BTB - Corrupted Characters & Leader Mutation

Hi,

We are using the rules in the Corrupted Characters article in our BTB campaign. We just played a scenario in the northern wastes and the leader of the Celestial Protectorate warband rolled a random mutation. We now have a question about the following section...

Quote :

Skaven, Chaos Dwarfs and Dark Elves have a reverence for all things twisted and corrupted by Chaos. As a consequence of mutation, any other Hero can usually expect to be cast out from his group by his suspicious peers when word gets around. After a warrior becomes a mutant, the warband leader typically uncovers the truth and wrestles with his conscience to decide whether the infected individual should be drummed out of the warband. Before the start of the next battle take a Leadership test using the characteristic of the warband leader to determine the mutant's fate. For each mutant the warband is already harbouring apply +1 to the Leadership test. If the Leadership test is passed, then the mutant is put to death and must be struck from the warband roster sheet and his equipment is discarded. If the test is failed, then the shamed warrior is allowed to remain with the warband.

Should the Leadership test still be done using the leader's Leadership or should it be done using the warrior with the next highest Leadership characteristic? After all, if the Leadership test is successful then the warrior will die which is back to front when the leader is rolling for himself.

It is semantics I know and at the end of the day it doesn't really matter. I'm just curious whether you would still roll using the leader's Leadership or would you invent a house rule to cover this situation and force another warrior in the warband (the warrior who is next in line to become leader) to pass the Leadership test instead.

Thanks.

Personally, I would go for the guy with next highest Ld taking the test. I figure it makes sense story wise as the next bravest guy approaches the Leader and calls him out on his tainted ways.

That's very much a house rule for storyline purposes rather than some official ruling of course. Just makes sense to me.

Hi.

Use the rules as they are stated.

In you want to add colour then consider this. The warband leader takes the Leadership test as he wrestles with his own conscience concerning the mutation! Ultimately he might choose to keep it a secret from his fellows... Conceal a small evil for the greater good of the adventure.

I would urge anyone not to test based on the Ld of subservient character. You really don't want to increase the chance of losing your leader.

Regards,

Stuart.

Thanks werekin...

Based on what you just said I am wondering then if the wording in the article is currently back-to-front.

Quote :

If the Leadership test is passed, then the mutant is put to death

Should this sentence instead actually say that "if the Leadership test is failed, then the mutant is put to death"?

The leader generally has the highest Leadership value in the warband and is therefore more likely to pass a Leadership test than a subservient character. According to the rules as written this then contradicts what you said because using the leader's Leadership value will increase the chance of losing the leader. This is why we are confused.

Yes it's meant to say "apply a +1 modifier to the roll", not "apply +1 to the Leadership test".

Hope that clarifies.

Regards,

Werekin

Yeah, I had the same question.... a passed Ld means they allowed to stay, or a passed means they are ejected/killed?

Likewise, a small question: the "handling the stones" chance of mutating applies only to "Power of the Stones" items, or to anyone who so much as picks up a wyrdstone piece?

Another question: do the "discreet" rules still apply, like they did in Power of the stones (as in, some mutations were mild enough that other players didn't notice?) Or are all of the mutations now noticable?

I'm starting a Mordheim City campaign soon, and if you have any advice for using the Corrupted Characters in the city proper, I'd love to hear it... the rules look like fun!

Werekin,

Could you give us an example... please ?

I'm still confused about this rule. Its best to have a low or high leadership ?

Thx

Hello gents.

You're quite right here Rational. The wording is back-to-front! Doh!! Treat the text on the first page as reading;

After a warrior becomes a mutant, the warband leader typically uncovers the truth and wrestles with his conscience to decide whether the infected individual should be drummed out of the warband. Before the start of the next battle take a Leadership test using the characteristic of the warband leader to determine the mutant's fate. For each mutant the warband is already harbouring apply +1 to the Leadership test. If the Leadership test is passed, then the mutant is put to death and must be struck from the warband roster sheet and his equipment is discarded. If the test is failed, then the shamed warrior is allowed to remain with the warband.

I should probably think about checking &/or updating this file some time soon.

Regards,

Werekin.

That makes more sense. Awesome! As I said, can't wait to use them in the City of Mordheim.

