Toiminnot
Sivusto
ADDITIONS TO EXISTING HOLY TRIALS BLAH BLAH
Holy trials are an excellent chance for roleplaying. Every part of the trial should begin with a small speech by the prosecutor. The judges should actively ask questions and challenge the Shepherds, which leads into the skill checks to demonstrate evidence. The defendant should either defend themselves or have an attorney questioning the charges and the evidence.
If the amount of evidence is completely overwhelming, the determination of guilt phase can be passed over without any skill checks. Proceed directly to the declaration of judgement. Evidence can be assumed to be overwhelming when its value is over twice the defendants total Influence.
If a group is charged for a crime committed together, their Influences are added together for the difficulty of convicting them. This means that powerless people can be convicted en masse, but people with status must be charged separately.
Sometimes, a powerful character might want to help a defendant to survive a trial. This can be achieved through the active use of Influence (see page XX).
Actively using Influence portrays hiring an attorney to challenge the Shepherds in court, finding or hiring counter-witnesses (such as alibis), providing contrary evidence and so forth. A character using Influence decides how much they will use, in total, before the trial starts.
During the trial the spent Influence tokens can be used to resist evidence put forth by the Shepherds. The Shepherds must then show that the evidence is relevant. This happens through a skill check relevant to the evidence; for example, medical evidence can be defended with Leechcraft. One point of Influence creates 1D in check difficulty; up to six tokens can be spent to counter one evidence.
For example, Brother Argento has showed the court a heretical book found in the possession of the defendant. The defendants friend uses four Religious Influence to bring in a religious scholar who argues the book is not actually heretical at all. Brother Argento must succeed in a 4D Religion/Law check or the scholar convinces the tribunal to cancel the evidence.
If actively defending someone drops the value of evidence below the total influence of the defendant, they are found not guilty. In general, if someone is using Overt Influence to bring in attorneys and witnessess, the Shepherds will hear word of it in advance while the trial is prepared. Covert Influence is, by its nature, secretive and will allow for surprise defenses.
Note that Overt Influence can always be tracked to its source by some legwork or is apparent from the beginning. Thus an influential adversary might not always be willing to defend their minions even if they could, as it would show their interest in the case at hand.
Note that spending Influence for defending someone in a trial takes time. In the case of an immediate trial, the other party can't usually rouse their resources in time or can only use a couple of tokens. In the case of a secret trial, assistance is usually not available.
Sometimes, a suspect might have enough Influence to be practically untouchable, no matter how much evidence the characters collect. In that case, the Shepherds must attack the suspect's Influence before setting their charges. This can happen before or after they are arrested.
All Influence stems from something external - wealth, popularity, military rank, family ties and so forth. Faction system (page XX) codifies this in transgressions and accomplishments. In general, if a character's peers can be convinced that they have committed a terrible transgression, their Influence will suffer. While the Faction system only lists religious Factions and Cabals, you can use it as an inspiration for how to Disgrace a targeted character.
This kind of activity is a subject to scenarios and adventures on their own and can never be achieved with a single dice roll. Bringing down a powerful character will be a long and arduous campaign, where the player characters saw down their Influence bit by bit. It will feature subterfuge, diplomacy and politics.
For example, the Shepherds have proof that Baroness Mathilde is actually an agent of the Golden Lord. Unfortunately she is very powerful (total influence 31). The characters find out most of her power stems from her noble family (Government 15), shares in the Trader Union (Mercantile 10) and friends in the armed forces (Military 6). Making Mathilde's family disown her is very tricky, maybe impossible. However, the characters convince her military contacts that Mathilde aided Pacificus in the war. This is equal to a Decisive Transgression and freezes her Military Influence. Now the characters must find a way to make the Trader Union drop their support and they'll have a chance! But will the Baroness just sit idle while this campaign carries on?
BLAH BLAH SETTING OF CHARGES, CONVICTION AS IN OLD HOLY TRIALS
The trial followed ther same principle as the chase rules (see page XX). The trial is based on Opposed Checks and partially shared narrative power. The distance between the suspect walking free and being convicted is abstracted into five ranges. These five ranges abstract the mood of the tribunal. They are Guilty, Suspicious, Neutral, Wary, Innocent.
The trial starts at a range set by the circumstances. In a fair trial the starting position is neutral. If the tribunal is predisposed towards innocence or guilt, the starting position is Suspicious or Wary. A completely corrupt tribunal would start at Guilty or Innocent, depending on their bias.
