Author Topic: A Non-Evil Denarian?  (Read 11789 times)

Offline Belial666

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 2389
    • View Profile
Re: A Non-Evil Denarian?
« Reply #45 on: April 08, 2011, 09:54:12 PM »
Question;

The Fallen gain more power by causing death and destruction. People like the Blackstaff and Harry Dresden save the world by causing widespread death and destruction. So why wouldn't one of the more reasonable Fallen like Lasciel give such a character the power to save the world? They'd gain more power from all the death and destruction caused by their bearers (which would be alot, considering Dresden annihilated an entire supernatural nation and McCoy has caused major disasters). They'd get to destroy evil supernatural beings that are not Fallen - and thus their antagonists in ruling the world. And eventually the good bearer would die of old age after a couple of centuries, with the Fallen having grown in power and obliterated many of his enemies.

Offline kamilion

  • Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 24
    • View Profile
Re: A Non-Evil Denarian?
« Reply #46 on: April 08, 2011, 11:12:13 PM »
Interesting character.  First off, a minor point: "The Catch: Swords of the Cross" isn't a Catch, since Swords of the Cross already satisfy every Catch.  You should be taking the standard Catch of Denarians, which is "Blessed swords, holy water, faith magic, that sort of thing."

Technically, a Sword of the Cross can be a Catch just fine.

Quote
YS 185 - "If it is bypassed by something only one or two people in the world have access to or could produce (like a Sword of the Cross), you get nothing." +0

Same page - "If knowledge of the Catch requires access to specific research material that could be restricted(like a wizard's library), you get a +1." +1 (Since you could find out the Swords of the Cross are designed for anti-Denarianism with access to the proper information).

A Sword of the Cross does not satisfy every Catch unless a fate point it spent. If it is the Catch for a Toughness/Recovery power, then it requires no fate point spent to satisfy that Catch, any more than a fate point is required for a Sword of the Cross to satisfy a Catch that is holy items, etc.

But that's just being technical.

I figured since he's not completely embracing Guziel's power, he's less vulnerable to general-purpose holiness, but the swords are aimed right at denarians.

Another thing you might want to consider is that your background makes it very clear that your character is very strong-willed, so much so that he is able to hold his ground in a battle of wills against his Fallen.  Yet your Conviction is 'Good' and your Discipline is 'Fair'.  I think that at least one of these should be significantly higher to represent your strength of will (and Discipline is probably the better choice).

Yeah, that's a good point, though I think of him as being more independent than strong-willed. Keep in mind, the idea behind this guy is that the Fallen is also seeking redemption, it's just not very good at it and tends to slide, making Wrench's desire for redemption all the more important.

I think that your big problem is going to be that if your GM handles your Denarian correctly, you will be (rightfully) compelled by your high concept at all of the most story-appropriate yet inconvenient times, and assuming your GM does so at the right times (ie, mostly at times when accepting the compel would be very troublesome), you will often have a shortage Fate with which to buy off the compel (assuming you have any at all).  By this, I mean that if your GM compels you to kick every puppy you see, then you will end up with a lot of terrified puppies and a pile of Fate to spend on the Important Stuff.  But if your GM waits until a key battle against your Nemesis, when your resources are nearly expended, then offers a Fate point and points out that the innocent little girl hiding in the corner would make a wonderful shield to protect you against those sprays of machine-gun fire...

Well, I'm the GM, actually, I just think the character is an interesting concept. And I strongly subscribe to the theory that compels exist to create drama and make life complicated, not to punish or cause arbitrary issues. I'd never compel a little-girl-shield... unless said little girl was the bad guy's little girl, and the Fallen was going for the most ruthless and practical solution.

Also worth noting that I don't tactically compel - whenever a situation seems fun and good for a compel, I toss one out. PCs can either buy it off or roll with it, as they choose.

All in all, I think you might be better off considering battling against your Fallen's shadow, rather than the Fallen itself.  Perhaps your character pulled a Dresden, and has hidden his coin out of reach, and figures that he'll take on the Shadow first, then if successful they can confront the Fallen 'together' (possibly by 'corrupting' the Fallen with the redemption of the Shadow)?

Shadow has been done though, I want to see some suffering and angst! Lol!

Regardless of what you decide, have fun with the character!

If nothing else, it'd be a cool NPC!
« Last Edit: April 08, 2011, 11:15:48 PM by kamilion »

Offline Silverseraph

  • Lurker
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
Re: A Non-Evil Denarian?
« Reply #47 on: April 11, 2011, 03:13:29 PM »
Thematically, I like it.

From what I understand of Christian mythology, no one, not even Satan himself is beyond redemption. Seems to think that a Denarian would be the same way.

However I don't think the Denarians were the casual Satan supporters, I believe it is mentioned that they were all members of the army, and high ranking ones at that

I still agree that even they can be redeemed, but I would not qualify any of them in the Innocent Bystander category. However, there is an issue of power level.

