sábado, 11 de septiembre de 2021

The Dark Tower: A Rant

This post is about the Dark Tower books by Stephen King. Probably won't make much sense if you haven't read them before. 

I read the saga somewhere around the change of century, when only four of the seven books were written. I was really on fire with that shit, like fucking mad. I remember reading this old web for theories (god, I found it! so many memories!) on the old age of internet, and thinking about the tower all day at home, high school...

I eventually read the last three and I didn't like them much. Not just the ending, but the whole three novels feel much different than the rest, and I think most readers might agree with me. I will try to explain what I feel by saying this: While the first four feel (as Stephen King says they were) channelled more than written, as if a voice related to the tower itself was telling him when and what to write, at intervals, during thirty years; the last three feel like written analitically and in a rush, trying to make sense of what he had been writing "in a trance" up to that day. There are many other things that can be blamed for this, I guess (Self inserting as a character, devaluating Roland's world by inserting a Keystone World set in our era, trying to build a Stephen King expanded universe, lots of epic build-ups wasted like Flagg, Crimson King, Patrick Danville, Eyes of the Dragon crossover, etc) but I think the reason I cited is the most overlooked, and maybe the reason for all the rest. 

In a way, I feel that the setting became sort of "spoiled" and that the only way to enjoy them is to "forget" the newer books, as if they didn't exist. Sometimes I think about how cool it would be, after I saw the entries about "1937 hobbit as a setting" and the "What if Star Wars episode IV was the only Star Wars movie", and I go even deeper: What would happen if only Roland's youth scenes were the story?

And by this, I mean all the collected flashbacks: Cuthbert and Roland at the hanging of Hax the Cook, the manhood test with Cort, the whole Mejis arc, the whole Wind through the Keyhole (alongside the fairytale on it!) and the spare comments of Roland all across the books: "I once saw a man called Flagg turning a man into a dog". Cutting down all the obvious ties with the real world and New York, and focusing on the ripe lore of the Mid-World. I think it would almost stand on its own as a good story: it has enough foreshadowing for the readers to picture the fall of Gilead and the final confrontation at the Dark Tower, without the needing of showing beyond that or more detailed narration. I only need to know things like that Roland and Cuthbert shot Alain by mistake at the battle of Jericho, and that something happened around the horn of Eld, whatever. Someday the Gunslinger will head to the tower, and thats all; everything ends after the Wind Through The Keyhole confrontation with the skinchanger, and Gabrielle's Deschain revelation. Sort of a weird sudden ending like the one the very Stephen King already did in Colorado Kid, but it works in my mind.

But this is a blog about RPGs! I should focus this imaginings to more practical purposes: How would the Dark Tower Flashbacks Only work as a gamist setting? Well, at first glance, much better than the original one:

You got the epic struggle between the barony of order, descendant from Arthur of Eld, and in ultimate stance some sort of paladins of the White, versus the forces of chaos, incarnated on the more tangible threat of John Farson's rebellion, the deceptions and schemes of the evil sorcerer called Marten/The Covenant Man, and then, behind them, the Crimson King whom all of them seem to serve in some way. The Dark Tower's nature is not really ever explained (I guess that thinking about it is GM's job), but the journey towards it is a great gaming quest. The PCs are, of course, Gunslingers, either formed or in training; with duties and powers similar to Jedis with guns; but with status more akin to medieval knights. I'd like to make an entry soon detailing ideas for a setting inspired by this. But I realized that doing that would require from myself to explain possible readers and even maybe myself certain things, and that this rant would require certainly more than a paragraph: hence this whole entry.

To close this, I'd like to unfold an idea I'm holding this days. When I was reminded of the Tower this last time, I felt the urge of reading the fourth book: Wizard and Glass, that I had not read in a long time, maybe almost 20 years (I remember reading that book while on detention class at high school!). Reading it now, with my (adult? father's?) current eyes, I felt some heavy themes underlying on the book; maybe even the central core of it. I won't argument much as I don't want to persuade anyone, just state them the best I can:

