I've had a problem with the Magus-Mystic's Channel Agony Talent for some time.

Yes, I know, pain for power is traditionally a dark ability, so it fits as a Dark Side ability. I'm not complaining about that. I'm complaining about the double-dip of Conflict, and the fact that you also take wounds for it. Yes, you can heal them pretty fast, you've got two Healing Trance Talents, plus up to three more if you dip into the Healer-Consular, but the Conflict double-dip is just painful as a player.

I've finally decided how I'd rewrite it, too: Just have the Dark O gained be Neutral O instead, using the Force Point symbol from EotE and AoR. Basically, it counts as Dark for Dark Siders and Light for Light Siders. It's thematically inappropriate, but a change like that would give me a reason to actually consider getting the Talent.

Does anyone agree? Do you have different solutions? Or am I just being a big baby about the nature of the Dark Side?

Funnily enough, there are folks that complain that gaining Conflict for PCs to go dark is difficult enough in the rules, and that this talent is one of the few ways to gain substantial Conflict without going full-on cackling serial villain levels of cartoonish evil in order to fall to the dark side.

To be frank, this isn't supposed to be an ability that those on the light side would make use of, so the fact that it effectively fast tracks you do the lower end of the Morality scale makes perfect sense.

Yes, it's a hefty cost, but it's also the simple fact that it's bonus Force points which at the lower end of the XP scale is quite a boon when you're only rolling one Force die, even more so if you're fully intending to go dark side with your PC.

I hate to sound snarky, but if you want a mystical powerhouse that doesn't rely on delving into the dark side of the Force, then you'll probably want to take Seer or even Sage from the Consular career instead.

That sounds like it's more of a problem with the Morality/Conflict rules, which I do agree with. Being a Light Sider should be hard, just like being a Paladin.

I've actually got a bunch of house rules for that, many of which are cribbed from another source. I suppose I'll write them in another thread, and see if anyone cares; I'll link it here, too, when it's up.

EDIT: It's up !

Well that's the thing about the dark side talents. Using powers that are generally solely powered by emotions can be distorted to evil and corruption quite quickly. The Dark Side is drawing on unnatural forces in such an effect that it damage's the force itself and really channel agony in essence is as dark as they come.

I mean I could see why obtaining conflict from owning the talent is a bit weird; the system operates on the system that knowing how an evil power works incorporates some corruption, especially given each individual instance of channel agony gives conflict. Then again, Magus is pretty much the mad evil force wizard tree. A character that recklessly delves into their will lose themselves quite quickly. Which is a little different from sage or alchemist, that focus on tradition to give shape to education.

14 hours ago, Machaeus said:

That sounds like it's more of a problem with the Morality/Conflict rules, which I do agree with. Being a Light Sider should be hard, just like being a Paladin.

Not sure the meaning of that first line? Is the problem you are referring to implying the Morality/Conflict rules have the problem, namely giving you Conflict because you *shock of shocks*, used a Dark Side power?

Or do you mean it's your problem with the rules as they are written?

Not criticizing, just not sure which direction the problem is coming from in your point.

OT: Yeah, an ability called Channel Agony (which when I first read it, thought you meant something like Channel Zero, on a tv ), inflicts Conflict on you, because it's not a very nice thing to do to yourself or someone else. That' s kind of the point. It's a GREAT way to be more powerful, it's quick, it's easy, it's very seductive of an ability to get....which is exactly how the Dark Side works. It lures you in with the promise of great power...all it costs is your Humanity/Soul.

Personally think that conflict should be gained through the intent behind the use if the power no arbitrary dice faces. If I used channel agony to catch a person from falling to their deaths with move do I really deserve to be mechanically closer to Sidious?

18 minutes ago, SithArissa said:

Personally think that conflict should be gained through the intent behind the use if the power no arbitrary dice faces. If I used channel agony to catch a person from falling to their deaths with move do I really deserve to be mechanically closer to Sidious?

Yes, because you still tapped into that darker power to accomplish your goal. Now as the GM at that table, I would probably halve the Conflict gained, due to intent. That you aren't using the power to actually inflict harm on another, or to be selfish, but the taint of tapping into the Dark Side itself, would still generate the Conflict. If you've ever read the Dresden Files, the way Harry describes using Black Magic, is very similar to how the Dark Side, works. In that it's sort of like a toxic substance, that leaves a stain on you, regardless of why you used the power. Or like being exposed to radiation. Simply coming into contact with it would damage you to some degree.

But the fact that Conflict was gained doesn't equal you are evil. It just means you've done a questionable action (for one reason or another), and your character is...Conflicted about it, and how it impacts them. If the net result on the roll is zero or positive, then they didn't have any problems, and while they might regret the action they took, their moral core is still sound. I usually roleplay this as this being an action that they regret, and feel remorse for, but instead of spiraling down into a depression, or letting their anger fester into a rage, they accepted it, and strove to do better in the future. To take it as a learning experience. To me, that is the narrative reflection of them still having a positive Morality result at the end of the session.