Conviction Guilty Suspicious Neutral Wary Innocent Set free
* * * * * * *
During the first round of the trial, the prosecution starts with an opposed Law/Leadership check portraying the starting speech. If the prosecution wins, the trial moves one dot towards guilt. If the defendant wins, the trial moves towards innocence. On a tie, the trial status remains unchanged. If the prosecution wins a round at Guilty, the trial ends and the defendant is convicted. If the defendant wins a round at Innocent, they are declared innocent and let free.
After the first round, the narrative becomes flexible. The winner of the first round gets to set the stage and decide what piece of evidence is handled next and how it happens. If the round was a tie, the player who rolled the lowest result does this. Setting the stage determines what skills are used in the chase. This starts another round, using opposed checks as before.
The following skills can be used in trials:
Fast-Talk/Human Nature Interrogating witnesses
Investigation Explaining the investigation and the crime scenes
Law/Religion Legal challenges, finding or closing legal loopholes, setting charges, increasing or downgrading the weight of evidence.
Leadership/Diplomacy Holding speeches, convincing the tribunal, impressing the audience, spinning the meaning of evidence
Leechcraft / Alchemy Presenting medical evidence
Many expert skills can be used when presenting evidence where they are a logical choice. For example, using Clockworks when presenting a mechanical device or using Intrusion to explain a break-in. All checks can be assisted as usual. If sufficient narrative reasons are given, different skills can be used against each other.
For example, Brother Argento shows the tribunal a stack of letters from the defendant and argues they show the defendant is actually a Vernian heretic. The defendant claims this is a misunderstanding and it was harmless historical discourse between scholars. Brother Argento calls for Opposed Check, using Law assisted with Leadership, as they set a legal argument with a rhetorical flourish. (The player gives a short description on it and an argument the character sets before the tribunal.) The defendant uses History assisted with Fast-Talk, as they claim the context is misunderstood and tries to muddle the issue. (The GM roleplays a few opposing sentences.) Whoever wins the checks gets to choose which piece of evidence is handled next and what skills are used to argue it. In addition, the trial moves one tick towards conviction or away from it.
The trial rolls happen as long as the Shepherds have evidence or the defendant has remaining Influence (or the trial reaches a conclusion). Every roll requires the Shepherds to have a piece of evidence to present. The defendant must then have Influence left equal to the evidence strength. If the Shepherds run out of evidence, they lose and the trial is inconclusive, with the defendant set free. If the defendant runs out of Influence, they lose and are deemed guilty.
A critical success in a trial check means the roll was free; the evidence can be used again with a different skill or the defendant didn't spend any Influence. A critical failure means the Shepherds lose two pieces of evidence or the defendant loses double the Influence.
The amount of individual pieces of evidence that can be presented in a trial is limited. The amount of lower level evidence that can be presented is up to the twice of the number of the highest level evidence. For example, having two major pieces of evidence means four incriminating and four minor pieces can be presented, for a total of ten rolls or 22 Influence.
If the Shepherds have large amounts of minor evidence from similar sources, they should be lumped together into incriminating evidence. For example, witness reports from multiple commoners should form one incriminating evidence rather than a handful of minor evidence. If the Shepherds have only separate minor evidence available, they can use maximum of five evidence (for five rolls) in the trial.
If the amount of evidence is completely overwhelming, the determination of guilt phase can be passed over without any skill checks. Proceed directly to the declaration of judgement. Evidence can be assumed to be overwhelming when its value is over twice the defendants total Influence (and they are not defended by someone else).
If a group is charged for a crime committed together, their Influences are added together for the difficulty of convicting them. This means that powerless people can be convicted en masse, but people with status must be charged separately.
Sometimes, a powerful character might want to help a defendant to survive a trial. This can be achieved through the active use of Influence (see page XX).
Actively using Influence portrays hiring an attorney to challenge the Shepherds in court, finding or hiring counter-witnesses (such as alibis), providing contrary evidence and so forth. A character using Influence decides how much they will use, in total, before the trial starts.
During the trial the spent Influence tokens can be used to resist evidence put forth by the Shepherds. The Shepherds must then show that the evidence is relevant. This happens through a skill check relevant to the evidence; for example, medical evidence can be defended with Leechcraft. One point of Influence creates 1D in check difficulty; up to six tokens can be spent to counter one evidence (resulting in 6D check for the Shepherds).