The first one is the relationship of Roland and his parents. Their mutual treason and conflict represents in a minor scale the breakup of civilization that would come in the Mid-World, with the chaos forces who tainted Gabrielle do the same into the world's bastion, Gilead, of which Steven Deschain is an impersonation. The impact on the world is devastating, just as the treason was in Roland's heart. They are both an allegory of each other, and lead to each other. The initial state is never to be repaired, but instead it becomes even harder and harder to even remember correctly as a faded picture, only to be repaired through a desperate quest, which is once again sent by Roland's father: The Dark Tower was though to be a myth by young gunslingers, and most of the mid-world. But at the end of DT4 Roland points out something like "Our father's know otherwise, as is the secret they keep, I'm sure of it". It is by stepping in the shoes of his idealized father that he attempts to fix a desperate situation, and it is only by carrying his guns and his father's determination, overriding to extremes the joyful heart he inherited from his mother (That he could rise above [his divided nature] and willingly embrace the insanity of romance was a gift from his mother. All else in his nature was humorless... -DT4)  that he intends to do it. If anyone of you is familiarized with the tarot, you might picture clearly the Emperor vibes here.

This is more or less how I always pictured Roland's dad. 
I usually disregard descriptions and go along with what my 
subconscious gives me

The second one is the will to explore the world as we watched it when we were kids, as opposed as the one we live in today. Scientists might say its the same planet and everything, but they are just deluding themselves. 
There was a world before, one we put together where everything was at the same time very ancient, older than time itself; and at the same time, very new and with an infinite future bursting out of its thin skin. A world that was infinitelly vast and at the same time very simple to comprehend; in which laws are obvious and natural. With the years, we forget this world and put together a new one; deeming the other one as childish and false. We have formed a new worldview that fits our life better, but, to which degree is it more real than the other? We might argue that we have more life experience, yes, but, while we have lots of what we believe it is world knowledge, we also have a lot of limiting scars, fears and frustrations which, who knows, maybe they take our eyes out ot the paths instead of showing us them. And in any case, the former world is equally real in its way, and still calls you to be explored in search of the hidden treasures you left there unchecked. 
This world is represented in the saga at least in a triple way: the way that Eddie, Susannah and Jake perceive the Mid-World (I think it was Jake who thought somewhere in The Waste Lands: "this world is really dangerous, yes, but is much more real"). The way in which Roland remembers Gilead; and the way the world, including the nostalgic/magical New York is presented to us, readers.

And now that this personal short analysis is done, I will focus the next post on something related but more practical: Ideas for a game/setting that takes the good parts of the Dark Tower; preferably the ones that make it really magical. As opposed that "Oh, its a western ambiented game, we should use a poker deck to randomize it, so cooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool"

martes, 17 de agosto de 2021

A spell list of pokemon moves


One of my long carried over projects is to make a game or D&D adaptation whose entire spell list is taken from pokemon. Basically to take the list of Gen 1 - pokèmon moves (back from when there were 151 of them) and rework them into spells. 

Many of them are explicit on their effects (flamethrower). Some of them might require some explanation, and some of them, which are redundant (Thunder, thunder punch, thunder shock, thunder wave and thunderbolt), can be reworked into more interesting things, so they are the place in which I can get creative with non-combat effects (for example, thunder wave might be used to magnetically seal a gate or whatever)

The great thing about this is that it feels a really new start, not based in the D&D list, to make magic fresher and personal. At the same time it has some constraints that, far from being adverse, are always the greatest helpers when building something great.

Interestingly, it allows for a very elemental-esque approach to magic, with all spells having someone that is vulnerable or resistant to it. One can make monsters based on elements, or trying to figure out to which pokemon element do D&D monsters belong. 

PC casters should not be elemental per se (they are treated like type: normal unless belonging to a specific race, like merfolk or harpies) though they can become elemental under certain circumstances (some spells or items, maybe?). Another good way to "pokemonize" this casters is to allow them to learn only moves of 2 different types, (beyond type:normal). Maybe monks can also work this way, by learning moves of type:fighting.

In the list I linked the moves are labeled as physical (causes physical damage) status (causes status alters, might be sort of magical) or special (more magical in nature). This and the movement type are to be respected a priori, though I might change my mind.

I find it very interesting that in the pokemon games there were no Dark and Holy types (though they added Dark shortly afterwards). This sort of paints the world as having no definite law and chaos, just a very strange and wild nature. Also there are oddly specific types like bug, ghost and three types of earth related elements (plant, ground and rock; with steel being added in the later generations). So there is no way to play a cleric in the usual version we know about. If we count them as being "those who drive ghosts away", a quick glance at the chart shows us that only other ghosts are super effective VS ghosts :/

Which element do you feel that a healing spell would belong to?
Which types would you grant to a medusa?

miércoles, 4 de agosto de 2021

magic system sketch

Following the guidelines of previous entries, I'm devising some possibilities to simple and cool magic systems.