DFRPG makes it quite clear that mortals have CHOICE and monsters have their NATURE, and that having more POWER makes you a MONSTER.

Denarians have ALOT of power and therefor are monsters and are therefore driven by their nature. Any Denarian who would want to switch should likely give up ALOT of power, if only because they no longer will be drawing upon Hellfire, and likely no angelic force is gonna let them back into the pool of soulfire just yet.

Also, if you had a theoretical "good" Denarian with all it's powers it would essentially destroy the entire purpose of the Denarian metaphor. Just like the ONE RING, it's a metaphor for what having great power does to the human mind. It subverts it and changes it to it's whim, if the all powerful coin your character keeps relying on ISN'T slowly corrupting his mind, then you have given him a super weapon for free.

I guess I am asking, why are you putting a good Denarian in a game? Is it for an interesting story idea about redemption and repentance? Good, I'd say tone down the power and makes it like a Bob The Skull kind of thing. Is it to get around the drawback of having full Denarian power? Then I think it's lame!

One final note,
(click to show/hide)
People have suggested they are lying, I believe they are telling the truth. Harry knows it too, but Harry sees down the line, It's a TRAP! He will rely on the power and then the price goes up steeply and the fallen has a little more control. And you won't be able to TRULY know you can trust them until it's too late and they all ready control you. They are drug dealers! The first hit is free, it's the following ones that you REALLY have to pay for!

Offline pensivetoast

  • Lurker
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
Re: A Non-Evil Denarian?
« Reply #48 on: April 11, 2011, 10:44:29 PM »
I think that the Denarians are evil, at least from our mortal point of view. They see what they are doing as being completely justified, and they have a cause. This is a dangerous combination, since they will do anything to further their goals.

However, more then thirty angels rebelled against the white god. I think if you really wanted to play a fallen angel, you could just as easily play a lower echelon angel who has his own anchor in the mortal world. You can really get those creative juices flowing and come up with something entirely new. Maybe there was originally more then 30 fallen, but only 30 of them bound themselves to the denari. The rest didn't for their own reasons. Perhaps, tired of being trapped on the mortal plane, some lower ranked fallen have gathered together to subtly oppose the denarians, hoping to win favor with the heavenly host and be allowed to return... 

Offline DFJunkie

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 624
    • View Profile
Re: A Non-Evil Denarian?
« Reply #49 on: April 11, 2011, 11:31:52 PM »
Well, I suppose that from a mortal perspective it could be possible for one of the Fallen to be non-evil.  Depending on which version of the Old Testament you're reading God can be quite the cranky-pants, and it could be possible for one of the Fallen to feel some sympathy for the mortals that are usually God's punching bag, and want to do something about it.
90% of what I say is hyperbole intended for humorous effect.  Don't take me seriously. I don't.

Offline Becq

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1253
    • View Profile
Re: A Non-Evil Denarian?
« Reply #50 on: April 12, 2011, 01:32:48 AM »
A possibly useful quote from 1 Enoch, which is from the Dead Sea Scrolls (and is non-canonical).  Still, there is potential inspiration for a Fallen that isn't a raging genocidal megalomaniac.

Quote from: 1 Enoch
And it came to pass when the children of men had multiplied that in those days were born unto them beautiful and comely daughters. And the angels, the children of the heaven, saw and lusted after them, and said to one another: 'Come, let us choose us wives from among the children of men and beget us children.' And Semjaza, who was their leader, said unto them: 'I fear ye will not indeed agree to do this deed, and I alone shall have to pay the penalty of a great sin.' And they all answered him and said: 'Let us all swear an oath, and all bind ourselves by mutual imprecations not to abandon this plan but to do this thing.' Then sware they all together and bound themselves by mutual imprecations upon it. And they were in all two hundred; who descended in the days of Jared on the summit of Mount Hermon, and they called it Mount Hermon, because they had sworn and bound themselves by mutual imprecations upon it. And these are the names of their leaders: Samlazaz, their leader, Araklba, Rameel, Kokablel, Tamlel, Ramlel, Danel, Ezeqeel, Baraqijal, Asael, Armaros, Batarel, Ananel, Zaqiel, Samsapeel, Satarel, Turel, Jomjael, Sariel. These are their chiefs of tens.

And all the others together with them took unto themselves wives, and each chose for himself one, and they began to go in unto them and to defile themselves with them, and they taught them charms and enchantments, and the cutting of roots, and made them acquainted with plants. And they became pregnant, and they bare great giants, whose height was three thousand ells: Who consumed all the acquisitions of men. And when men could no longer sustain them, the giants turned against them and devoured mankind. And they began to sin against birds, and beasts, and reptiles, and fish, and to devour one another's flesh, and drink the blood. Then the earth laid accusation against the lawless ones.

