The Dresden Files > DFRPG
Funny/Epic/Legendary moments
Mr. Death:
--- Quote from: Addicted2aa on November 06, 2012, 09:14:52 PM ---They aren't forced to. They are forced to make their actions make sense. Also I'm not compelling them to do it, because I'm not always trying to force them into that situation.
that said, I'm fine with them calling it a self compel after.
--- End quote ---
I think you're also misunderstanding what a compel is. It isn't "force the player into something." It's "introduce a complication the player has to deal with because of this aspect." It might limit their choices or encourage them to take one course of action instead of another, but it's not about forcing them to do anything.
A high roll doesn't mean "more damage." It means, "The player succeeds at what he is trying to do better than expected." A high roll and a large margin of success shouldn't ever be a bad thing for the player.
Addicted2aa:
@lavecki, if the narration he says makes sense with the mechanics he chose, it's fine. If he chose to be really strong, and wants to punch someone hard(which is what attacking someone with fist, intending to do damage is) and gets that excess, he better have a good narration why the skull isn't caved in. Maybe he does, sweet, we're all good. Maybe he doesn't. Sweet, he learns a lesson in restraint.
I'm not saying it has to kill him, I'm just saying it has to make sense.
--- Quote from: Mr. Death on November 06, 2012, 10:07:16 PM ---I think you're also misunderstanding what a compel is. It isn't "force the player into something." It's "introduce a complication the player has to deal with because of this aspect." It might limit their choices or encourage them to take one course of action instead of another, but it's not about forcing them to do anything.
A high roll doesn't mean "more damage." It means, "The player succeeds at what he is trying to do better than expected." A high roll and a large margin of success shouldn't ever be a bad thing for the player.
--- End quote ---
No I understand what a compel is. The player has to pay their way out, and if they have no FP, they have to take the action after some negotiation. So it's very much trying to force something upon their character.
If a player wants to throw a fireball at someone, and they end up throwing a really good fireball, really well, that someone is likely dead. Maybe not, maybe something happened that saved them. If killing some one isn't an option, don't take actions that could possibly kill them. It shouldn't be a "bad" thing for the player, because they made that choice, knowing it was possible.
Mechanically it simulates the situations where highly capable people, Dresden, Karen, Micheal, have to hold back to prevent killing the other person, putting them at a disadvantage. If you want to simulate that complication with compels, it does work, but for me it strains the feel of the game. I'm fairly certain though that neither of us has introduced a new point in the past few messages, so I'm guessing we aren't going to agree on this. I still haven't had a chance to read the long one though. Will do around 11 or 12
Lavecki121:
But what about when I roll 12 shifts but the guy rolls an 11? Its still the same amount of control he was just able to dodge better.
Mr. Death:
--- Quote from: Addicted2aa on November 06, 2012, 10:48:07 PM ---No I understand what a compel is. The player has to pay their way out, and if they have no FP, they have to take the action after some negotiation. So it's very much trying to force something upon their character.
--- End quote ---
Clearly, you do not. I'd advise you reread the relevant section of the rulebook again--a compel means you're introducing a complication. That complication can be a certain action, but it by no means has to be.
--- Quote ---If a player wants to throw a fireball at someone, and they end up throwing a really good fireball, really well, that someone is likely dead.
--- End quote ---
So you're saying that if a player has high skills, and rolls really well, they should be forced into an action that they don't want? How is it at all fair for a good roll to take something out of the player's control?
If the player throws a really good fireball really well, that means the fireball does whatever the hell the player wants it to, outside of a compel.
Again: A hit mechanically does not have to mean it is a hit narratively.
A high roll means the character succeeds at what the player was trying to do. If the player decides that he doesn't want to kill someone, then that player does not kill that someone. That is RAW. The game is set up explicitly so that it's nigh on impossible to accidentally kill someone with magic.
--- Quote ---Maybe not, maybe something happened that saved them. If killing some one isn't an option, don't take actions that could possibly kill them. It shouldn't be a "bad" thing for the player, because they made that choice, knowing it was possible.
--- End quote ---
Being forced to take a lawbreaker--meaning a refresh cost and putting their lives in danger from the wardens--is a bad thing. Again, you're confusing narrative with mechanics. While the characters might be taking risky actions, the players have control over their own successful actions. If the player succeeds via the dice, the player decides what happens.
There is nothing--nothing--in the rulebook that says that a given mechanical action has to be a kill. There is nothing saying that beyond a certain threshold of success, the player loses that choice in how the roll plays out. There is nothing saying that a very good roll should be anything that is a detriment to the player without fate points changing hands.
--- Quote ---Mechanically it simulates the situations where highly capable people, Dresden, Karen, Micheal, have to hold back to prevent killing the other person, putting them at a disadvantage.
--- End quote ---
The game is not a simulation. If the player is at a disadvantage because of the nature of something outside of the dice, that is a compel.
--- Quote ---If you want to simulate that complication with compels, it does work, but for me it strains the feel of the game.
--- End quote ---
...Then why are you using Fate? Using compels to create complications is exactly what Fate Points and compels are for. It's like saying that using dice works if you want, but it strains the feel of the game.
I would seriously advise that you reread the relevant sections of the game books, because you are seriously off base with several of these points.
HeadWound:
My first post :)
Here are 2 sections of the rules that clearly indicate that a player cannot kill by accident.
--- Quote from: page 200 ---If the attacker wins the roll, the shifts he
acquires translate into a stress value he can
inflict on the defender
--- End quote ---
He can inflict the stress on the opponent if he chooses, not has to inflict it.
--- Quote from: page 203 ---If the damage exceeds the character’s stress track,
or occupied boxes “push” the stress off the right
side of the stress track, the character is taken
out, meaning the character has decisively lost
the conflict. His fate is in the hands of the opponent,
who may decide how the character loses.
--- End quote ---
No clearer than that. A winner of a conflict being unable to decide how his opponent loses is a house rule.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version