Heat Point of the Apok

[Tor]

This is normally an SDC spell exclusive to wormwood, pretty harmless seeming for the most point.

With Firetown clarifying that a lot of communion-spells work Off-Wormwood now (just costing double PPE) including this one, it makes me wonder... if an Apok is wearing his mask while he casts the spell, would that double its damage and inflict MD, so 4d6MD, to any supernatural evils who touch it?

It's edging the concept, they're stereotypical melee guys, but we do know that it works with black powder and laser pistols, and magic is an attack too... but I'm wondering how it works with delayed attacks. You could cast the spell but someone might not walk into the fire you set until a minute later. Same with bombs.

[Svartalf]

Firetown? Who wrote that?

Seriously, a) When I GM, Wormwood powers simply don't work away from wormwood, there simply is no living planet to ansdwer the prayers.
b) heat point is an utilitarian spell, not an attack, and cannot do MD damage

[Tor]

"Firetown & The Tolkeen Crisis " is part of the "Chi-Town 'Burbs" series of Rifts Adventure Sourcebooks, published in 2003 by Kevin Siembieda. He credits Julius Rosentstein as contributing additional ideas.

Some of the powers get asterisks and they require a bunch of weird conditions (a bunch of evil beings around, nexus, etc) and some only require the doubled PPE (which also applies to the asterisk'd ones).

It might be that the extra PPE spent forces an interdimensional link with the planet which allows them to access the powers?

Furthermore, one could interpret it that even this link requires the 50/week which the individual symbiotes/crystals do, like we consider the spellcaster themselves a symbiote of the planet who needs to be fed PPE, not to be kept alive, but to retain their imbued abilities.

If it inflicts damage, it seems like it's possibly usable as an attack, not sure why the mask wouldn't MDify it.

[Alrik Vas]

Isn't the mask part of wormwood anyway? It would seem an Apok could do what he likes.

[Nightmask]

Isn't the mask part of wormwood anyway? It would seem an Apok could do what he likes.

The mask is really part of the Apok, which is why it can survive off of Wormwood.

[eliakon]

Isn't the mask part of wormwood anyway? It would seem an Apok could do what he likes.

The mask is really part of the Apok, which is why it can survive off of Wormwood.

maybe....this has been debated in circles for ages. Pretty much its a question of if the GM gives more weight to "Symbiotes die off of Wormwood." or "The mask is indestructible"

As for the original point, I would not have any problem with heatpoint getting a damage boost. It certainly makes more sense than some of the possible things that could be boosted.

[Svartalf]

The mmask is well known to be the only wormwood symbiote that can survive being taken off Wormwood, that is enough...

[SpiritInterface]

The Apok mask states that it boost attacks and the Heat Point is not an attack, so it doesn't get the boost.

The mask only talks about doubling weapons damage and not spell damage.

[Alrik Vas]

The mmask is well known to be the only wormwood symbiote that can survive being taken off Wormwood, that is enough...

This is my understanding as well.

[eliakon]

The mmask is well known to be the only wormwood symbiote that can survive being taken off Wormwood, that is enough...

This is my understanding as well.

This is a common Fanon view. It is also supported by the unofficial FAQ. However it has not ever been addressed in canon AFAIK. The Firetown book is mentioned because the implication of it is that the mask would die with out the ritual.

[Nightmask]

The mmask is well known to be the only wormwood symbiote that can survive being taken off Wormwood, that is enough...

This is my understanding as well.

This is a common Fanon view. It is also supported by the unofficial FAQ. However it has not ever been addressed in canon AFAIK. The Firetown book is mentioned because the implication of it is that the mask would die with out the ritual.

Why? The symbiote is bonded to the Apok not Wormwood, even if Wormwood made it, it draws its life from him.

[Svartalf]

The mmask is well known to be the only wormwood symbiote that can survive being taken off Wormwood, that is enough...

This is my understanding as well.

This is a common Fanon view. It is also supported by the unofficial FAQ. However it has not ever been addressed in canon AFAIK. The Firetown book is mentioned because the implication of it is that the mask would die with out the ritual.

