[3ED/4ED] New Blood Magic

[etherial]

Recall that any Blood Magic ability you create, the Therans will use slaves to pay for.

[Kosmit]

Ok, you got me

[Lys]

There is, in my opinion, one big thematic gap in the Blood Oaths available in Earthdawn, namely that there is no real mechanism for which characters can swear vengeance in style of the Oath of Fëanor. So i decided to fill that gap by making a variant of the Blood Promise that can be sworn unilaterally, but with some additional downsides. Though i probably should give some kind of additional bonus, since it feels a bit weak for something that forces you to go on a roaring rampage of revenge.

BLOOD VENGEANCE

This rarely used blood oath is invoked only by those who have been grievously harmed and feel they have to no other recourse, for once invoked it can only be revoked by fulfilment or failure. The would be avenger utters out loud the Name or Names of those upon whom she wishes to avenge herself, using epithets for those Names she does not know, then lists all the sins they have committed against her. She solemnly swears before all the Passions to avenge herself on every one of her targets by hurting them in some specific manner (death is traditional but not required). As she does so she makes cuts in her off-hand and the chest opposite the heart, incurring 4 Blood Magic Damage. Finally she places the cut on her hand on the cut on her chest, and identifies a talent or skill that is to aid her in her vengeance, giving said talent or skill a +2 bonus.

Unlike Blood Peace and Blood Promise, an Oath of Blood Vengeance lasts until the oath is fulfilled, the avenger dies, or the oath is broken. The oath can only ever be fulfilled by hurting Named character or characters in the sworn manner, thought the avenger need not the one who does so. Forgiveness is simply not an option, so Namegivers are advised to never swear Blood Vengeance except for the most dire of crimes. Moreover, one who swears an oath is compelled to spare no effort in fulfilling it. She must spend all her days seeking out, hunting down, or enacting plans to hurt those she Named, else the oath is broken. However the oath is only meant to enact vengeance on those who actually wronged the swearer. Should she be mistaken about the identity of one or more of her targets, and their innocence proven to her satisfaction, she may let them go unharmed without consequence. Conversely, should she find the real perpetrators, she would be compelled to hunt them down as though she had Named them.

If the oath is broken, the Blood Magic Damage becomes permanent, and the failed avenger immediately manifests two Blood Wounds, one on each place that she drew blood from when swearing the oath. If the oath is fulfilled, the flesh were blood was drawn becomes silvered or gilt, and the avenger may heal the 4 Blood Magic Damage, losing the bonus to her skill or talent. Alternatively, she may choose to heal only 2 Blood Magic Damage in order to make the bonus permanent, but in exchange the other 2 Blood Magic Damage can never be healed.

[The Undying]

Blood Oaths are already open to way much abuse. I personally don't think that a unilateral Blood Oath that provides permanent bonuses is a good idea. Plus there just seem to be way too many open-ended loop holes in the as-written (but, all first drafts need refined, ne?).

Keep in mind that not everything NEEDS a system, and some things CAN be done simply for fluff. An Adept COULD make a Blood Oath to them self that they would do Thing X, allowing the wound to serve as a reminder to motivate them. A Player COULD do something, simply because they like the flavor, and the GM COULD provide a bonus or two at an opportunity time as a result.

Anyways, aside from all that, you'll notice that Blood Oaths, at least as provided in the Player's Guide, require co-mingling of blood. I would argue it is this co-mingling that provides the connection between the True Patterns through which the magic can actually work. I'd recommend minimally adding something like "the Adept must have caused at least X damage or one Wound to his foe, allowing him to harvest Y amount of blood, which is used as part of the Oath of Vengeance."

Plus, I just looked up the Oath you mentioned (not at all a Tolkein fan), and that was NOT a unilateral Oath as far as I can tell. It was multiple people. So, at a minimum, in the Earthdawn universe, one could see them making a group pact style Blood Promise.

[Lys]

It's precisely the fact that Blood Oaths are open to abuse why i didn't worry about this one being abusable. What stops people from swearing the Blood Vengeance over trivial things with trivial requirements? Same thing that stops them from swearing Blood Promises over trivial things with trivial requirements: nothing at all. You can easily get +2 bonuses to anything you want by having two people solemnly promise to fetch things from across the room for each other. Granted at the price of 2 permanent damage every time, so there is a limit to how often this can be done. Unless you choose to get a +2 to Durability, in which case you can exploit an infinite health loop. Here's a hint for GMs: Do not allow Blood Oath bonuses to stack, permit only one +2 per item.

And yes the Oath of Feanor is technically a Group Promise between him and his seven children. Which is something that probably deserves a write-up as well, since if Group Peace exists it stands to reason that Group Promise would as well. It really wasn't the best example, but it's the first thing that comes to mind when i think of people swearing revenge and then being forced to stick with it, even at great cost to themselves. The principal point is that i want it to be an option to solemnly swear revenge upon those who wrong you, preferably while rain falls dramatically, and then having no recourse but to follow through with it. The bonus is just there as because blood magic empowers you, as demonstrated by the other oaths.

[Tattered Rags]

Something like a Blood Vengeance probably shouldn't have an out for people who swear it wrongly. You enter into it, you better be sure. I'd even say you need to Name everyone. At a minimum the True Name creates a connection through your blood for the ritual.

