Regeneration and Bloodtheft

[Sigmund]

At 09:10 AM 9/25/2006, Sigmund wrote:


Well, being pretty much unkillable is what Invulnerability is all
about.... In a homebrew in which the Spider`s Invulnerability is to
be made less significant it`s probably easier to give him another
blood ability than to bypass that blood ability as a general
rule. Invulnerability often comes with its own special formula for
killing the character who has it, which is the whole point. I don`t
think it should be a unique method AND the standard bloodtheft method
using tighmaevril since that seems to be missing the point.


Gary

I suppose this makes some sense. I guess I'm trying to find a way to make my story work without just yanking powers and replacing them, or banning powers outright. I want the Spider to be very hard to kill... but I also want someone to succeed regardless. I want the event to make sense with the rules of the game, even if the PCs never know all the details and it seems mysterious and amazing from their perspective. To this end I created this thread and continue throwing out "What ifs" and "How abouts". Just exploring the idea really, and maybe ideas that arise here can help clarify the rules a bit as well.

I understand you believe the blood power trumps bloodtheft or tighmaevril, but the rules don't really say so. They don't say the opposite either. It is a rare enough situation that perhaps they don't need to come right out and address this specific issue, but it would be nice to know what the official line might be about which type of power trumps which. Obviously realm magic is more powerful than bloodlines, since it can be used to remove an individual's bloodline. Even regular true magic can be used to block an individual's access to their bloodline for a time. Where does bloodtheft, by any method, fall in this spectrum? The Bloodline Ward spell specifically states that although it protects bloodline from bloodtheft through normal means, it does not protect bloodline from tighmaevril bloodtheft. This would imply that bloodsilver is more powerful, or effective, than garden variety bloodtheft. How much more powerful, or effective, is it? Where is the line drawn?

[Sigmund]

I've poked my own curiosity with a sharp stick again. If a scion with invulnerability is killed while under the effects of a Suppress Bloodline spell, are they really dead? Does the "death" last even after the spell effect ends, since they had no access to their invulnerability or (if they had it) regen powers at the time they were "killed"?

[ploesch]

I would treat invulnerability like BloodForm, and have it be one of those passive things that are not able to be rid of. That's my opinion though, not supported by any documentation.

[Sigmund]

I would treat invulnerability like BloodForm, and have it be one of those passive things that are not able to be rid of. That's my opinion though, not supported by any documentation.

Despite my distaste for it, the nature of the power would lead me to agree with you. Otherwise it seems it would truely be too easily circumvented.

[geeman]

At 03:31 PM 9/25/2006, Sigmund wrote:

>I`ve poked my own curiosity with a sharp stick again. If a scion
>with invulnerability is killed while under the effects of a Suppress
>Bloodline spell, are they really dead? Does the "death" last even
>after the spell effect ends, since they had no access to their
>invulnerability or (if they had it) regen powers at the time they
>were "killed"?

I could see someone going either way with this one, but I`d suggest
two things. First, if one rules that the scion is killed permanently
we get a sort of end run round the blood ability of the sort that
could prove problematic in the long run. Second, it`s kind of a
standard of fantasy/sci-fi that a creature is "killed" temporarily,
but his powers eventually restore him to life. At least, it seems
like the more common way of dealing with this sort of thing in
general in a fantasy type setting.

Gary

[irdeggman]

In 2nd ed death did not remove a scion’s bloodline. In the Book of Priestcraft pg 83 it talks about regent death and resurrection. The regent’s tie to the land is severed with his death but he retains his bloodline. This is bypassed via bloodtheft. Although the rules on bloodtheft in the Birthright Rulebook (pg 31) don’t specifically state it drains the bloodline it can be read into the description that is what is meant. Also in the Book of Priestcraft under Bloodline Investiture (pg 81) it says that bloodtheft generally serves the same purpose.

The Suppress Blood Ability and Suppress Bloodline spells and from the Book of Magecraft (pgs 91 and 95) did not specify that the spells would not work on physical transformations from bloodform (like in the BRCS) – so technically in 2nd ed the spells could be used to remove the protection from the blood ability Invulnerability and thus allow killing the scion in question.

[Doyle]

At 03:31 PM 9/25/2006, Sigmund wrote:
...<snip>... Second, it`s kind of a standard of fantasy/sci-fi that a creature is "killed" temporarily, but his powers eventually restore him to life. At least, it seems like the more common way of dealing with this sort of thing in general in a fantasy type setting.
Gary

I like this second option mostly because of the plotlines that can be associated with it. 'A foe that seems destroyed, but generations later when the heroes are too old to adventure and the secret of how the foe was defeated initialy is lost, some fool (preferrably a PC) sets in motion a chain of events that lead to the foe returning'. Examples that come to mind are Eldrad (Dr Who), Voldemort (Harry Potter) and Imotep (The Mummy).