If they dip down Morality, it still doesn't mean you've gone full Red Saber, it just means that maybe you don't know why people are so bothered by what you did. It worked didn't it?! What were you supposed to do, just let them die!? Besides, I can totally handle it! I don't have a problem! It's fine! *goes and sits in his quarters and sulks in the dark for a while*. Again, different narrative reaction, but still not a Bad Guy.

Characters don't become Bad if their Morality drops (unless they actually go past that Dark Side User point, and even then plenty people debate that), it just means they've had to make some hard choices, that have had a serious impact on their personality.

Since you and I are in a pbp together, I can use Gaze's reaction when he used the Dark Side a few times, and also killed those Sith Troopers. He had, I think 4 Conflict at the end of that session, but I rolled a positive Morality result. So I roleplayed it that he was shaken by what he felt he had to do to save lives (kill people for the first time, and let his emotions fuel his connection to the Force, instead of serenity). It bothered and upset him, but he went back to the teaching of his Master, to learn from his mistakes, and to do better next time. If he had ended up with a reduced Morality, his reaction would've been significantly different.

36 minutes ago, KungFuFerret said:

Not sure the meaning of that first line? Is the problem you are referring to implying the Morality/Conflict rules have the problem, namely giving you Conflict because you *shock of shocks*, used a Dark Side power?

Or do you mean it's your problem with the rules as they are written?

Not criticizing, just not sure which direction the problem is coming from in your point.

I was agreeing with the previous post: The rules for Morality/Conflict are too lenient, at least in general. It's harder to get out of debt (reduce Obligation) or to gain Rebellion recognition (increase Duty) than it is to be a good person (increase Morality).

However, the actual Channel Agony talent seems the exact opposite to me, and it's a juxtaposition that confounds me, probably in large part because I'm fairly anal. But it also is because there's three instances of this Talent on the Magus Talent Tree, making it as central a feature as Healing Trance and Improved HT, and one of them is in a rather inconvenient spot for getting a specific talent. (That's probably the point, to be fair, but it's annoying.) The double-dip is what seems patently unfair to me, not the fact that it's a Dark Side ability. I get the Dark aspect of it, as I think I explained. It's just that the mechanics of this one talent, with the rest of the RAW for Conflict, makes it seem unlikely that I would ever pick it up.

I guess my main point is that, for its cost, it's mechanically rather underwhelming. For comparison, you've got other Dark Talents:

• Terrify (Core Rules: Aggressor Warrior): Make a Diff3 Coercion check to disorient targets. With the Intimidating Talent, pop a little strain and it can become Diff1 easily. Useful, and tempting, to take.
• Baleful Gaze (Keeping the Peace: Warden Guardian): When attacked, spend a Destiny Point, upgrade an enemy's attack difficulty by your ranks in Coercion. That's actually a little broken, and very tempting. I've honestly overlooked it until now.
• Terrifying Kill (Savage Spirits: Executioner Seeker): When you kill or Crit Injure someone, you can spend a Destiny Point to roll Force Rating and do Strain to everyone in Short range. Not bad, but not the best Dark Talent so far.
• Fear the Shadows (Endless Vigil: Sentry Sentinel): Make a Diff3 Deception check to drive off a minion group or a rival. Better than Terrifying Kill, but not quite to Terrify. Still tempting to take.
• Mind Bleed (Disciples of Harmony: Ascetic Consular): This one doesn't make sense to me for the Ascetic. I feel like the Arbiter should have had a Dark Talent. In any case, when you take damage, take Strain up to Wounds suffered and the target takes equal Wounds to your Strain. That's really nasty, if pricey!
• Power of Darkness (Unlimited Power: Magus Mystic): Oh hello again, Magus. Anyway, 1/session as Maneuver, increase Wound and Strain Thresholds by (number of Dark Side Points). I mean it's not as underwhelming as Channel Agony, but...
• Power from Pain (Knights of Fate: Colossus Warrior): Now this is nasty: 1/session as Incidental, spend 1 Destiny Point and increase Force Rating by the number of Crit Injuries you're suffering until the end of the encounter. Do I need to explain why someone might take this? Especially with the right Endure upgrades... even if your GM rules that no, Endure'd Crit Injuries don't count. (They probably shouldn't!)
• Embrace your Hate (Knights of Fate: Juyo Berserker Warrior): Thematically fitting, and fairly underwhelming at only one rank, but at two it can be fairly nasty. Still, this is an "eyes on the prize" Talent.
• Juyo Savagery (Knights of Fate: Juyo Berserker Warrior): This could be pretty vital in a fight. I can see myself picking this up just as much as Inner Peace and Vaapad Control.

