superstition

Quickleaf

Legend
How does this optional new rule look? I based it off of Steve Kenson's "mental strain" rules that appear on the M&M website. Anyone know of a good source for common ancient superstitions?

Superstition (Optional New Rule)
Commoners like the village folk in Lambeurs are prone to superstitious beliefs. Every commoner has a superstition score ranging between 0 and 10, depending on where they’re from. A high superstition score indicates more provincial, paranoid, and isolated peasantry, while a low score indicates a charismatic, worldly, or reasonable yeoman. Whenever a commoner is confronted with something foreign or super-natural, they must make a superstition check:

d20 + Charisma/Intelligence/Wisdom modifier (whichever is higher) – Superstition score

DC......... Strange and Fearsome Thing
10......... A newcomer in town. Doing something unlucky. Unfamiliar but unassuming technology.
14......... Illness and death. Unfamiliar and frightening technology. A newcomer with radically different appearance (dress, skin color, accent, race).
18......... A witch or evil spellcaster. A ghost or faerie. Someone back from the dead.
22......... A supernatural beast like a dragon or demon. An enchanted or cursed location.

If the Superstition check succeeds, nothing happens; the commoner manages to deal with the situation despite their superstitions. If the check fails, then the commoner is biased against the situation and will react in one of these ways as appropriate:
1) Base reaction is Unfriendly. Refuses services and aid. Shuts doors as the subject passes. Avoid the source of their superstition. Mutter prayers under their breath. The commoner won’t say anything good about the source of their superstition.
2) Base reaction is Hostile. The commoner either flees as fast as possible (cowering helplessly if unable to do so) or lashes out violently if it seems they have strength in numbers. It is hard for the commoner to describe what they saw clearly, often resorting to comparison, exaggeration, or unintelligible gibbering.
3) A commoner can instead increase their Superstition score by 1 and act normally (though they can still be manipulated as below). The commoner’s experience only serves to reinforce the validity of their paranoid, insular beliefs. Their Superstition score may never become higher than 10.

Option: Benefits & Hindrances of Superstition: At the GM’s option, a commoner can add their Superstition score to their Sense Motive and Notice skills for the purposes of detecting things out of the ordinary. However, they suffer an equal penalty to all checks involving the supernatural, such as attempting to use wield magic or make a Knowledge (Supernatural) check.

Option: Lowering Superstition: While it’s impossible to eliminate superstition on a large scale without several years at one’s disposal, it is possible to lessen superstition on an individual level. A commoner confronted with convincing evidence of the validity of a “strange and fearsome thing”, such as an astrologer’s explanation how their divination relies on purely holy powers or a magical beast that rescues the commoner’s child, may make a superstition check (DC 16). If successful, the commoner reduces their Superstition by one.

Option: Manipulating Superstition: A cunning foe can use a commoners’ superstition against them, gaining a +4 bonus on any Fear, Intimidate or Bluff check.

Common Medieval superstitions
(1) Soured or stolen milk (or honey) indicated the presence of a witch.
(2) When preparing a table always include a second set of knives for the fairies.
(3) A knot placed at a crossroads ensures good health of one’s animals while traveling.
(4) Carrying a fire out of one’s house will spell ruin for their family.
(5) Ringing a bell makes flying witches crash to the ground and wards off snake & mice.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Interesting; I have always just roleplayed this sort of thing, but it sounds like a pretty workable system.

Have you tried it out? How did it work in practice?
 

Interesting rules option. I quite like the look of it.

I'd be tempted, personally, to stick with Wisdom only - though I can certainly see an argument for Intelligence, too.

I like basing SAN on Wisdom, more or less; it would follow therefore, for my purposes, to use that ability for this purpose.
 

Thanks for the feedback.

During a playtest of the mini-adventure which I developed these rules for, the players dressed up as a monster to frighten away some unscrupulous commoners. I ruled that the commoners were more easily convinced of the reality of such a monster given two things:
(1) They already had "evidence" of said monster - +2 circumstance bonus to the PCs' Disguise check
(2) They're superstitious commoners - +4 bonus to the PCs' disguise check, based on the "manipulating superstition" option

The commoners failed their superstition check and I decided they fled in terror. "Aiiii! It's a fell beast of the Lord come to punish us for our sins!" It was great fun, but ultimately the rules felt pretty redundant for how I would have handled the situation anyhow.
I wonder if it would be useful to add a new rule which allows for "degrees of reaction." I.e. If commoner fails check by 1-5 they react as unfriendly, 6-10 hostile/flee, and 11+ rendered mad? pass out?
 

I very much like there being a system/rule for this. Though usually the outcome is rather obvious, it helps players who have there share of Ming under their belt feel comfortable with such things. Most players should just take the DM's word as is but this sort of rule helps with those who like to challenge the DM.

I think I will use it.

-Sravoff
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top