For example, Brother Argento has showed the court a heretical book found in the possession of the defendant. Mother of the defendant uses four Religious Influence to bring in a religious scholar who argues the book is not heretical, just misunderstood. Brother Argento must succeed in a 4D Religion/Law check or the scholar convinces the tribunal to cancel the evidence.
In general, if someone is using Overt Influence to bring in attorneys and witnessess, the Shepherds will hear word of it in advance while the trial is prepared. Covert Influence is, by its nature, secretive and will allow for surprise defenses. Note that Overt Influence can always be tracked to its user by some legwork or is apparent from the beginning. Thus an influential adversary might not always be willing to defend their minions even if they could, as it would show their interest in the case at hand.
Note that spending Influence for defending someone in a trial takes time. In the case of an immediate trial, the other party can't usually rouse their resources in time or can only use a couple of tokens. In the case of a secret trial, assistance is usually not available.
Sometimes, a suspect might have enough Influence to be practically untouchable, no matter how much evidence the characters collect. In that case, the Shepherds must attack the suspect's Influence before setting their charges. This can happen before or after they are arrested.
All Influence stems from something external - wealth, popularity, military rank, family ties and so forth. Faction system (page XX) codifies this in transgressions and accomplishments. In general, if a character's peers can be convinced that they have committed a terrible transgression, their Influence will suffer. While the Faction system only lists religious Factions and Cabals, you can use it as an inspiration for how to Disgrace a targeted character.
This kind of activity is a subject to scenarios and adventures on their own and can never be achieved with a single dice roll. Bringing down a powerful character will be a long and arduous campaign, where the player characters saw down their Influence bit by bit. It will feature subterfuge, diplomacy and politics.
For example, the Shepherds have proof that Baroness Mathilde is actually an agent of the Golden Lord. Unfortunately she is very powerful (total influence 31). The characters find out most of her power stems from her noble family (Government 15), shares in the Trader Union (Mercantile 10) and friends in the armed forces (Military 6). Making Mathilde's family disown her is very tricky, maybe impossible. However, the characters convince her military contacts that Mathilde aided Pacificus in the war. This is equal to a Decisive Transgression and freezes her Military Influence. Now the characters must find a way to make the Trader Union drop their support and they'll have a chance! But will the Baroness just sit idle while this campaign carries on?
Every investigation must always lead to a trial, no matter the circumstances and no matter how old the crimes uncovered are. The trials do not judge only the living, but as well the dead, for they are trials for their souls. This means that the trials could be theoretically held even for crimes centuries old. One investigation can cause multiple trials, if several different crimes are found.
Lesser crimes are judged by a tribunal of local clergy. Large or serious cases are judged by a tribunal consisting of an Archshepherd, a local bishop and a senior monk of St. Pruflas. In Lunarus and Golden Dome the crimes are judged by a secular court with the Shepherds acting as prosecutors. These courts tend to be more lenient towards the accused.
The Techmancers and the employees of Techmancers and the Gloomwalkers are immune to prosecution. In the case of Techmancers, the Shepherds can petition Ordo Rimore to prosecute the offenders on their behalf. The Gloomwalkers can be petitioned to deliver the offending employee for prosecution. Such petitions are usually ignored by the Gloomwalkers, while Ordo Rimore is more recepient.
The Followers of Eserhaus are a point of contention between the Rimore and the Shepherds. First claim them as Techmantic heretics, while some of the latter claim they are no longer Techmancers due to their rejection of the Order. Arrest and Imprisonment
The Shepherds have the right to arrest anyone, although higher nobility require an Archshepherd to be present. The arrest itself should be something happening inside the game and could involve chases, subterfuge and other interesting encounters. Sometimes the Shepherds prefer abducting the suspect in the middle of night, while other cases are handled publicly as a warning. In major cities the imprisoned are taken to a Shepherd monastery with proper dungeons and security. In the countryside no such facilities are available and the Shepherds must improvise. If the suspect is dead, the cadaver can be buried before the trial; the soul will be judged regardless.
The subject must be put on trial or let go within three weeks of the arrest, if a tribunal of judges are available in location. In a far-away places the prisoners must usually be transported to the closest town or monastery. Trials and punishments are usually public. The Shepherds can let a suspect go within three weeks and then arrest him again; while such abuse is technically unlawful, most people do not know it or have the resources to do anything about it.
