Powers = Tools ?

[ways and means]

I was wondering how many people would argue that powers have there own context and using them out of context is wrong? and how many people would argue the reverse that powers are tool to achieve an effect and the context is up to the individual character to describe the context for how he has that power. I have two examples of what I mean the first is inhuman strength which can be justified with magic with bizarre biology or even with mechanical contraptions the context for the power would be completely different depending on the high concept of the character using it.  The second example is Sacred Guardian a rather poorly balanced power which allows a boost to rolls at a cost of mental stress, if you look at this power like a tool it could be used to represent a great number of different feats such as biomantic boost (using magic to augment your body), certain mystical techniques, channeling a co-pilot etc. So I was wondering is it right to use powers as a tool secondary to character concepts or should the powers context come first?

[Silverblaze]

This is going to be a rather volcanic topic I reckon.

I'm going to say that the question feels loaded.  In some systems, allowing any power to be rewritten to fit any concept/template/class - works fine.  In others it can/will crate thematic problems.  In others it can/will create game balance issues.

I'm going to preface my opinion with a disclaimer; then go to town on the topic.

People are going to do what they want at their table as they see fit.  People are going to ignore our opinions and topics if they see fit.  Many people who play this game likely do not even go to this forum.  I see nothing wrong with house rules.  I use them all the time.

Ok, now that I "covered my ass", we can get down to business.

I think allowing every character to have the justification to do what every other character can do, grants an incredible amount of freedom. That is very nice for some people.  Freedom can be overwhelming though.  With so many options; making those decisions on what to play and what to spend refresh on becomes ever so much harder.  It can also make chracter cration and spending refresh take so much longer with so many options available.

Harder because some people like to be unique.  The option of every power being just a tool and able to be remade to fit any build removes such unique-ness (um, yeah, that is a word now ) possibilities. 

It also makes character roles in games sort of less important.  I don't have to play the groups "fighter/tank". Anyone can do it as well as I can or better.  While I suppose this can promote a player to  buy things with more freedom, it can also create a feeling of not mattering.

The options freedom grants certainly makes for a vast number of playble options however.  I suppose there is something to be said for that.

I think it can be a paradise for munchkins both benign and malginant.  (See, I can make munchkins not seem all bad)  I think the former sentence bears a lot of thought.  The number of powers and stunts that can interact widens dramatically and could in theory damage a game (while making a player or players feel very badass).

 Ultimately, some players need limits.  My group has a player that does indeed need such limits and will gladly admit it.  I have met too many people who ignore concept and template and simply buy powers and stunts that are the most efficient.  I've even been tempted to do the same thing.  My opinions on this matter remain colored by that.

I honestly think some powers should remain the domain of rare beings and or creatures (or only be in the hands of the GM even).  I may be in the minority but, such is my opinion. 

So I suppose I believe that certain powers regardless of retooling should be disallowed to certain concepts, based on the following:

First and foremost - game balance: The GM must be able to challenge all players (unless the gameer group disagrees).  Every player should feel like they matter to the story and if possible the action at hand.  Some power combinations on some characters can hamper this.

Second - concept should be followed: I think this encourages roleplaying and makes the game feel more immrsive.  (again, YMMV)

Third - limits can spark creativity as much as it can hamper it and some players straight up need limits (again YMMV)

I tried to be as concise and non confrontational as possible.  I can't guarantee this will prevail all the time as this conversation will likely heat up.  Hey  I tried!

[Harboe]

If I was to make a Power that was mechanically identical to an existing power, but with different flavour text, I'd simply be wasting space on the page. You can call it Inhuman Speed or Prescient Evasion, but either way you get a bonus to dodge.

Superman can be (and, actually, has been) strong due to the radiation from the sun or due to telekinetic talents. Either way, he can lift a car. The details are unimportant for the most part.

Of course, before encountering FATE, Savage Worlds was my go-to system and since that's a universal system, conversions by giving things a paintjob seems like the easiest thing to do.

[ways and means]

Harder because some people like to be unique.  The option of every power being just a tool and able to be remade to fit any build removes such unique-ness (um, yeah, that is a word now ) possibilities. 

It could be argued that context is what provides the uniqueness not the mechanic of the power which is the same whoever uses it. Toughness, strength and speed powers (one or all) are almost universal to the non-casting supernaturals yet you couldn't call a werewolf the same as a red court vampire just because they share inhuman speed. 

[Silverblaze]

It could be argued that context is what provides the uniqueness not the mechanic of the power which is the same whoever uses it. Toughness, strength and speed powers (one or all) are almost universal to the non-casting supernaturals yet you couldn't call a werewolf the same as a red court vampire just because they share inhuman speed.

