Spikards... feh

[jibbajibba]

Except it is never explained what a "power source" really is. Is it suceptible to Pattern edition or even fundamental Chaos ? My understanding has always been that there were some substance in them, making them hard to disrupt.

Sure, all the question I asked can be answered and it can be fascinating. But it is a tedious work and a single mistep could lead you to a vastly modified setting.

Agreed but I just adopt a position. A power source is a shadow or construct (the Pattern and Logrus being in effect constructs) with energy. The links from the spikard are just links. You can eleimintate the power of the spikard easily and disrupt the links easily. The spikards take centuries to build so are very powerful but are also very vulnerable rather like an antique glass vase.

You then see why forging them into pattern blades and thus making them more resilient is a good idea. Effectivly then you imbue the item with power from the pattern so that link can not be broken but the downside is a drop in flexibility and application.
Then I don't feel the need to answer your questions directly I can just adlib them based on this base premise.

[Klaus]

I know my players. As soon as they will get their hands on one, they will basically become unchallenged sorcerers. If they learn there are several spikards, however, they will want to know at least the identity of the people who own them and therefore can defeat them.

What does that have to do with how many spikards exist. Feeling that you "have" to include 12 is pointless.

Well they will at least know enough of them to draw power from them. From there you have to wonder if a player can :
{snip}
Spikards would require a 30 pages book to be fully described. Hell they could also form the basis of a whole series.
 

Every one of those questions falls into one of two broad categories, both of which are easily answered. The first is "Can a spikard do X" The answer is that spikards use Sorcery. The use it very quickly and in places where Sorcery normally doesn't work, but it's still Sorcery. If Sorcery can do it, a Spikard can do it, if Sorcery can't do it, a Spikard can't do it. Period. None of this "draw your own Pattern" or "use Powers you don't actually have" nonsense.

The second is "Can I modify a spikard" to which the initial answer is "You don't know how a spikard works. You couldn't modify one to save your life." If you want, you can then allow the player to research different modifications on a case by case basis. If you don't want them to do something, then they simply can't figure out how to do it.

Considering it is equivalent to a first place in Psyche, it is quite cheap.
If a character wanted to own the less powerful jewel of judgment, would you allow it for the same price ?

LESS powerful? Only if you use the version of the JoJ that can't do anything but modify the weather.

If players walk the Pattern with the JoJ, I make them pay for the ability to use the Jewel. No one person owns the Jewel though, as others have access to it.

[weilide]

I would suggest that the assumption that all 9 (or 11, depending on how you count) spikards work the same is very possibly unwarranted. If we assume, instead, that they all have radically different uses and abilities then the conversation becomes more interesting and the proposition that there are scores of identical high-octane spell processors out there becomes less of a headache.

[gabriel_ss4u]

yes, it's stated in the Merlin series that there are more powerful ones than some of the others, and the idea that they give power in different ways is more appealing.

[Ivanhoe]

I still dislike the profound modification they cause to the game setting, but this could come entirely from my dislike for sorcery.

I feel that the working of powers in the first series were fascinating because you would see under the hood how it worked. You saw people doing experiments with the Pattern sign, with the Trumps, and a power that seemed at first a bit limited to walk shadows proved to be very powerful thanks to these twisted ways of using it. With the spikards, letting the players do the same has so many implication that people here suggest to just forbid that. As a GM who encourages players to try things, to mix interesting powers and effects, I must say that spikards are the opposite of what I am looking for : big power at no effort and no way to make it better through ingenuity. "Here is a big stick, waggle it around" and if the player says that he would like to do something interesting, like trying to extend a logrus tendril through it into a new power source, you just say "no, no, you don't know how it work. Stop trying to understand it, just use it". Maybe it is because of my sci/tech background, but that removes an element that I think is a key to Amber genre.

But I see that people are interested in other things in the Amber setting than I am and this is fine by me. So I'll just HONK again at them, and stop arguing they are bad in all cases. I'll just won't put them in my game unless I have taken a lot of time to work out all the details, which will probably never happen. Better create a thing from scratch completely. Maybe a Tolkienesque one-spikard-to-rule-them-all campaign...

[scottishstorm]

Daaaaaamn, Ivanhoe!  

I agree with everything you said there, including an intrinsic dislike for sorcery in the DRPG.  

I almost feel aroused.  If you had better legs and a less deep voice, there might have been an indecent proposal to follow.


(tongue firmly in-cheek, naturally.  It's just nice to find someone to agree with.  Arguing opposite POVs is fine and good, but it's nice to be on the same "side" occasionally!)

[Ivanhoe]

Damn. I should shave my legs.

To follow up on gabriel_ss4u remark, I think it is possible to make a very interesting campaign around spikards, their discovery, the way they work, the leads they open, how differently they operate, etc... I would read such a material if it existed, but I would be uncomfortable to introduce one spikard without its full story.