Well
a) all others symbiotes are clearly labelled as dying within 1d6 hrs of being removed from Wormwood
b) The Demon Mask is quite as clearly labelled as "indestructible": and is as much part of its Apok than it is a product of Wormwood.

ergo, a wormspeaker or symbiotic warrior are powerless away from the Living Planet, whereas an Apok may travel if mischance or backstory cause him to be pulled away from the Crusade against the Unholy.

[eliakon]

The mmask is well known to be the only wormwood symbiote that can survive being taken off Wormwood, that is enough...

This is my understanding as well.

This is a common Fanon view. It is also supported by the unofficial FAQ. However it has not ever been addressed in canon AFAIK. The Firetown book is mentioned because the implication of it is that the mask would die with out the ritual.

Well
a) all others symbiotes are clearly labelled as dying within 1d6 hrs of being removed from Wormwood
b) The Demon Mask is quite as clearly labelled as "indestructible": and is as much part of its Apok than it is a product of Wormwood.

ergo, a wormspeaker or symbiotic warrior are powerless away from the Living Planet, whereas an Apok may travel if mischance or backstory cause him to be pulled away from the Crusade against the Unholy.

Indestructible could mean "indestructible la la la" or "indestructible on wormwood....anywhere else it dies in 1d6 hours"
The canon is not clear, and as I pointed out BOTH statements are made.
Firetown muddies the waters further with the ritual that sustains symbiotes....the Apok 'hates this'...but the only symbiote he has is the mask.....so if he hates being a PPE vampire.....he has to be supporting something....and the mask is the only thing he HAS to support.

[Nightmask]

The mmask is well known to be the only wormwood symbiote that can survive being taken off Wormwood, that is enough...

This is my understanding as well.

This is a common Fanon view. It is also supported by the unofficial FAQ. However it has not ever been addressed in canon AFAIK. The Firetown book is mentioned because the implication of it is that the mask would die with out the ritual.

Well
a) all others symbiotes are clearly labelled as dying within 1d6 hrs of being removed from Wormwood
b) The Demon Mask is quite as clearly labelled as "indestructible": and is as much part of its Apok than it is a product of Wormwood.

ergo, a wormspeaker or symbiotic warrior are powerless away from the Living Planet, whereas an Apok may travel if mischance or backstory cause him to be pulled away from the Crusade against the Unholy.

Indestructible could mean "indestructible la la la" or "indestructible on wormwood....anywhere else it dies in 1d6 hours"
The canon is not clear, and as I pointed out BOTH statements are made.
Firetown muddies the waters further with the ritual that sustains symbiotes....the Apok 'hates this'...but the only symbiote he has is the mask.....so if he hates being a PPE vampire.....he has to be supporting something....and the mask is the only thing he HAS to support.

Generally 'indestructible' means just that, if you aren't given any exceptions they generally don't exist. Given it's also not a conventional symbiote but something special generated at the time an Apok is created and bonded to him it makes sense that it doesn't require Wormwood to survive like the standard symbiotes.

With regards to the ritual, maybe he just hates it on general principle, reminding him too much of the atrocities he witnessed and was part of before undergoing his epiphany and transformation into an Apok? Certainly 'well he if he hates it he must be one' doesn't qualify as a logical argument, many reasons to hate it that don't require you to be a self-hating hypocrite (and their transformation and dedication to good seems to preclude them existing in the realm of hypocrisy).

[eliakon]

This is a common Fanon view. It is also supported by the unofficial FAQ. However it has not ever been addressed in canon AFAIK. The Firetown book is mentioned because the implication of it is that the mask would die with out the ritual.

Well
a) all others symbiotes are clearly labelled as dying within 1d6 hrs of being removed from Wormwood
b) The Demon Mask is quite as clearly labelled as "indestructible": and is as much part of its Apok than it is a product of Wormwood.

ergo, a wormspeaker or symbiotic warrior are powerless away from the Living Planet, whereas an Apok may travel if mischance or backstory cause him to be pulled away from the Crusade against the Unholy.