Influence and social skills can be used to increase or shorten the imprisonment or make the trial a secret one. Other parties – such as the suspect and his allies – can use skills and influence in the same manner.
| Trial change | Skill check | Influence |
| Secret trial | 5D Diplomacy/Law | 3 tokens |
| Three month arrest | 5D Diplomacy/Law | 3 tokens |
| Immediate trial | 6D Diplomacy/Law | 4 tokens |
In extreme cases, there might be attempts to free or lynch the suspect before the trial.
It is typical for Shepherds to pressure a suspect to confess in exchange for a lighter charge and sentence; especially if the suspect then testifies against someone else. Even in the case of a confession, the tribunal must examine and accept it. If the tribunal suspects the confession was forced or otherwise untrue, it only counts as a testimony and the trial commences normally. If the confession is accepted, the trial phases below can be ignored and punishment applied directly as demanded by the Shepherds.
Trials are set in three phases: setting of charges, determination of guilt and declaration of judgement. Skill checks are made only in the beginning of these phases. Other skill checks can be made during the trial - such as observing the audience for reactions etc - but only these checks have an effect on the trial itself.
All check difficulties assume the tribunal is neutral towards the case as a whole. A biased or corrupt tribunal has +-1D on all checks. Most trials are done during one day, but major and complicated cases might drag on for several days, especially if there are several defendants.
Setting of charges is the phase where the Shepherds declare what crimes they charge the defendant with. Setting charges requires a Law/Religion check that can be assisted with other skills. The difficulty of the check depends on the seriousness of the crime and the prime evidence used as its support.
If the prime evidence of a crime presented is at least the level shown in the table, the difficult of the prosecution check is 4D. Every level under the required evidence strength adds +1D while every level over adds -1D. For example, accusing someone of worshipping false gods (crime of darkness) based on hearsay (minor evidence) would be a 6D Law/Religion check.
| Crime | Evidence |
| Minor | Minor |
| Moral | Incriminating |
| Darkness | Major |
| Damnation | Major |
If the setting of charges fails, the Shepherds must enter another charge based on another piece of evidence. Patience of the tribunal is limited; after a second attempt the third charge receives +1D, the fourth +2D and so forth. Once a charge is accepted, a couple of lesser charges can be attached if the evidence supports it. For example, a priest who turned a church into a demonic temple could be additionally charged for breaking holy vows and subverting the word of Arius.
Critical success in the check upgrades the charge severity by one; critical failure means the subject is released immediately.
Determination of guilt is based on examining the weight of evidence for guilt against the weight of evidence for innocence. The phase begins with oral arguments by the prosecution; this requires a Leadership/Diplomacy check. The speech can be assisted by other skills as fits to the evidence at hand. The starting statement counts as evidence (see blow) worth half the dice rolled. Thus a 6D speech check would, if successful, count as evidence worth three influence against the accused. (See below.) A critical success will provide evidence worth the dice while a critical failure will provide counter-evidence for the defendant.
Declaration of judgment is the last phase that only happens if the defendant is found guilty. The tribunal deliberates on the judgment and can be petitioned for strict or lenient punishment by the Shepherds. This requires a 4D Law/Religion check modified by up to +3D for extreme suggestions.
Shepherds are not responsible for upholding secular laws, their interest is in the souls of the people and the purity of the world. Even if the suspect is found innocent by Shepherds, he might be convicted in a secular court for the same crimes later. Fines are often turned into slavery should the condemned be unable to pay. This varies from temporary bonded service to permanent slavery. In many realms it is legal for a parent to sell their children to pay their debts.
If the punishment is not carried out, the convicts soul is at risk. If the convict is dead, relatives usually take care of the punishment to avoid his damnation. Multitude of crimes is punished harsher than a single deed, while confessing freely will reduce the punishment. Ordinary clergy can investigate and prosecute minor infraction and crimes of morality. However the prosecuted (or, if dead, the next of kin) may always demand an investigation by the Shepherds. Such request must always be granted.
While people of a higher position are harder to convict, they will be punished more severely. The birth position of a person indicates the purity of his/her soul. Thus a person born higher has fallen lower when committing fell deeds compared to a peasant. (Incidentally, this practice maintains the Church's superiority over the nobility and popularity among the commoners as a result.)