Does that help explain my position a little better? Sure, there's lots of OP and UP Talents in this game, but I just can't see myself picking up Channel Agony from a mechanical perspective. Too much cost for too little benefit.

14 hours ago, Machaeus said:

That sounds like it's more of a problem with the Morality/Conflict rules, which I do agree with. Being a Light Sider should be hard, just like being a Paladin. 

Actually I think this may be part of your problem.

If you look, the system is set up the way it is so that a player is largely in control of their Morality. Doing a little something questionable here, and a not in the right frame of mind there isn't that big a deal. This allow that "Anakin" player to be largely in control of his fall to the darkside, and if the campaign goes long enough, eventual redemption.

Previous systems tried things in the "Paladin" mindset you proposed and it didn't work.

In D6 one single misstep and your character was removed from play for going Dark. Seriously, one bad deed followed by 1 bad roll and it was game over for you.

In D20 they did a thing where the darkside gave a boost, and so players would play a game of violation and atonement to get the most bang for their buck.

This system on the other hand allows Hayden and George to chat about this Anakin character, and George to provide situations that allow Anakin to fall to the Darkside at a pace that doesn't take the story off the rails, or give Anakin abilities that Ewan's character Obi-wan doesn't have.

Sooooo back this....

Yeah, it double dips conflict, but that's the point. Either you're already on the way to, or are a Darksider, in which case Who Cares? or You're trying not to be a darksider at all, in which case choosing this ability is going to be something you either don't do at all, or carefully manage if you do choose it.

@Ghostofman Like I said in my House Rules thread, I agree that d6 was way too harsh about it. However, I do think that the current system goes just a little too far in the other direction.

There probably is no easy solution. That's kind of how morality works IRL, in fact. Funny how that works :B

19 minutes ago, Machaeus said:

I was agreeing with the previous post: The rules for Morality/Conflict are too lenient, at least in general. It's harder to get out of debt (reduce Obligation) or to gain Rebellion recognition (increase Duty) than it is to be a good person (increase Morality).

K, just wanted clarification, as plenty of people post about having a problem with the Morality system, and they mean something entirely different

Regarding the double dipping comment though. I don't have the book that contains that one, or at least not in front of me, but how is it "double dipping" on conflict, when compared to other Dark Side talents?

@KungFuFerret Simply put, when you Channel Agony, you take up to Rank x 2 wounds and gain half your Wounds in Dark Side Force Pips/Points. You also get 1 Conflict at the start of each session per Rank in the Talent (which is something they didn't do for the two Ranks of Embrace Your Hate for some reason).

47 minutes ago, Machaeus said:

@KungFuFerret Simply put, when you Channel Agony, you take up to Rank x 2 wounds and gain half your Wounds in Dark Side Force Pips/Points. You also get 1 Conflict at the start of each session per Rank in the Talent (which is something they didn't do for the two Ranks of Embrace Your Hate for some reason).

Yeah, considering how many Force pips that can generate for you, I can see why. If they didn't put a very strong negative aspect to this power, every munchkin would consider it a mandatory power for anyone playing a Force user, because it's just so cost effective, and is hardly a conflict generator at all. So that doesn't surprise me. Thematically though I think it makes sense too, that it would be an express lane to the Dark Side to regularly use a power called Channel Agony

I understood the thematic sense; I just didn't think it was a low cost relatively speaking.

I'm gonna guess, based on the sheer amount of people telling me that I'm wrong about all this, that I'm really not thinking about Channel Agony from the right angle. That's rather worrying.

1 hour ago, Machaeus said:

I understood the thematic sense; I just didn't think it was a low cost relatively speaking.

I'm gonna guess, based on the sheer amount of people telling me that I'm wrong about all this, that I'm really not thinking about Channel Agony from the right angle. That's rather worrying.

I don't think they ever intended for it to be a "low cost", given what the power does and how much destruction it could allow for a Dark Side PC. With only a small amount of XP invested in upgrades into a power like Heal/Harm, having a guaranteed handful of pips to trigger some of the more powerful effects, would make a low XP DS PC a powerhouse that would be very hard to take down without some casualties.

I think part of the reason, is for the type of player, that we all know, (partly because they post on this forum all the time), that try and haggle their way out of conflict for doing bad things. "Well in my PC's morality system, drowning orphans with their shelter puppies is totally fine, so I don't see why I should get conflict for doing it." I've seriously heard a variation on this sentence countless times, in pretty much EVERY game that has a system that tries to track how good/bad someone behaves. World of Darkness is infamous for some of the Humanity debates based on their systems, so yeah, I think this was probably done intentionally, to curtail min/maxing monster PC's, who just gleefully solve every problem with Agony, and don't care about the Conflict cost, because a different version, it would be a minor setback, and they could possibly skirt by, being a "Grey Jedi", if they just manage their Conflict.

I mean I personally mismeasured the cost. Sorry, I thought I'd made that clearer ><

Good points, though.