Indestructible could mean "indestructible la la la" or "indestructible on wormwood....anywhere else it dies in 1d6 hours"
The canon is not clear, and as I pointed out BOTH statements are made.
Firetown muddies the waters further with the ritual that sustains symbiotes....the Apok 'hates this'...but the only symbiote he has is the mask.....so if he hates being a PPE vampire.....he has to be supporting something....and the mask is the only thing he HAS to support.

Generally 'indestructible' means just that, if you aren't given any exceptions they generally don't exist. Given it's also not a conventional symbiote but something special generated at the time an Apok is created and bonded to him it makes sense that it doesn't require Wormwood to survive like the standard symbiotes.

With regards to the ritual, maybe he just hates it on general principle, reminding him too much of the atrocities he witnessed and was part of before undergoing his epiphany and transformation into an Apok? Certainly 'well he if he hates it he must be one' doesn't qualify as a logical argument, many reasons to hate it that don't require you to be a self-hating hypocrite (and their transformation and dedication to good seems to preclude them existing in the realm of hypocrisy).

Idestructable is nice.....except that the mask is ALSO a Sybiote, and those are all said to die....and the two are not mutually exclusive, an indestructible dead mask is of no little use after all.
and the comment is that he hates that it has turned HIM into a PPE vampire to survive....which indicates that he is utilizing it for survival....with only one symbiont to maintain......

[Nightmask]

Generally 'indestructible' means just that, if you aren't given any exceptions they generally don't exist. Given it's also not a conventional symbiote but something special generated at the time an Apok is created and bonded to him it makes sense that it doesn't require Wormwood to survive like the standard symbiotes.

With regards to the ritual, maybe he just hates it on general principle, reminding him too much of the atrocities he witnessed and was part of before undergoing his epiphany and transformation into an Apok? Certainly 'well he if he hates it he must be one' doesn't qualify as a logical argument, many reasons to hate it that don't require you to be a self-hating hypocrite (and their transformation and dedication to good seems to preclude them existing in the realm of hypocrisy).

Idestructable is nice.....except that the mask is ALSO a Sybiote, and those are all said to die....and the two are not mutually exclusive, an indestructible dead mask is of no little use after all.
and the comment is that he hates that it has turned HIM into a PPE vampire to survive....which indicates that he is utilizing it for survival....with only one symbiont to maintain......

So where exactly does it say Apoks are PPE vampires? Since I've seen no such thing in my copy of Wormwood AND it would be contrary to the nature of the class and their rejection of the darkness to be PPE vampires.

Plus the mask isn't a regular Wormwood symbiote, and given it's something the Apok has after leaving one of those corrupt Life Cauldrons it's not like it's acquired in a normal way through Wormwood either to qualify as 'just another symbiote'. Just because it's a symbiote doesn't mean it's bound by the rules for all the standard symbiotes when it clearly isn't.

[Alrik Vas]

I see your argument, eliakon, but I'd rule the sybiosis between the wearer and the power of wormwood in the mask are what keep the whole show running. It's not just connected to another dimension, it also uses the wearer who is of that realm as well.

The argument can go both ways, I just like the idea that the symbiote can survive outside Wormwood better than the alternative. I think the idea of being a PPE vampire to keep the mask alive is a "deep and interesting anti-hero" device, which also works. Just depends on how people want it to work i suppose. As you said, canon is muddled and complicated by the various issues covered in this discussion.

[say652]

And I say isnt there an Apok in Center. His mask works.

[Tor]

Isn't the mask part of wormwood anyway?

Yup, all symbiotes made by Wormwood are.

The mask is really part of the Apok

Only according to the FAQ, which invented something not indicated in the text in the slightest, and which now conflicts with Firetown which has an Apok become a PPE vampire to maintain his symbiote.

its a question of if the GM gives more weight to "Symbiotes die off of Wormwood." or "The mask is indestructible"

Indestructability is one of the mask powers, and symbiotes lose their powers off Wormwood, ergo it WOULD be destroyable off-planet. As to it's damage capacity, I'd go with 200 SDC.

The mmask is well known to be the only wormwood symbiote that can survive being taken off Wormwood, that is enough...

I disagree about 'well known'. Only those who read the obscure FAQ full of inaccuracies would think this. I'm all for using the FAQ when it makes sense but not when it conflicts with established canon.

