Greetings, brethern

somewhere in the career tree, a psyker gains access to the Talent Peer (The Insane). My problem with this Talent is at which point is a npc treated as "Insane" under the current rules? 10 Points of Insanity? 30 Points?

Right at the moment, I find it hard to value the actual use of this Talent to a player. Most "clearly mad" people seem to be the more like "final opponents", at least in the official modules.

Any ERRATA I missed? Any "tried and true" suggestions from fellow GM?

Many thanks!

I don't think the Peer talents are supposed to be based on set numbers of insanity points. It's just something that let's the PC get along a little better with certain NPC's.

Peer (The Insane) would therefore perhaps give the PC a chance to interact with even the most unhiged paranoid schizofrenics who seem to view the other PC's as vicious monsters with crocodile heads being out to get the schizofrenic person. A character with Peer (the insane) would somehow be able to relate to these delusions and thus establish some sort of common ground with a clearly delusional person. Perhaps by playing along with the delusions and claim that he also sees the monsters with the crocodile heads... Or because the PC in question can genuinely see them.

Anyway, it would be up to the GM to decide which NPC's this talent would be relevant with and not something that could easily be based on a set number of insanity points.

I hoped it could be based on a set of numbers, since the "Peer" Talent (and it subgroups) give a bonus on a simple set of numbers.

For the other "Peer" Talents, there is "base of use" any player and GM can judge fairly well. There is not that much discussion about if some-one is worker, clergy, criminal etc. Well, at least not at my game table.

With "the Insane", it is a little different (around my table). Is every inhabitant fo Dusk who got 1-5 points of insanity "insane"? If not, when is someone "insane enough"?

As long as me & my players do not have a "grasp" for the effect of the Talent, no-one will take it.

I am the GM, it is my job to get a hold on this (again, at my table)

I am not sure and need some inspiration.

Anyone with the same problem and his solution to it?
Besides "judged from moment to moment"?

Gregorius21778 said:

Is it really that clear cut in your game?

I mean, let's consider Peer (Workers) a little. Naturally the multitudes of people slaving over the assembly lines of countless manufactoria would be a no brainer for this. But what about their overseers, the morale/propaganda boosters, the inspection clerks, the assembly line mechanics etc. etc. ?

I mean, they might have a multitude of different job descriptions, but pretty much all of them belong to the same social class and work together in the same enviroment. Wouldn't they all count as "workers" in that scenario?

The same goes for talents like Peer (The Ecclesiarchy). Not everyone affiliated with the Ecclesiarchy are priests, clerics, altar boy's etc. The Ecclesiarchy is a massive organisation including many different kinds of people that recognize and practice it's practices and formal codes. From certain pious nobles that give contributions to the building of new cathedrals, to the pauper warriors that fight in the many holy wars backed by the Ecclesiarchy. In my opinion, everyone of these would be subjected to he Peer (The Ecclesiarchy) talent.

You see where im going with this?

So while the talent itself might give a set number in how large of a bonus you get to your interaction skills with the group of people that the talent concerns, which types of people the talent actually encompass is largely up to the GM and should most of the time be determined according to a case by case manner.

Also, if you're the GM, don't be afraid to let certain Peer talents stack with eachother. After all, if you're dealing with a Noble Born Cleric NPC, then naturally you should benefit from both the Peer (Nobility) and Peer (The Ecclesiarchy) if you have both of them. Symbolizing that you might greet the cleric in a formal manner with the proper codes and jargong appropriate for any Ecclesiarch, but once you get to know him or her better and about the him(her noble background you switch topics and mannerisms to one appropriate when dealing with nobels, and thus make an extra good impression that you are a well connected and a person of good manners and education.

Given that we are talking about insane characters, this is a way that you could do it: Have the gm roll a d100. If it is equal or less than the characters insanity points, then peer (the insane) counts for this encounter. If it is higher then it doesn't. Maybe use a separate roll for each player with the peer (the insane) talent.

Bilateralrope said:

Thanks, that was actually helpfull!

Varnias Tybalt said:

I must say, I tend to agree with Varnius here.

However, if you really want to be able to quantify exactly when it applies to your players, I would recommend that:

1.) if you want it to apply fairly frequently, then you could just say that it applies to anyone that has at least one minor mental disorder.

2.) if you want it to apply less frequently, then just say that it only applies to anyone that has at least one severe mental disorder, and ...

3.) if you really want to lessen it's usefulness, then just say that it only applies to anyone that has at least one acute mental disorder.

JMHO. Hope it helps.

I agree with Varnias here too. Peer (the Insane) would for instance apply when speaking with the prophet/madman in Illumination. But not to someone who's just gotten a few insanity points along with corruption. Often you can't just pin the label onto someone and give the bonus. That's entirely GM discretion.

Consider Hatred (Criminal) or Hatred (Heretics). Everyone's a criminal or heretic, depending on perspective. It's as ambiguous and needs GM decision when to apply. Otherwise it loses its balancing factor of being situational and becomes as overpowered as Hatred (Sinners) would be for the Redemption.

Consider Hatred (Criminal) or Hatred (Heretics). Everyone's a criminal or heretic, depending on perspective. It's as ambiguous and needs GM decision when to apply. Otherwise it loses its balancing factor of being situational and becomes as overpowered as Hatred (Sinners) would be for the Redemption.

As a matter of fact, I think that Hatred (Heretics) is supposed to be overpowered when you compare it to Hatred (specific cult) and similar ones - that's why it's available only with the Redemptionist package which comes with a few disadvantages of its own.

Sisters of Battle and Moritat (Reapers) get it too.