I want magic progression to follow a 4-step, exponential structure; from non-magical, to initiate, mage and archmage (and diminishing gains after that if any). 
Magic, then, is cast from a list of spells that increase in number on every "magical grade", but also in power.

What I have for now is this:

Initiates roll 1d6 when casting spells
Mages roll 2d6
Archmages roll 3d6

and spells have three parameters to be measured:

Impact (how many hp you heal, damage you do, effect you cause, etc)
Range (how many people it affects)
Retain (decides if the spell is retained after use or not)

As I want that there are mechanical benefits to casters to disregard armor, I made it so wearing armor or other encumbrances decreases the chance to retain spells: you must roll your movement rate or under to keep the spell.

Sample movement rates:
No armor=2
Light armor=1
Heavy armor=0

Initiates roll 1d6 to cast magic. So when an initiate rolls a heal spell, the result defines all parameters; but one from impact or range is defaulted to 1:

Lets say he rolls a 4: he can choose to heal a target 4 hit points, or heal 1 hit point to up to four targets. As he rolled over its movement rate (no armor=2), the spell is lost.

Mages roll 2d6 to cast magic. They can allocate the results anywhere they see fit from Impact, Range or Retain. A parameter which has no results is defaulted to 1, and if its Retain, its automatically lost.

Mage in no armor rolls a 4 and a 2 when healing: He can choose, for example, to heal 4 points to a target and keep the spell (2 is equal to his movement rate); or maybe he can heal 2 points to 4 targets and lose the spell.

Archmages roll 3d6 to cast magic. They are, of course, benefited from allocating low rolls on Retain and high rolls on effect. 

Archmage in light armor casts heal and rolls 3, 3 and 1. He heals three points to three different targets, and as he keeps the spell, he can attempt it again next turn.

Now the base is established, lets get to the fun spare bits:

* Some spells make no sense in having a numerical score for Impact, but they can be described differently depending on the result assigned to it (from an 1 to 6 score, how much does "Magical Light" shine into the cave?). On others, where the result is a matter of yes or no (charm, sleep, maybe) the Impact roll can measure the number of turns affected, being a threshold that you must reach for the spell having an effect (like in "sleep needs a 3 at least to kick in") or just having the spell work straight, and making it more a matter on "how many people you sleep" (effectivelly putting the weight on the Range score)

* Mages and Archmages revert to 1d6 lower if they are for any reason deprived from their magical wands (I'm a great fan of Earthsea novels)

* Spells can be learned multiple times. This is the way in which a forest nymph (Initiate level) would cast Entangling vines many times before retreating.

* Things that complicate this structure further must be treated on a case by case basis, described on the specific spell description.

* Casters can attempt to cast spells reactivelly: when they are attacked, they can attempt to cast a spell before the attack takes place. This is done by casting normally, and if the Retain is successful, the spell is cast before the attack. If the Retain is lost, the spell takes effect after the attack (if the mage is still alive and any other conditions allow it). In any outcome, this consumes the casters' turn.

*It is weird that mages can only cast spells on groups of 6, no matter their power, huh? To fix that, having a range of 6 means you cast the spell on all the group you select (all foes, all allies, everyone but a single person... its your call)

viernes, 30 de julio de 2021

Gameifying Alignment

I was reading the book of Pits and Perils when something inspired me (it happens a lot with that book). Right above the yellow marker:

"A knight is just a lawful fighter". It came into my mind that a cleric is just a lawful magic user too. And in a way, seeing mages as good and evil clerics makes sense if you imagine it in, for example, Lord of the Rings: Gandalf (and every elf too) feels more a cleric to me than anything else. I feel that anything he does is a version of Light, Bless and Turn; while Sauron and Saruman are tainted with evil and that is why their magic feels "different". I don't know where its the key difference. I heard somewhere that elven magic creates, while the shadow magic cannot create and only corrupts. I leave here this article to further reading when I have some time.

Then I started to think deeper into the alignments: How they are always just ignored (I never payed them any attention myself), and I think that it is because A: they have no mechanical weight beyond certain magic weapon restrictions, so why bother? and B: they are metaphysically complex. After all, in real life is hard to define or tell good from evil sometimes.