Offline zaq.hack

  • Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 22
  • I succeed, therefore I am.
    • View Profile
Re: A Non-Evil Denarian?
« Reply #51 on: April 12, 2011, 05:43:48 AM »
I'm surprised this topic has 4 pages of replies to it. It is mildly interesting, but I would not have thought it this much so.

I would have to say that "Fallen" implies making AT LEAST one bad choice. I don't think there's a "Shoeless Joe" who is "unjustly accused" among them ... though I think it would be interesting for them to try to convince you that hey were.

I also agree that "redemption" is a grand thing. For those who wonder if truth is stranger than fiction, I would submit to you the following (a friend from Liberia told me about this guy): http://tinyurl.com/5ybh7j  His story is absolutely unbelievable. I do not know if he will find redemption in the next life, but he has submitted to at least one war tribunal and been set free. He may be sent to the Hague before it is all said and done.

And so I share that to say this: If he has found redemption, who is beyond it? However unlikely it is that a person (or Fallen) may find it, it is still out there to be picked up for those who choose it ...
The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light particles, here." A neutrino walks into a bar.

Offline Tedronai

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 2343
  • Damane
    • View Profile
Re: A Non-Evil Denarian?
« Reply #52 on: April 12, 2011, 06:14:27 AM »
I would have to say that "Fallen" implies making AT LEAST one bad choice.

...or, rather, at least one Officially Disapproved-Of (tm) choice, which is very nearly the widest possible definition of 'bad'.
Even Chaotic Neutral individuals have to apologize sometimes. But at least we don't have to mean it.
Slough

Offline BumblingBear

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 2123
  • Rawr.
    • View Profile
Re: A Non-Evil Denarian?
« Reply #53 on: April 12, 2011, 10:18:36 AM »
If you want to have a good leaning Fallen melding with a character, put it another item other than one of the 30 coins.

Simple solution.
Myself: If I were in her(Murphy's) position, I would have studied my ass off on the supernatural and rigged up special weapons to deal with them.  Murphy on the other hand just plans to overpower bad guys with the angst of her short woman's syndrome and blame all resulting failures on Harry.

Offline Peteman

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 102
    • View Profile
Re: A Non-Evil Denarian?
« Reply #54 on: April 14, 2011, 03:11:08 AM »
Interesting character.  First off, a minor point: "The Catch: Swords of the Cross" isn't a Catch, since Swords of the Cross already satisfy every Catch.  You should be taking the standard Catch of Denarians, which is "Blessed swords, holy water, faith magic, that sort of thing."

Actually, you need to spend a Fate Point to activate that function, while this implies that you can hack away without need of that.

I guess +1 is a fair, since a well-stocked wizard will know of them, but getting ahold of one is quite difficult.

Offline Tedronai

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 2343
  • Damane
    • View Profile
Re: A Non-Evil Denarian?
« Reply #55 on: April 14, 2011, 11:08:10 AM »
The appropriate costing of such a Catch, let alone whether such a Catch is appropriate in the first place, is a point of significant contention.  Tread carefully.
Even Chaotic Neutral individuals have to apologize sometimes. But at least we don't have to mean it.
Slough

Offline kamilion

  • Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 24
    • View Profile
Re: A Non-Evil Denarian?
« Reply #56 on: April 14, 2011, 06:00:28 PM »
The appropriate costing of such a Catch, let alone whether such a Catch is appropriate in the first place, is a point of significant contention.  Tread carefully.

Quite agreed. By it's nature, FATE, even as expressed within DFRPG, is open to significant interpretation. I wouldn't have a problem with such a Catch in my game, which is why I threw it in above, but I could see others having an issue with it. Can't even disagree with their reasoning, in their game.

There are very few hard and fast "Thou shalt..." and "Thou shalt nots..." in this game, where the rules are concerned. Even the designers rarely lay out a hard and fast law.

Offline MorkaisChosen

  • Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 90
    • View Profile
Re: A Non-Evil Denarian?
« Reply #57 on: April 14, 2011, 07:08:39 PM »
On the issue of redemption and free will:

Genesis. Humans were made "in our own image" (i.e. the image of God and the Angels).

Could that be a reference to free will?

Offline remission

  • Lurker
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
Re: A Non-Evil Denarian?
« Reply #58 on: April 28, 2011, 10:17:26 PM »
Evil depends on your perspective. If you were an Angel, even a Fallen One, you would have a totally different viewpoint and perspective than mortals, having lived billions of years. Evil is something Mankind invented. The Fallen just dont like Humans and Gods plan because it puts us first. God gave Humans souls and Angels are nothing but soul. I might be a bit peeved too, if after a billion years of worship, he decides to give his love to something else and I would have to think, why should I continue to worship. After all, the War only started because one side of Angels decided to "rebel" , or not to do Gods wish.

From a humans perspective, they want to kill or corrupt us. From a Fallens Perspective they are just poking us with a sharp stick because they can.