The Apok mask states that it boost attacks and the Heat Point is not an attack, so it doesn't get the boost.

You can use Heat Point as an attack. A tool having a primary use other than attacking doesn't mean that attacking with it doesn't qualify as an attack.

Or would using a hammer not be doubled because hammers are primarily made to construct things?

The mask only talks about doubling weapons damage and not spell damage.

Weapons are used in the examples, but it talks about 'attacks' which is broader than weapons.

The symbiote is bonded to the Apok not Wormwood, even if Wormwood made it, it draws its life from him.

Canonical source?
Page 45 left column says "symbiotes .. created by Wormwood are powerless in other dimensions. It is the planet that keeps these items alive." The mask is created by Wormwood.
Page 45 right column says confessors/priests/speakers lose their powers instantly when they leave the planet. Confessor means Apok.
Page 57 clearly states the planet makes the mask, the Apok merely shapes it.

I think the Apok himself needs the 50/week for his own communion powers and an additional 50/week for the mask, or any other crystals he might have.

a) all others symbiotes are clearly labelled as dying within 1d6 hrs of being removed from Wormwood

No they aren't, reminders are given for the categories on page 96-97 but not on an individual basis.

The Battle Saint Orb and Spirit of Wormwood are also symbiotes, and would also die off Wormwood, yet like the mask they don't have a reminder. That doesn't mean they don't die, the p45 death statement applies to all symbiotes unless explicitly excepted.

b) The Demon Mask is quite as clearly labelled as "indestructible"

Power 6 would be lost like the others, off-planet. Just like it would cease to radiate magic.

is as much part of its Apok than it is a product of Wormwood.

Source of mask being part of the Apok and not merely a badge shaped to remind him of his past? A symbiote being exclusively bonded doesn't make it PART of you. It can be removed, after all.

a wormspeaker or symbiotic warrior are powerless away from the Living Planet, whereas an Apok may travel if mischance or backstory cause him to be pulled away from the Crusade against the Unholy.

Symbiotic Warriors do not explicitly lose their powers, Confessors/Apoks do.

if he hates being a PPE vampire.....he has to be supporting something....and the mask is the only thing he HAS to support.

Actually it isn't. He would also have to support himself, if we take the view that people with Wormwood Communion powers are themselves symbiotes.

By canon we know that these guys lose all their powers instantly off-planet. Yet these guys are able to use Communion magic off-planet. So the ritual must be sustaining those abilities too.

Plus I think Fortune had an enchanted crystal or something like that. Probably the first he'd let go if starved. So that's ~3 total.

Generally 'indestructible' means just that, if you aren't given any exceptions they generally don't exist. Given it's also not a conventional symbiote but something special generated at the time an Apok is created and bonded to him it makes sense that it doesn't require Wormwood to survive like the standard symbiotes.

Generally 'loses powers and dies off Wormwood' means just that, if you aren't given any exceptions, they generally don't exist.

Firetown is an exception. The symbiotic power of indestructibility isn't, since 'loses powers' trumps 'power of indestructibility'.

With regards to the ritual, maybe he just hates it on general principle, reminding him too much of the atrocities he witnessed and was part of before undergoing his epiphany and transformation into an Apok?

Doubtful, he can use ley lines to sustain his hunger and it doesn't even taste sour. He's just a whiner.

Certainly 'well he if he hates it he must be one' doesn't qualify as a logical argument, many reasons to hate it that don't require you to be a self-hating hypocrite (and their transformation and dedication to good seems to preclude them existing in the realm of hypocrisy).

You're arguing that Fortune hates that his absent Wormwood companions became PPE vampires but that he himself isn't? He's clearly a PPE vampire, read the stats.

I'm betting Salome has something like this set up as well, otherwise her crystals and symbiotes would die whenever she went to visit her goblin world.

where exactly does it say Apoks are PPE vampires? Since I've seen no such thing in my copy of Wormwood AND it would be contrary to the nature of the class and their rejection of the darkness to be PPE vampires.

Apoks aren't, a particular Apok NPC named Fortune is, due to a ritual cast on him by Tolkeen sorcerers to allow him to retain his symbiote, priestly powers and crystal.