But inside a game's rules, we can simplify them enough to make them work and make them mean something. These are some guidelines I've come up with:

* There are three alignments: Lawful / Neutral / Chaotic; which are just another words for Good / Neutral / Evil. Lawful is because it follows "god's" law, or whatever benign force you picture. Chaotic is for vampires, undead, demons, etc; but also any corrupted or tainted person, object, race, etc.

* There are no clerics. Instead, a lawful fighter is a Paladin, and a lawful Magic User is a Cleric, as we know them. I dont know what to call lawful thieves, hobbits, elves, etc; but I assure you they exist.

* Mages can only take spells from the MU list or their aligment list (cleric for lawful mages or reversed clerical spells for Chaotic mages). This makes neutral MUs the boring, academic guys who actually have less spell choices.

* Any lawful character can attempt to turn undead. Holy symbols give a bonus to that, or even allow the action to neutral characters (though neutral characters doing that count as level 1 for turning purposes)

* Elves take advancement and all other charts from the original clerics, instead of being fighters one day and mages the other (a little silly). Im not familiar with all rules but it is how they work in OD&D at least. 

* As being Lawful has an upside, it must have a cost or every character would pick it as an alignment. My best idea is that being lawful makes you start with 1/3 of the money (because you're so selfless, bro). Maybe even you have to give some XP money to charity to level up.

* Being Lawful its a status to be kept. It is weird and awkward to have a Judge GM telling you that you are "behaving bad" on a grey area and taking your alignment from you. I don't know if that is a thing that happens. But there must be ways to become a neutral or even evil in-game. I'll think later about this.

* Being Lawful is something you can become mid-game. I think that a good way could be to have it as a prize: remember all those Lawful monsters on the list, that don't seem to have a use? Well, on a good reaction roll, they will give you missions, related to god's will, cosmic struggle or maybe some humble thing (how does it fit on the lawful plan is up to you to imagine). If you succeed on it, you become (or have a chance to become) lawful, Rescuing princesses, killing evil monsters, recovering lost scions, restoring hopes: that is what lawful guys do.

* Evil characters can happen too, but they are subject to be turned by lawful monsters. Apart from evil spells, maybe they could have some area effect of fear, darkness... who knows, maybe at high levels. This is to be decided later. Chaotic thieves are assassins, while chaotic mages represent warlocks and witches.

* Alignment adds + or - 2 to reaction rolls if faced with the same or opposed alignment (neutral characters do not benefit from this)

* The list of things affected by alignment does not end here: magic weapons restricted to alignment, alignment languages, aligned places, groves, rivers, havens, etc. I am starting to think that understanding and exploiting alignments is one of the most powerful keys of the fantasy genre.

was this a case of clerical turning induced by magic object?

miércoles, 19 de mayo de 2021

Monks & Mummies: Player's Guide

 In this entry, I will write the Monks & Mummies player rules, bit by bit, using edits so the game is not scattered around in multiple ones. This is the definitive shape of the "Minimalistic D&D" entries. It is also a way to not lose my work over time, be it the work of months or years. 

The premises from which I start are:

* Mechanical parts reduced to the minimum to not be redundant. Hit Dice and Attribute scores are not in their common forms, but they are there somehow.

* Monks and Fighters must coexist and not over-rule the other. The setting is much more based on Dragon Quest rather than Medieval fantasy. 

* Combat is made by one roll for each combatant: You roll weapon damage, substract any AC and the rest is taken from HP.

* Instead of tracking Charisma and Hirelings separately for each PC, the whole party uses hirelings as one. The hireling's united levels cap must be lower than the party's levels united. Equally, many other things as monster reactions are based on the actions or dispositions of the whole party, often taking account alignment when applicable instead of the charisma score.

* More information will be added overtime. 

Character Creation:

Roll 3d6. Assign any 2 results to each of this tables. The other number is your starting HP

Starting boon:

1- Monk: +2 hp; your fists count as small weapons. Using actual small weapons allows you to parry.

2- Fighter: You get expertise on a kind of weapon: blades, bows or any other. You start with said weapon.

3-Wizard:  You get some spells depending on your HP: 1-2 hp = 3 spells. 3-4 hp = 2 spells. 5+ hp = 1 spell. You don't have to choose them now; you can play and choose them when you need them; but once chosen, you can't change them.

