I'm pretty sure that's a "try it and find out" question.
The only thing we can be sure of is that it affects undead constructs.
That's why I asked for a source. Klaus made a definite statement and said that it had been covered. I didn't remember that happening, but while I have read every single BoneyM comment, my memory isn't always the best.
Wanting to know the dice rolls and their modifiers in advance is asking for perfect foresight. Mathilde doesn't have that. All she knows is that the steam-wagons are very heavy and will be going off-road.
Not every dice roll. Just if the actions give a straight modifier. And yes, I know I probably have no leg to stand on here. I guess I was just frustrated that we are spending up to three AP for a single activity with little literary content.
If Mathilde is present when that happens.
Don't answer this, but I am speculating that this would be a 1d4 to see what action we are currently performing. Maybe a d5 to simulate all the in between time where we sleep or socialize with our inner circle or whatever. Since visiting the Yusak is probably in the running it then makes sense to be a 100% sure to preempt a mishap. Even if I think that it's unlikely that we visit the Yusak before encountering Dolgan leadership.
Yes. Hence why it might be considered important to seek them out in advance.
Oh. That's pretty dumb and risky of them. But I guess they could counter that not scouting the supposedly friendly Chaos Marauders is just as dumb and risky. Still...
I'm very strongly against these sorts of options. The point of a quest is for voters to make the best choice they can, and in scenarios like this 'ask them what they want to do' is not a choice, it's an abrogation. But they still win compromise votes because voters mistakenly believe it to be both 'safe' and beneficial for their relationship with the person in question. Mathilde is in command of Johann and it is her job to decide where he would be most useful.
Is that a confirmation that Johann will not join us unless we tell him to and that neither result means that it would be the objectively smarter result? I only proposed that because
@veekie gave "he would come along anyway if it would be the smart thing to do" as his reason for why he (and others?) aren't voting for the write-in.
Most sane people consider 'can't do it at all' and 'can't do it without generating Dhar in the soul' to be the same thing. If you're at the point where you decide to do necromancy, you've probably decided that's not a problem.
I thought most Necromancers considered themselves as playing it smart and relatively safe for not resorting to pure Dhar magic.
Speaking of, why don't Vampire Mages, who aren't really afraid of corrupting their souls any further, go full Dhar instead of sticking with the Lore of Vampires plus Wind Lores?
There is no undercurrent, there's one person, two occasionally. Out of a voter base that has exceeded 200.
There's two to three, plus a few more occasionally humoring them.
It does not work on chaos-anything, despite the amount of Dhar they throw around.
Didn't think it would. Though it might work on Chaos Spawn for the same reasons that their flesh might light itself on fire in our mouth.