Plus the mask isn't a regular Wormwood symbiote, and given it's something the Apok has after leaving one of those corrupt Life Cauldrons it's not like it's acquired in a normal way through Wormwood either to qualify as 'just another symbiote'.

Irrelavant, power-loss and death are not stated as happening to only normal/regular symbiotes (whatever that means).

Just because it's a symbiote doesn't mean it's bound by the rules for all the standard symbiotes when it clearly isn't.

Yes, it does, because these are not 'rules for standard symbiotes' (the book doesn't even classify any symbiotes as regular) there are only 'rules for symbiotes'.

I say isnt there an Apok in Center. His mask works.

Which book? The only guy from Wormwood I recall in Center is the Freelancer/Witch in DB2, who isn't an Apok, even though he has a nifty mouth-mask. Am I overlooking an Apok introduced in one of the recent DBs?

[Svartalf]

Well
a) all others symbiotes are clearly labelled as dying within 1d6 hrs of being removed from Wormwood
b) The Demon Mask is quite as clearly labelled as "indestructible": and is as much part of its Apok than it is a product of Wormwood.

ergo, a wormspeaker or symbiotic warrior are powerless away from the Living Planet, whereas an Apok may travel if mischance or backstory cause him to be pulled away from the Crusade against the Unholy.

Indestructible could mean "indestructible la la la" or "indestructible on wormwood....anywhere else it dies in 1d6 hours"
The canon is not clear, and as I pointed out BOTH statements are made.
Firetown muddies the waters further with the ritual that sustains symbiotes....the Apok 'hates this'...but the only symbiote he has is the mask.....so if he hates being a PPE vampire.....he has to be supporting something....and the mask is the only thing he HAS to support.

Generally 'indestructible' means just that, if you aren't given any exceptions they generally don't exist. Given it's also not a conventional symbiote but something special generated at the time an Apok is created and bonded to him it makes sense that it doesn't require Wormwood to survive like the standard symbiotes.

With regards to the ritual, maybe he just hates it on general principle, reminding him too much of the atrocities he witnessed and was part of before undergoing his epiphany and transformation into an Apok? Certainly 'well he if he hates it he must be one' doesn't qualify as a logical argument, many reasons to hate it that don't require you to be a self-hating hypocrite (and their transformation and dedication to good seems to preclude them existing in the realm of hypocrisy).

Idestructable is nice.....except that the mask is ALSO a Sybiote, and those are all said to die....and the two are not mutually exclusive, an indestructible dead mask is of no little use after all.
and the comment is that he hates that it has turned HIM into a PPE vampire to survive....which indicates that he is utilizing it for survival....with only one symbiont to maintain......[/quote]
The Apok mask is not mentioned in the section where all the others symbiotes that die when off wormwood are... So the rules that are in the Apok section clearly take precedence.

[SpiritInterface]

The Apok mask states that it boost attacks and the Heat Point is not an attack, so it doesn't get the boost.

You can use Heat Point as an attack. A tool having a primary use other than attacking doesn't mean that attacking with it doesn't qualify as an attack.

Or would using a hammer not be doubled because hammers are primarily made to construct things?

So by your example a Door is a weapon, what wp would you use?

The mask only talks about doubling weapons damage and not spell damage.

Weapons are used in the examples, but it talks about 'attacks' which is broader than weapons.[/quote]

Outside of the Hell Fire Apok's have nothing but weapons for attacks

[Svartalf]

But in all likelihood, the mask ALSO doubles the damage of Hellfire against supernatural evil.

[Tor]

So by your example a Door is a weapon, what wp would you use?

Being usable in attacks doesn't necessarily make something a weapon, nor do all things usable as weapons have WP skills. Someone can use WP Improvised to use a t-shirt or a coat hanger as a weapon, if they wanted to. If you check the WP list in PF, things like darts are mentioned as weapons that have no WP.

If I were to apply anything, I would assume it to be WP blunt, or possibly WP improvised.

The mask only talks about doubling weapons damage and not spell damage.

Weapons are used in the examples, but it talks about 'attacks' which is broader than weapons.[/quote]

Outside of the Hell Fire Apok's have nothing but weapons for attacks

What about hand to hand combat? Their wooden stakes (which are for holding down tent flaps, not weapons) or resin cross (no WP for religious symbols) could also be used to whack people with.