4- Expert: +1 to your background knowledge. Once per downtime, you can produce an item that is common or related to your background. Roll 1d6 for number of doses, or 4+ on a d6 for reusability/adaptability if its a tool. You can also craft related things during downtime.

5 or 6- Nothing remarkable.

Special table:

1- You are weak (-1 damage tier) or crippled (-1 MV). Choose any. You get an extra spell or +1 background 
2- same as 1, but you dont get shit in return.
3- nothing
4- nothing
5- You get +1 strength (+2 hp, +2 items carried, +open doors) or +1 MV
6- You get +1 on either MV or strength, and -1 on the other.


At anytime during play, you can state a one-word background that gives you +1 to a skill roll involving knowledge (no stealth or combat shit). You keep that background from now on. 

That kind of rolls are d6; and are TN based. As a guide, easy things are 4 in 6; medium things are 2 in 6 and harder shit at 1 in 6.

Based on your HP, you also get power ups over time:

Movement and Armor:

Roll or choose. Certain actions require to roll equal or under your MV on a d8. Armor, on the other hand, adds HP unless noted.

1,2,3: MV 3, no armor
4: MV 2, light armor; +2 HP
5: MV 1, heavy armor +2 HP, +1 AC. Increased MV doesnt apply on heavy armor.
6. You get a shield and roll again. +1 AC

When you are hit in melee or suffer similar effects, and you have not used up your turn yet, you can attempt to dodge by rolling under your MV in 2d8. On one success, you dodge this attack. On two successes, you dissappear from melee if this is possible; cannot be targeted and you can choose to flee if there is an escape route.

Combat Structure:

Unless there is surprise, the side with the integrant with highest HP goes first. They choose who acts first (no need for it to be said "higher HP guy")
Then one member for each side makes his or her action; lets say 1 member of the PCs act, then a monster acts. Monsters with extra attacks count them as different party members for this purposes.
If there are no more members on one side to act, the other side follows up with their remainding actions.

If there is surprise, all the surprising side acts first.

Weapons and weapon damage:

Weak characters deal 1d3 with small weapons, 1d4 with normal weapons
Normal characters deal 1d4 with small weapons, 1d6 with normal weapons
Heroes deal 1d6 with small, 1d8 with normal weapons
Super heroes deal 1d6 with small, 1d10 with normal weapons

Fists always do -1 damage than small weapons unless the monk class is chosen.
Normal weapons that are used 2-handed also deal an extra damage point if the roll is 6 or over.

Weapons // Favored effect:

Small weapons: Carrying a side small weapon lets you reroll your main weapon damage once per combat.
Favored: If the character is a monk, rolling under your MV allows you +1 ac until next turn, OR +1 damage in the next attack

Swords count as normal weapons. Fencing: when taken as favored weapon, swords and other light similar weapons allow you to parry. Rolling under your MV gives you +1 ac until next turn AND +1 damage in the next attack

Bows deal damage as small weapons. When favored, characters can spend a turn to aim: Roll 1d6 each turn and add it to the roll if you were to shot the next turn,

Maces/axes deal damage as normal weapons. Favored: if you hit for no damage (because armor/shield soaks it) you can re-roll once.

Polearms/spears: they always add +1 on the first charge. Favored: if you're hit and you haven't used up your turn, you can strike your attacker before he does.

Crossbows and guns: deal damage as normal weapons, once every 2 turns. Favored: once in a turn

Saving throws: 

You must get your level or under on a d8. Certain saves might have advantage or disadvantage  (+1d8, take best or worst) though disadvantage is not really meant to be used unless its a very specific situation in which the character is very likely to die, but you still want to give him a chance.


The party (and not the individual) gets 1 XP when one of these happen:

- Defeating an enemy of higher level than the highest member of the party
- Recovering 3 treasures
- Completing a mission given by an NPC

The earned XP goes into a pool and its split amongst the party once there are enough to be split amongst the number of members.

Leveling alone might be faster because you skip this step. But is also more dangerous.


Unless bound to a PC for some reason, hirelings check loyalty with the whole of the party unless they are commanded to do different things by different members. Alignments might add bonuses to this roll.

Hirelings either do not count and do not level up, or else they work as an extra PC for XP purposes.

Leveling up:

When a character levels up, he gets 1d6 hp. He can choose to halve this amount and get 2 new spells. 