[Lys]

Something like a Blood Vengeance probably shouldn't have an out for people who swear it wrongly. You enter into it, you better be sure. I'd even say you need to Name everyone. At a minimum the True Name creates a connection through your blood for the ritual.

Well i wanted you to be able to swear revenge on people whose True Names you do not know, since the raiders who burned your village and killed your family probably din't stop to introduce themselves, which is why epiphets work (for example "The Black Raiders"). The problem is that if ephiphets work then it necessarily means that vengeance is being directed at those you intended it towards, not necessarily those you actually Named (there might be a gang called The Black Raiders who had nothing to do with it). So i put in the out, but also added a flipside that if you do find those you meant, you have to hunt them down as if they'd been Named. Do keep in mind that i'm balancing this against the fact that you can get the exact same thing by Blood Promising a friend that you're going to seek vengeance, and will less downsides. If you word it correctly, you can even keep your +2 after one year even if you haven't found the perpetrators yet, and you're no longer bound by the Blood Promise. (ProTip: Never promise to do something, instead promise that you will do your best to accomplish it. As long as you sincerely try, it doesn't matter whether you succeed or fail.)

[Tattered Rags]

I think the unilateral nature of the Blood Vengeance really should be balanced with having to specifically Name the people. This means you need to quest to find the Names of the leaders of the Blood Raiders before you swear vengeance.

And the lack of an out would mean you need to BE VERY SURE. It also leads to stories where someone is actually innocent, but now you're stuck going back on your Blood Vengeance or killing an innocent man (you silly dupe).

edit: It's also, to me, far more interesting without the innocent out.

[The Undying]

I'm assuming that your "protips" have been sarcastic.

On the whole topic of Blood Oath power and balance and so forth...

Blood Oaths exist to build drama. Really, everything in a pen and paper exists to tell a great co-operateively developed and experienced story. Tabletop miniature systems are simply better for people who want a super crunchy, numbers are be all and end all system. In the case of Earthdawn, the system is really about heroics and good versus evil; epic oaths, going to great lengths to fulfill them, and staggering repercussions upon broken oaths are all part of that.

Blood Oaths are really not there to build up numbers. I'd say there are really two ways to look at this. First, if players are trying desperately to just get super numbers, and the GM is willing to allow it, then just cut out the middle man. There's nothing wrong with playing a super-hero power level Earthdawn game. The balance is just that the super-heroes should just be facing off against super-villains and super-beasts (does anyone really want to play a game where your hero is now so OP that everything is cake?)

Second, in a world where Blood Oaths are taken flippantly ("I solemly promise to use my Spellcasting to make you this breakfast using Heat Food!" and "I solemnly promise to use my Wilderness Survival to find us food for that breakfast!"), two things happen. One, if it's not assumed to be baked into the basics of everyday life. At this point, don't think the Adepts are the most cleverest of clever to have figured out this loophole, I'm sure everyone in Barsaive is doing it, so we're back to the "everything is super-power-level" thing above. Two, it IS baked into the basics of everyday life, in which case base stats take that into account, so Blood Oaths should provide no mechanical bonuses.

Finally, on the topic of innocent outs - Blood Oaths don't really work that way. If you make a Blood Peace, only to find out you ended up with the worse deal, you can't say "Well, this was obviously done as a feint, it doesn't apply, so I'm gonna shank this dude." Do that, and the Oath is broken. If you make a Blood Promise to go hunt down and retrieve an artifact for someone, only to find out that the artifact is the only thing keeping some ancient forest alive, you can't say "oh, I was tricked, I'm not removing this." Do that, and the Oath is broken. All this is totally a thing. And, best of all, it's INTERESTING, great stories, with horrible aftermaths that someone might quest to undo or otherwise make right. And an Adept can DO that quest without making Yet Another Oath.

[Lys]

You two do make fair points about how the out in the case you swore vengeance on the wrong person goes counter to the normal way in which Blood Oaths work. So consider that part removed, if you swear vengeance on someone, and they did you no wrong, then maybe you shouldn't have been so quick to swear revenge. That said, i still think that you don't need to actually find the True Names of those you're swearing vengeance on. The reason for this is precisely because there is no out, you don't have to make sure you've got the right person. However if you don't make sure then you might find yourself stuck between breaking your oath, and doing harm upon one who has not harmed you. It seems appropriately dramatic.

Also i was not being sarcastic about the ProTip. There is no reason why a smart person would ever swear to accomplish a task. Not when they can instead swear to do their best to do so. Blood Wounds suck, being permanently branded an Oathbraker sucks worse, so in the face of incurring such potential harm, why wouldn't you want to make sure that it's impossible to break the oath accidentally? If you only swear to try your best, then the oath can only be broken intentionally by slacking off or being negligent, circumstances beyond your control cannot break it. Moreover the person you're swearing it to is likely to accept it, since the threat of accidental oathbreaking doesn't make you any less likely to accomplish the task, you did promise to try your best.

Remember in Earthdawn people are generally aware of how the mechanics of magic work, which means they are able to optimize around them in-character. Similarly when my character Stormbreaker swore the Oath of Group Peace, she specifically said that she would not "intentionally take action to" or "knowingly allow" harm to befall her group. The qualifiers of "intentionally" and "knowingly" are there so she can only break the Oath if she means to break it, not just because it's plain common sense to do so, but also because she will simply not swear an Oath that can be broken by circumstances outside her control. Nor does she expect anyone else to do so.