Heck, since they have supernatural strength even without the mask on, if push came to shove they could remove the mask and whack someone with that. Although they'd usually be better off just keeping it on and punching. But sometimes you need that extra reach, or a magical object.

But in all likelihood, the mask ALSO doubles the damage of Hellfire against supernatural evil.

Yeah but I didn't want to bring that up since it would freak peopel out

Also the 'supernatural evil' requirement is only for the damage>MD conversion. The doubling applies to all supernatural beings AND creatures of magic, regardless of their alignment.

[Svartalf]

Freaking people out is my job, and I haven't read Wormwood in a loong time, I'll have to countercheck.

[Tor]

How exactly does creating a ritual to allow Wormwood symbiotes to survive off-planet violate canon? It supplements it. The rules describe how things go, but exceptions can always be added.

Where does Psyscape introduce astral MDC? Is the thing in Rifter 9 you're referenced even canon?

[Tor]

The golem have MD/MDC stats I interpret as meaning that once you activate the power on the astral plane, it is possible to take the golem out of it and use it within the real world.

If that seems a bit unbalancing (and in some ways it is, since there's no duration and it can give you an indefinite minion) the GM could rule that the psychic has to stay on the astral plane to maintain the power while sending the golem into the real world. This way, the range limitation would keep the golems in proximity of Psyscape or of any astral portals. So they could defend it more effectively, but to a limit.

[Nightmask]

Read the astral golem power, has 3000 SDC (30 MDC) and inflicts 1d6x100 damage.
The contributor who wrote that up also wrote rifter 9s article.

Likely an error, so used to everything needing that 'or X MDC' add-on he did it automatically even though the astral plane isn't supportive of MDC.

[Tor]

The golem has SDC and normal damage for within the plane.

[Tor]

Your explanation is plausible, but the details aren't clear enough to make a concrete ruling. The 'only possible in the astral plane' statement could be referring to the first portion (creating the golem) and not the entire thing (such as controlling it).

I'm inclined to think that since it can inflict MD, it must be able to make contact with something which can have it, and if you can't have it astrally then they must be able to leave the plane.

The middle ground here is of course, Psyscape, since we could view it as co-existing in both the astral plane and Rifts Earth at the same time, making it the only known astral kingdom to support MD due to its unique coexistence feature, distinctive from portals.

[Svartalf]

No, the author insisted there was astral MDC, and wrote his mechanics around that... then KS took that out, but not removed all the references. The Astral Golem does NOT operate in the physical world.

Do you remember where that was published and who the author was? Some people don't understand the system as well as, say, Kevin.

[Tor]

Rapp mentioned Rifter 9, which has a section by Todd Sterrett (pages 18 to 38) dealing with Astral stuff. Page 23 has a 'MDC and SDC in the Astral' explanation (MDC only works in a MD planet's unique outer later) and Page 26 has a "supports MD" feature for realms on the Inner Plane (a place you normally can't have MD).

I believe this is also what introduced the concept of distinct outer layers for each world or dimension, while canonically I think there's still just 1 outer layer.

I don't see Sterrett mentioned in the credits on page 3 Psyscape... could he be the "another author" mentioned on page 9's 'Some Words from Kevin'? Is Rapp saying that Kev actually included some of the original author's work (Astral Golem) but didn't credit them for it?

I had always assumed the original author to be one of the four text/concept guys (Nowak/Murphy/Kornmann/Rosenstein). Did one of them do the MDC stats? Has one of these four published MDC Astral stuff in the Rifter?

[Svartalf]

Rifter... guy whose name is unknown to me... yeah, some idiot who does not understand astral rules and whose insistance on inexistent "astral MDC" can safely be discarded...

[Tor]

I don't think it's appropriate to call Sterrett an idiot, the guy did great work on that section. The metaphysics of world-coexistence linking to the outer plane(s?) hasn't been clarified in Palladium even now, so he took a great stab at it.

Just for fun... where are the first instances of MDC creatures becoming SDC on the astral plane mentioned anyway?