Humanoid monsters are made pretty much as characters (roll hp depending on their level, assign powers and spells)

Monsters that go in packs share a pool of HP and a given number of attacks, and count as a single monster. Their level/save check is still the one of a single one of them.

Monsters that are non-human do not follow pc character logic, can have any armor, hp, damage die, number of attacks, powers, etc. But they do have a level score that is used for their saves. This is what counts for PC levelling purposes-

Monsters have each a built in reaction chart when applicable; modified mostly by alignment and by if characters have done certain actions 

Monster powers might be automatical, work as spells, work as attacks or any other. But of course with the due preparation, a PC might eventually replicate them,

viernes, 30 de abril de 2021


* This is a list of gameable things that I took by watching Katanagatari.

1 - An island inhabited by a powerful fighter and his family; as he was abandoned there by his lord.

2 - A land that its been completely overrun by a desert, from which only the top of a castle remains. The castle is a dungeon with the entry on the top.

3 - A swordsman who, from a non-threatening sitting position, can unleash an speed of light attack; but only if you step 1 milimeter into the room he is in.

4 - The concept of a tactician that cannot combat, but instead watches you fight and comes up with the best approach to any duel or battle.

5 - A four handed automat/puppet, with a sword in each hand, and another one hidden in the mouth; that is powered by solar energy (basking in the sun for a while during the daily routine) and is also shaped after the author's loved woman.

6 - A group of ninjas who are gorgeously cosplayed as an animal each. Seriously I really want to use this one.

7 - An interesting reason for being a monk in-game (because you are a human sword, so you cannot use swords)

8 - A bunch of poisoned (read as cursed) weapons with diverse powerups. Then, a wooden sword whose ability is make you feel righteous, and a bladeless sword that makes you overanalyze yourself to the point to "cut" you.

Houhou sama! I really liked that character for some reason. The series themselves are 12 episodes of awesome anime of the 2000s era. I reccomend it to all the old school anime fans like me.

viernes, 16 de abril de 2021

Charm, Sleep, Fear, Confusion

Writing some spell lists, I've come to think about D&D's mind-altering spells in particular. Charm, Sleep, Fear, Confusion. 

They all have the potential to be encounter-skippers. Then, why choose one over the other? 
In the rules the differences are subtle: Charm might give you a temporary ally, so does Confusion by making an enemy so confuse that attacks itself or its allies. Sleep might affect more enemies. Fear makes the target flee, carrying away all treasure they might hold.

But in practice, rules as written, they speak more about how the enemies act than on how they do feel. For example: by casting fear, an NPC will never react to fear by trying desperately to befriend you, like in a charm spell (so you spare his life) or channel the fear attacking, but awkwardly, like in a confusion spell. RAW, they will always flee. So the spell effect is not as much about what does the target feel, its more about what they physically do.

So, a wizard learning Fear in wizard school, dreaming of the day in which he will subdue armies at his feet using magical fear, will be dissapointed because fear will only send them fleeing from him,

I'm thinking on having all those spells somehow mixed in one. Lets call it "Ensorcell".

When you cast it, you change the reaction of target NPC 2 steps up or down the Reaction Table. That is the effect. It's the GM who, depending on the reaction and the situation, describes which is the magical effect who caused it. Lets say that the Reaction Table its like:

A goblin who is attacking you (Immediate Attack) would be hold for some turns (confused). The GM says if its because of fear, daze, tiresomeness or maybe he is tripping balls.

A hostile one (roll of 3-5) would retire its attack completely. Maybe he is asleep or just lost his will to fight. He might not get in love with you, but will be opened to negociation.

If the monster is undecided (6-8), then you have the chance to make it your pal/waifu, as a classic Charm spell.

Possibly you can increase the power of this spell somehow, to make an Immediate Attack become an Enthusiastic Friendship by casting it twice or whatever. 

Now, I can imagine the same wizard in wizard school, memorizing lots of different theorems and tricks to be capable to ensorcell enemies someday, and adapt his spells no matter the situation. 

The bad part of this approach is that, when cast on PCs, it lacks guidelines on what should happen. The GM should interpret it based on the shown attittude of the PC towards the caster and interpret it as it was a reaction roll.

Monsters that normally cast effects on PCs, such as sirens or vampires, still work normally casting Charm or Fear, and should affect PCs just as they do in classic rules, no matter what is their attitude. They are monsters after all and work outside the PC's rules.