Those are generic super powers though.  Thats why everything has them.

[Tsunami]

I think it's different for different powers.

It has already been said that some powers are quite generic. Strength, Speed, Toughness for example are so basic that their expression in the game can vary a great deal. Others are a lot more loaded with innate "flavor". Blood Drinker or Addictive Saliva for example.
Most, if not all, of that flavor is derived from what we have seen in the DF Novels, it therefore fits to the creatures we have seen there.

Gameworlds will differ from the DF-Novelverse, some more some less. Strictly limiting powers that have some innate flavor to their original roles in the Novels will likely be to limiting to model the Game-Worlds that differ greatly. Therefore most powers should be tools to model a character concept.

However, some powers have been built with their innate flavor being a somewhat limiting factor, balancing their technical effect. The Swords of the cross are a good example here, as is the Sacred Guardian power mentioned by the op.
When fitting those powers to different character concepts, one should not forget the original flavor. As to not make them into balance problems.
The flavor can be changed, but the limiting factors should still be there.

If you intend to create a world that is extremely close to the Novels, then it is helpful to cleave to the inherent flavor of powers.

In the end the answer is: Yes, and No... it depends.
I know... very helpful 

[Harboe]

It has already been said that some powers are quite generic. Strength, Speed, Toughness for example are so basic that their expression in the game can vary a great deal. Others are a lot more loaded with innate "flavor". Blood Drinker or Addictive Saliva for example.

Well, if I was to mimick the Blood Bond from World of Darkness vampires, I'd use Addictive Saliva to mimic that. Same for Stargate SG-1-esque mind-control devices (melee range, little physical harm, sometimes addictive).
Or how about being a demon, whose touch attempts to rip the soul straight out of your body (thus, mental damage)?

The Swords of the cross are a good example here, as is the Sacred Guardian power mentioned by the op.

Actually, if people have a proper concept and are willing to pay an increased price, I'd gladly let them buy, for example, All Creatures are Equal Before God.

So if you're the Scion of the Grim Reaper and your goal is death, death, death (Also known as a "Killf**k Souls**tter") I might let you take something like:

• Claws + Venomous.
  You touch someone and their souls start rotting, represented by pain and agony until they're either Taken Out or remove the aspect.
• Sponsored Spellcasting: Death.
  I think there's a write-up on these boards. Otherwise, I'd wing it.
• All Creatures Are Equal Before God.
  I might rename it "One Day, I'll Even Reap God." Otherwise, it stays the same.
• Living Dead.
  Because, barring strange aeons, death won't die.
• The Sight.
  As if a Veil would save you from Death.
• Ghostspeaker.
  Arguably unrelated, though if the player asked for it, I'd gladly give it.
• Greater Glamours.
  Invisible, unnoticed and make a scythe appear out of nowhere? Check.
• Supernatural Sense.
  Seeing when people are to die, seeing souls, sensing life/death.

Now, he's got powers from the Minor Practitioner, Emissary of Power, NPC-only and Knight of the Cross Templates and still works just fine. Sure, he could be called a form of Changeling, Scion or Emissary, but who cares what metagame term is used to describe his "I deal with death"-sthick?

[Locnil]

I'll Reap God should be With strange eons even death may die instead. Though that might be construed as too emo.

Personally, I think that if a power wasn't meant to be a generic power for it's price, or be out of the hands of PCs, there should be a note saying so.

Also, there should be such a note on ACAEBG and Sacred Guardian.

[ways and means]

I'll Reap God should be With strange eons even death may die instead. Though that might be construed as too emo.

Personally, I think that if a power wasn't meant to be a generic power for it's price, or be out of the hands of PCs, there should be a note saying so.

Also, there should be such a note on ACAEBG and Sacred Guardian.

Interestingly Greater Glamors has such a note (limiting it to true fae) and it is the only power that does have an explicit restriction on who can use it.

[Silverblaze]

Interestingly Greater Glamors has such a note (limiting it to true fae) and it is the only power that does have an explicit restriction on who can use it.

Now that I agree on fully.

The writers should have really put that restriction on more powers or not bothered with that one.

[Becq]

As the game is written, 'context' is actually part of the balance for powers.  The game designers included ACAEBG as a component power of the Sword of the Cross, balancing it with a "Catch" making it useable only when God deemed it fitting.  Can a custom power/IoP/whatever recycle this concept?  Sure, but the balance of the resulting power still needs to be examined carefully.  I've seen ACAEBG priced generically at -3 refresh, but I'd say it's more accurately a -4 to -5 refresh power with a +1 to +2 refresh Catch.