As there are no Northern Wastes in the City, what do you think about rolling for Mutations in any scenario that involved picking up Wyrdstone? (Hunt, the Pool, etc.) Makes sense that exposure = chance of mutation.

Um. I still don't get it. What words changed from the original? It seems like the leader has the highest leadership, he takes the test and if he passes the mutant guy dies. Right?

Quote :

If the Leadership test is passed, then the mutant is put to death and must be struck from the warband roster sheet and his equipment is discarded. If the test is failed, then the shamed warrior is allowed to remain with the warband.

Quote :

If the Leadership test is passed, then the mutant is put to death and must be struck from the warband roster sheet and his equipment is discarded. If the test is failed, then the shamed warrior is allowed to remain with the warband.

I'm sorry I feel quite at sea here.

It would seem, unless I'm mistaken, that the Leader is taking a "Tolerance" test... is he strong enough of a leader to accpect his henchmen in any form, or so paranoid that anything different or changed must be destroyed... ergo, unlike what was originally PRINTED, a warband with a mutant takes an Ld Test. If passed, the leader allows the mutant to stay. If failed, it is killed.

Whatever, if that is what is intended it is not what is written. I'll wait for a revision.

Guh ...

Me ... dont .... understand.... (grumble)

Big leader must be good (with high Ld) or bad (low Ld) for me to stay with you ?

a now stupid mutant

werekin wrote:

Hello gents.

Treat the text on the first page as reading;

After a warrior becomes a mutant, the warband leader typically uncovers the truth and wrestles with his conscience to decide whether the infected individual should be drummed out of the warband. Before the start of the next battle take a Leadership test using the characteristic of the warband leader to determine the mutant's fate. For each mutant the warband is already harbouring apply +1 to the Leadership test. If the Leadership test is passed, then the mutant is put to death and must be struck from the warband roster sheet and his equipment is discarded. If the test is failed, then the shamed warrior is allowed to remain with the warband.

Uh, Werekin? I think that's the exact same wording it has now.

So the higher your leadership is the more likely you are to kill the Mutant, and lose a hero and all his stuff?

So a high leadership is actually a bad thing.

Is this the effect you want? Or did I misread something?

werekin wrote:

In you want to add colour then consider this. The warband leader takes the Leadership test as he wrestles with his own conscience concerning the mutation! Ultimately he might choose to keep it a secret from his fellows... Conceal a small evil for the greater good of the adventure.

I would urge anyone not to test based on the Ld of subservient character. You really don't want to increase the chance of losing your leader.

werekin wrote:

You're quite right here Rational. The wording is back-to-front! Doh!!

The wording in the Corrupted Characters article is back-to-front. A higher Leadership is good becausing passing the Leadership test results in the mutant being accepted back into the warband.

werekin wrote:

Yes it's meant to say "apply a +1 modifier to the roll", not "apply +1 to the Leadership test".

What I am not sure about is whether having mutants already in the warband is good or bad. The article says to apply +1 to the Leadership test (which makes it easier to pass the Leadership test) but Stu has said that it should instead be to apply +1 to the roll (which makes it easier to fail the Leadership test).

I think that the presence of existing mutants would make it easier to accept further mutants into the warband so currently our gaming group is playing the rules as follows in our current campaign (which has resulted in three mutants being kept and one mutant being left behind):

1. If the Leadership test is passed then the warrior is accepted back into the warband. However, if the Leadership test is failed then the warrior is put to death (or at least sent away ) and all equipment is lost.
   
2. Existing mutants add +1 to the Leadership (or -1 to the roll) which makes it easier to pass the Leadership test to accept the new mutant.
   

I believe that the first point above is definitely correct but I am very uncertain about the second point.

1. Did you arrive at this conclusion after PMs or something? We can post quotes from Werekin on this thread all day, but he contradicts what you are quoting with the next sentence in his last post. Which could be an oversight or his way of reiterating his previous point which was use the rules as stated.

Double my bad. Meh, I copied text from the old file! The text I ended up with was this;

Before the start of the next battle take aLeadership test using the characteristic of the warband leader to determine themutant's fate. For each mutant the warband is already harbouring apply +1 tothe roll. If the Leadership test is failed, then the mutant is put to death andmust be struck from the warband roster sheet and his equipment is discarded. Ifthe test is passed, then the shamed warrior is allowed to remain with thewarband.