A spikard is described as having dozens of links to shadow power sources. Follow such a link and you will reach a shadow who has a whole story of how someone in ancient times harnessed a mystical power. It is a really wonderful hook for a GM, but it takes one hell of preparation.

[jibbajibba]

Damn. I should shave my legs.

To follow up on gabriel_ss4u remark, I think it is possible to make a very interesting campaign around spikards, their discovery, the way they work, the leads they open, how differently they operate, etc... I would read such a material if it existed, but I would be uncomfortable to introduce one spikard without its full story.

A spikard is described as having dozens of links to shadow power sources. Follow such a link and you will reach a shadow who has a whole story of how someone in ancient times harnessed a mystical power. It is a really wonderful hook for a GM, but it takes one hell of preparation.

You prepare stuff like that ? If I have more than 3 things then i ablib them all

'You trace the line back into shadow the line is obviously ancient and links to a place of great power. After a number of minutes of great effort you find the destination. Using your advanced pattern you open a gateway and push through it. Exhausted you land with a slump upon a glassy plan. The land about you has been fused into an obsidian-like substance, you guess from extreme heat. Unusual though this is it is not the most strinking feature of this place. That priviledge falls to the uncounted number of bodies stretching off to each horizon. Victims of some terrible battle the ground is littered with corpses, armour and the detrius of war. Whatever happened here, in the pre-history of shadow, the land still reverbates with the terror of it.'

there you go something like that ...

[boulet]

What Jibbajibba says. Spikards should bring as many complications as they bring powerz. Curiosity killed the cat: when players go and visit sources of power of the shiny toys who knows what trump absorbing ooze or nefarious chaos sorcerer of old times they will unleash?

[Ivanhoe]

Well I would probably not prepare more than one or two very particular shadows (maybe for a scenario a la Stargate where a whole civilization is found) but I would at least have the identity of the original binder of the links. Is s/he still alive ? If yes where is he now, if not where is his body ? Has he heirs ? Has he created only one of the spikards ? Are they a guild ? How do they appear to shadow dwellers ? Are they still active ?

All of this is interesting but in a coherent setting and in order to offer an interesting story, I have to know how, when and who created the spikards, if only for my players to discover these crucial elements. After all, they could be a trap for their users/wielders, they could be so many things that a decent player (i.e. not Merlin in the series who just thinks "shinyyy!" about them) will want to investigate about them as much as possible if he get his hands on one. Better be prepared. Sure you can invent, but inventing something completely coherent and solid while the player has so much possibilities and power takes some thinking. That's why I say that I would not introduce them without having given them a fair amount a thought.

[jibbajibba]

Well I would probably not prepare more than one or two very particular shadows (maybe for a scenario a la Stargate where a whole civilization is found) but I would at least have the identity of the original binder of the links. Is s/he still alive ? If yes where is he now, if not where is his body ? Has he heirs ? Has he created only one of the spikards ? Are they a guild ? How do they appear to shadow dwellers ? Are they still active ?

All of this is interesting but in a coherent setting and in order to offer an interesting story, I have to know how, when and who created the spikards, if only for my players to discover these crucial elements. After all, they could be a trap for their users/wielders, they could be so many things that a decent player (i.e. not Merlin in the series who just thinks "shinyyy!" about them) will want to investigate about them as much as possible if he get his hands on one. Better be prepared. Sure you can invent, but inventing something completely coherent and solid while the player has so much possibilities and power takes some thinking. That's why I say that I would not introduce them without having given them a fair amount a thought.

Well I would just invent them I am fairly certain that given both our approaches most players wouldn't notice the difference and I woudl be able to fit in at least 2 games of pirates and hidden treasure ( i refuse to play Dr Who as I am always the assitant who gets exterminated) with my daughter whilst you were making notes

[Croaker]

Agreed with JibbaJibba.

Make things on the fly, rationnalise later. Let your imagination go wild!

Following a spikard to a shadow is like a player wandering in shadow in search of "adventure" or "magic" or "I don't know".
Relax. You don't have to prepare everything in advance

[scottishstorm]

In respect to Jib et all and back to Ivanhoe, I think people are overlooking a major point here.

Sure, a GM can BS players for nigh on forever... lead 'em on wild goose chases and whatnot.  Sure also that the 'secret of spikards' may also be too big for a single game to hold (ie: one of those things that could literally take centuries to research, ICly).  But, there's a certain integrity issue involve as well.

In essence, I think part of Ivanhoe's point is: "I'm not going to introduce spikards into my game unless I can justify them.  Current, I cannot."  

This, I believe, is a valid point.  Granted, as fans/players/GMs we cannot really justify or substantiate anything in the Amber cosmology. But, I think it's safe to say that Pattern, Trump and other powers feel right.  At least they feel right enough to play around, while spikards do not.  On the flip side of this, because the existing powers 'feel right', it's probably easier to BS and ad lib with them.  Furthermore, the existing powers (yes, I'm comparing spikards to a power rather than an item) are built around a slow learning/developmental process while spikards are geared more towards instant competency and a fast route to POWER (using Merlin as an example).