Individual Shepherds have a large leeway in the details on what a specific crime entails. For example, adultery is often treated as a minor infraction, but could be seen as breaking of a holy vow. Some Shepherds pursue even the slightest infringment with merciless zeal, while others are willing to forgive lesser mishaps. Some ignore secular crimes, while others find ways to judge them through holy laws.
Curiosity about the Pre-Burning past, possession of immoral materials, sexual escapades, failing religious/family duties, harmful gossip, possessing unlicensed Techmancery.
Usual punishment: Light fines (10 – 50 omns), public shaming, mild physical punishment (caning or whipping) and/or temporary penance (mild self-harm, punitive labor and/or daily religious rites)
Lying to clergy or Shepherds, sexual perversion, producing immoral materials, producing unlicensed Techmancery, abusing the word of Arius for personal gain, possessing Forbidden Knowledge.
Usual punishment: Fines (100 – 500 omns), permanent public shaming (physical marking, newspaper notifications etc), serious physical punishment (torture or forced starvation), heavy temporary penance (heavy labor or pilgrimage) and/or temporary monastic vows (1-10 years).
Harming the Church and the Holy Word, seeking or possessing Pre-Burning knowledge, seeking or spreading Forbidden Knowledge, possessing forbidden Techmancery, worshiping false gods, breaking holy vows. Usual punishment: Heavy fines (1000 – 5000 omns), permanent physical punishment (amputation, blinding or mutilation), permanent penance (exile, regular charity or pilgrimages), permanent monastic vows, execution and/or damnation for 50-100 years.
Spreading Pre-Burning knowledge, possessing Pre-Burning artifacts, creating forbidden Techmancery, spreading false faiths, conspiring against the holy order of the world, communing with Gloom Devils.
Usual punishment: Confiscation of all property, execution and/or permanent damnation.
The trials require both sides to present evidence for the guilt or the innocence of the suspect. The weight of the evidence varies as shown below. Slaves are considered property and usually not allowed to testify. Witnesses must make a sacred vow to only speak the truth at a trial and can be prosecuted if found lying.
Prosecuting characters must show evidence in front of the tribunal on the guilt of the subject. The evidence must be found, produced or fabricated during the game before the trial. While influence can be used to help investigations, it will never produce evidence directly. For example, influence could hint that a local priest is a heretic, but the proof for it must still be found.
The defence of the accused is abstracted by adding together every point of influence he has; including covert influence. This abstracts alibis, defensive witnesses and so forth. Each piece of evidence is equal to a certain amount of influence. Evidence required for a conviction is greater in value than the suspects influence. For example, to convict a local farmer with three points of Rabblerousing influence would take testimonies from two different Shepherds (worth four influence).
The overt influence level of a character can be usually found out in advance through social skills, investigation and influence usage. While the exact number is not usually found, a rough estimate within a couple of points can be determined. Covert influence, on the other hand, is secretive by nature and can't be found out under ordinary circumstances. If the weight of the evidence fails to surpass the defendants total influence, he is found not guilty. No legal principle prevents the Shepherds from charging the same defendant again for the same crime, as long as their initial evidence in the setting of charges is a new one. The Shepherds can, in principle, abuse powerless people and convict them at will through their own testimonies. If the abuse is systematic with no plausible excuse, it will lead into internal investigations.
Trials in Lunarus and the Golden Dome require twice the usual evidence for a conviction. The public courts of the Golden Dome give more weight to dramatic speeches and flashy shows than scholastic arguments; all Law/Religion checks are replaced by Leadership/Diplomacy.
Minor evidence (worth 1 inf)
Hearsay and rumors, testimonies from disreputable source (commoners, peasants and slumdwellers), religious visions, indirect proof of Forbidden Knowledge, incriminating confessions from others gained under duress.
Incriminating evidence (worth 2 inf)
Testimonies from a reputable source (respected subjects, clergy and Shepherds), incriminating materials (forbidden books, Techmantic tools or occult paraphelia), material evidence of crimes, incriminating confessions from others, well-known public events, major sign(s) of Blight.
Major evidence (worth 5 inf)
Testimonies from a noteworthy source (reputable nobility, senior clergy and Techmancers), extraordinary proof (photographs, audio recordings or personal mail), extreme acts of public wickedness, damning materials (forbidden Technomancy, shrine of devil worship or hidden corpses), demonstrations of Pre-Burning knowledge.
Mekanismin wiki pyörii PmWikin päällä ulkoasunaan UnStrapped