The logic;

1. Failing a Leadership test is bad, hence the death penalty.
2. +1 modifier to the roll for each mutant in the warband, rather than the test, because that doesn't make for very good language.
3. The more mutants in the warband, the more difficult it is for them to conceal their freak identities and for the warband leader (if he's in on it) to protect them. Mordheim & Marienburg are urban campaigns which is why I included a modifier. If you had a half-dozen heretic warbands scrapping it out in Shadowlands treat the new mutant as a threat to the leader!

Regards,

Werekin.

p.s. A delicious treat has been prepared for next weekends blog update.
http://libermalefic.blogspot.com

Thanks Werekin.

I'll let our gaming group know that we're playing the +1 modifier wrong.

I'm starting a new campaign in Mordheim city, and I can't wait to try out the Corrupted Character rules. One possible add-on, and one question:

Suggestion: ~In the Northern Wastes (or similar warped place), Any chaos warband may purchase a mutation as a skill. If he rolls doubles for his skill roll, he MUST purchase a skill. If not he does not pay, he immediately rolls on the D66 chart for mutations.

(I like the idea of chaos warbands occasionally rolling on the random chart too...

Question: you mentioned a Holy list too. Is that coming out soon? Until it does, do you have any recommendations to balance out the added bonus to darkness (like, having holy items & spells effect all mutants, not just possessed?)

Ahhh a holy list. Sweet. That must be coming out in the article for priests that Werekin is working on. That will be good as our gaming group have found that Corrupted Characters is definitely swayed to the advantage of evil warbands.

Interesting idea about forcing a random mutation if the warrior cannot pay for a good mutation.

Quote :

Suggestion: ~In the Northern Wastes (or similar warped place), Any chaos
warband may purchase a mutation as a skill. If he rolls doubles for his
skill roll, he MUST purchase a skill. If not he does not pay, he immediately rolls on the D66 chart for mutations.

Fair one. The trick here is that player-collectors using Chaos miniatures like to customize their warriors. You cannot do that as you like with random results. Followers of Chaos have the option of buying a mutation of their choice instead of choosing a skill. No money = no honey.

A warband that is not naturally siding with the Ruinous Powers will not benefit from choice. The mutations will have no cost, but they are random, the player may not have wanted them in the first place, and it could lead to the warrior being drummed out of the gang.

There will be other instance when followers of Chaos will pick up random mutations. ie, Tainted goods, Black dust etc.

Quote :

Question: you mentioned a Holy list too. Is that coming out soon? Until
it does, do you have any recommendations to balance out the added bonus
to darkness (like, having holy items & spells effect all mutants,
not just possessed?)

Argh! Really wanted to have this article out by now! Researching the topic has led me deeper into the subject of faith than I had anticipated. While I look forward to revealing all in a whirlwind expose of the holy clergies, you should be able to allow corruption to seep into your campaign to begin with! With any luck I will get the job done in time for you to start messing about with holy miracles to foil the schemes of abominations who are loyal to the Dark Powers.

Regards,

Werekin.

Hmm. What if it was based off the existing item, the "Hammer Against Witches"? It grants the normal powers to start with, but increases with time and further reading. Probably like the "paths" system from relics. Just a thought.

Sorry, what is 'it'? I don't follow you man.

By the 'Hammer Against Witches', I take it you are referring the rare item 'Hammer Of Witches'. Don't see a connection here to the previous discussion.

Incidentally, a witch hunter with the rare book hates all followers of Chaos (plus various other heretics and foul creatures) and any character with a mutation would be considered a mutant, and therefore considered a pawn of Chaos by the witch hunter.

I apologize, I should have been more clear...

By "it" I was referring to any work-in-progress article about Holy Powers. I did not mean to suppose, but my "brainstorming" suggestion was to use the "Hammer of Witches" as the base:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malleus_Maleficarum

If the Corrupted rules stemmed from an existing factor in the Mordheim universe (wyrdstone), it seemed to me it would be neat to base any expanded "bonuses" to holy /anti-mutant warband by using the existing "Hammer of Witches" misc item as the base. Perhaps the "hatred" rule is the start, but with "extended reading" (such as, rolling a Double skill roll), the reader diphers a greater truth from the book, gaining potent skills or bonuses against the warped.

Again, I'm spit-balling. If you want me to back off, I'll be more than glad. (Sorry, I love writing rules)