In short, if someone uses spikards in their game, there is an immediate call to define them (especially if PCs are going to get their grubby hands on them).  Players PAY for their abilities in the drpg and most players want to know what they pay for.

IMO, the only fair way to use spikards in the game is to never allow a PC to own one!  I don't mean that no PC will ever get to use a spikard, just that the player cannot spend points on them.  A GM can then make things up, even changing the rules, as he goes along.  He can have the damn thing blow up on the (un)lucky PC using a spikard.  He can have it suddenly stop working... work in 'reverse'... work only under specific conditions... change under seemingly random conditions, etc.

With the above understood, "you get what you pay for" can be applied.  Drive the player to a state of near paranoia in which they may actually be afraid to use the thing!  Use it as a story device, too, of course.  But never ever make the spikard dependable and taken for granted.  Always let the PC know they're carrying the "hot potato" which can and likely will eventually lead to their doom.

PS: I also very much like the idea of using a spikard to kill a PC or elder resulting in a "curse" upon the spikard-wielding character.  I'm talking something along the same power level of a Pattern Curse (nothing that can simply be rid of by walking the Pattern/Logrus).

[jibbajibba]

In respect to Jib et all and back to Ivanhoe, I think people are overlooking a major point here.

Sure, a GM can BS players for nigh on forever... lead 'em on wild goose chases and whatnot.  Sure also that the 'secret of spikards' may also be too big for a single game to hold (ie: one of those things that could literally take centuries to research, ICly).  But, there's a certain integrity issue involve as well.

In essence, I think part of Ivanhoe's point is: "I'm not going to introduce spikards into my game unless I can justify them.  Current, I cannot."  

This, I believe, is a valid point.  Granted, as fans/players/GMs we cannot really justify or substantiate anything in the Amber cosmology. But, I think it's safe to say that Pattern, Trump and other powers feel right.  At least they feel right enough to play around, while spikards do not.  On the flip side of this, because the existing powers 'feel right', it's probably easier to BS and ad lib with them.  Furthermore, the existing powers (yes, I'm comparing spikards to a power rather than an item) are built around a slow learning/developmental process while spikards are geared more towards instant competency and a fast route to POWER (using Merlin as an example).

In short, if someone uses spikards in their game, there is an immediate call to define them (especially if PCs are going to get their grubby hands on them).  Players PAY for their abilities in the drpg and most players want to know what they pay for.

IMO, the only fair way to use spikards in the game is to never allow a PC to own one!  I don't mean that no PC will ever get to use a spikard, just that the player cannot spend points on them.  A GM can then make things up, even changing the rules, as he goes along.  He can have the damn thing blow up on the (un)lucky PC using a spikard.  He can have it suddenly stop working... work in 'reverse'... work only under specific conditions... change under seemingly random conditions, etc.

With the above understood, "you get what you pay for" can be applied.  Drive the player to a state of near paranoia in which they may actually be afraid to use the thing!  Use it as a story device, too, of course.  But never ever make the spikard dependable and taken for granted.  Always let the PC know they're carrying the "hot potato" which can and likely will eventually lead to their doom.

PS: I also very much like the idea of using a spikard to kill a PC or elder resulting in a "curse" upon the spikard-wielding character.  I'm talking something along the same power level of a Pattern Curse (nothing that can simply be rid of by walking the Pattern/Logrus).

Okay I guess my issue is probably that I don't have such an issue with Sorcery and so a device that can process spells is well meh. The Spikard has links to power sources each one is a potential plot hook if the GM chooses to make it so. Aside from that put aside the 'spikard' name if a player came to you saying I want to make this item

Rack and Use Horde spells (8 points)
Linked to named and Numbered Power Sources ( (extrapolated from a primal plane costing 4)
Speak and Sing in songs and voices (4) (this intelligence is used by the item to suggest the most appropriate magic)

Now I would allow this in a high powered game (200 point starting characters) I guess you guys wouldn't ....

Of course the variety and mix of what you can do in Amber is one of the things we all love about it so whatever suits

[Klaus]

With the spikards, letting the players do the same has so many implication that people here suggest to just forbid that.

"no, no, you don't know how it work. Stop trying to understand it, just use it".

I said no such thing. I specifically stated that you can let people modify the spikards, but no PC is going to have "Exalted spikard Mastery" right out of the box; I wouldn't let any PC jump straight to Advanced Pattern the day after walking it just because they say "I want to try looking through the sign of the Pattern" and spontaneously develop Pattern Sight.

Better create a thing from scratch completely. Maybe a Tolkienesque one-spikard-to-rule-them-all campaign...

I've actually read the logs of a campaign like that: the spikards actually connected you to the Master Spikard, and let whoever had it into your mind.