them as they try to desperately flee through the pass back to their homelands from the horror they never realized they'd be facing or him standing over the eviscerated body of a rival lord, devouring his fresh quivering heart while his horrified subjects look on in terror.
And things start to spiral from there.
That's far, far more interesting than just 'so your character has been cursed to eat 1 HD of hearts a week in return for a +2 to cha checks with his subjects (Once a day)'
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It...kind of seems like you just said the same thing twice. You just gave the flavor text the first time and the rules text the second.
It...kind of seems like you just said the same thing twice. You just gave the flavor text the first time and the rules text the second.
Rysky
Of course we have curses. We have a f~+*ton of curses. And they all do all sorts of different things.
The major difference is the first involves choice on the part of the King (In this case the player character)
Its something he opts to do each step of the way, rather than it being done to him.To put it in neater terms, Curses are/should be something someone else does to you, Corruption is/should be something offered/that taints you and then you do it all to yourself.
For that to happen the power offered has to be, well, tempting.
That and a difference in scale.
Edit: Minor additional thought, Corruptions would be, if done better, a fantastic way to introduce horror elements into your game, they're power at the simple cost of ones soul, moral decency, sanity and loved ones and Players are naturally inclined to accept any offer of power they get.
Good example of a Corruption in situ? Read the Dresden files and look at the Black Denarius, how Lasciel interacts with Dresden.
Die Alone is a curse.
The constant temptation of the Fallen, 'Just give in and you can be happy, powerful enough to defend those you love and we'll be partners'? That's corruption.
Cosmic balance? In a horror game?
Oh, you poor, innocent soul.
:P
I don't know, wouldn't be that hard for Cosmic Horror or Psychological Horror. Good corruptions would be brilliant to afflict upon NPC class people are heroes who retired or a trying to retire.
Dragon Age games have a good example of a Lawful Good corruption.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It...kind of seems like you just said the same thing twice. You just gave the flavor text the first time and the rules text the second.Rysky
Of course we have curses. We have a f~+*ton of curses. And they all do all sorts of different things.The major difference is the first involves choice on the part of the King (In this case the player character)
Its something he opts to do each step of the way, rather than it being done to him.
To put it in neater terms, Curses are/should be something someone else does to you, Corruption is/should be something offered/that taints you and then you do it all to yourself.
For that to happen the power offered has to be, well, tempting.That and a difference in scale.
Edit: Minor additional thought, Corruptions would be, if done better, a fantastic way to introduce horror elements into your game, they're power at the simple cost of ones soul, moral decency, sanity and loved ones and Players are naturally inclined to accept any offer of power they get.
Good example of a Corruption in situ? Read the Dresden files and look at the Black Denarius, how Lasciel interacts with Dresden.
Die Alone is a curse.
The constant temptation of the Fallen, 'Just give in and you can be happy, powerful enough to defend those you love and we'll be partners'? That's corruption.
And the Corruptions work the same way as you're suggesting, you gain a Manifestation level you can choose to get a gift or reject it and get a bonus to saves vs the Corruption.
For your edit you haven't named a different system, you've named different types of Corruptions. The ones in HA all have stages and levels, but that's where their similarities end.
|
|
Note: I have not read the rule but am commenting based on your info above.
Do you think the rules were not more detailed do to negative real life issues that might arise and the age range of the game?
ie: they could have written more "horrific" rules but then would have had to slap a Not Under 17 label on the book.MDC
They also left some, like Lich, vague ads it can cover different but similar creatures, such as a Dreadknight.
|
|
Cosmic balance? In a horror game?
Oh, you poor, innocent soul.
:P
I don't know, wouldn't be that hard for Cosmic Horror or Psychological Horror. Good corruptions would be brilliant to afflict upon NPC class people are heroes who retired or a trying to retire.
Dragon Age games have a good example of a Lawful Good corruption.
Wynne was cool.
Undead Justice was a possession rather than Corruption.
Anders/Justice/Vengeance on the other hand, er....
Undead Justice was a possession rather than Corruption.
You say that as if Possession wasn't a Corruption :P