I only use that as a convenient example, but on a more general note there are balances built into RAW in terms of character template, too.  No character was intended to have free reign to shop at will through the power list; character concept (template and/or high concept) was meant to limit the choices there.  A wizard with Toughness powers might be appealing, but that's not an option on the wizard template.  (Take a wizard in a high refresh game and add in the Winter Knight as a second template -- along with all of the baggage that entails -- and the situation changes.)

So yes, players should feel free to customize the power list and build new templates/concepts beyond those listed examples in the book, but the table needs to look at the result and decide if it fits as written into their game, or if it needs to be revised/balanced.

(Just my thoughts.)

[Silverblaze]

As the game is written, 'context' is actually part of the balance for powers.  The game designers included ACAEBG as a component power of the Sword of the Cross, balancing it with a "Catch" making it useable only when God deemed it fitting.  Can a custom power/IoP/whatever recycle this concept?  Sure, but the balance of the resulting power still needs to be examined carefully.  I've seen ACAEBG priced generically at -3 refresh, but I'd say it's more accurately a -4 to -5 refresh power with a +1 to +2 refresh Catch.

I only use that as a convenient example, but on a more general note there are balances built into RAW in terms of character template, too.  No character was intended to have free reign to shop at will through the power list; character concept (template and/or high concept) was meant to limit the choices there.  A wizard with Toughness powers might be appealing, but that's not an option on the wizard template.  (Take a wizard in a high refresh game and add in the Winter Knight as a second template -- along with all of the baggage that entails -- and the situation changes.)

So yes, players should feel free to customize the power list and build new templates/concepts beyond those listed examples in the book, but the table needs to look at the result and decide if it fits as written into their game, or if it needs to be revised/balanced.

(Just my thoughts.)

I agree, but I think we may be in the minority. 

[Sanctaphrax]

...powers are tool to achieve an effect and the context is up to the individual character to describe the context for how he has that power.

This is correct. Groups should have the freedom to narrate as they please. So if they want to narrate their Strength as the assistance of tiny fairies, they can.

I see no way to avoid this approach without imposing a one true way on people playing the game. The need to avoid inflicting a one true way on the players makes this the one true way for the writers.

@Silverblaze: You're mostly right, but there are a couple of problems with what you just said.

First, making all powers available with various flavourings does not diminish uniqueness. No matter how you flavour Strength and Toughness, the dude with them is a tank.

Second, there's no danger to game balance from reflavoured powers. Because balance is mechanical, and flavour is flavour.

The danger comes from unintended interactions, which should be stopped with mechanical techniques. If ACaEBG is unbalanced when used with spellcasting (and I think it probably is) then not being usable with spellcasting should be part of ACaEBG's mechanics. Using narrative things to keep it away from casters is not a good solution at all, since players have the freedom to narrate as they wish. They shouldn't have to worry about having the mechanics crap out on them as a result.

Sometimes a mechanical limitation can look like a narrative one. As an example, I present to you the possibility that spellcasters be prohibited from taking ACaEBG. Looks narrative, but it's mechanical.

@Becq: That just isn't true, dude. Divine Purpose isn't a Catch, it's a guide to Compels. It says so right in the description!

Also, the templates aren't balanced. At all.

The optimal Wizard, Sorcerer, and Crafter builds are some of the strongest things in this game, and they're all allowed with canon templates. No matter how hard I munchkin, I can't really exceed the level set by the canon templates.

There are also some distinctly suboptimal templates. I'm thinking of White Court Vampire here.

This is not a problem, by the way. If someone doesn't want to optimize, they shouldn't have to. A WCV, though suboptimal, is just as valid a character as a Wizard or a Bloodthirsty Weapon Bearer.

Adhering strictly to the templates given makes the game less balanced, not more.

This fact is quite important to the game's balance. If you include templates in the game's balance, then people making non-traditional characters have to be careful lest they accidentally break the game.

And the more likely one is to accidentally break the game, the less well balanced the game is. (This principle is behind much of my posting.)

[ways and means]

I only use that as a convenient example, but on a more general note there are balances built into RAW in terms of character template, too.  No character was intended to have free reign to shop at will through the power list; character concept (template and/or high concept) was meant to limit the choices there.  A wizard with Toughness powers might be appealing, but that's not an option on the wizard template.  (Take a wizard in a high refresh game and add in the Winter Knight as a second template -- along with all of the baggage that entails -- and the situation changes.)

Well a wizard could take an IoP to get his toughness, if Madrigal can find a IoP with physical immunity over the net then a Wizard who has been round a while could almost certainly have found one that grants toughness. 

[Tedronai]

Or gain it by way of skill with transmutation magic, possibly even as represented by Modular Powers (alongside True Shapeshifting) to represent the kind of skill seen from LTW.