The Dresden Files > DFRPG

Funny/Epic/Legendary moments

<< < (8/24) > >>

Addicted2aa:
@ mr. Death Just reread compels. Pretty sure I'm not abusing them. I add complication to players life, provided they don't pay off with a FP. If that compel is a limitation of choice, they are being pushed to a certain course of action. I was imprecise to indicate I controlled the action, the player still gets to decided how that action is played out, but the compel still pushes towards a course of action.

Fate also is a simulation, or at least DFRPG  is. It's not a simulation of reality, it's a simulation of the Dresden files novels. Which are in turn a *somewhat* realistic fantasy novel.



The reason I'm not going to put a compel after an action is because I'm not introducing the complication. The player is. They put forth a course of action "I'm going to try and shoot the bad guy" I confirmed "With your fifty caliber machine gun, that fires a minimum 3 bullets at a time and uses armor piercing explosive rounds?" They confirmed "Yup". They succeeded on their intended action, shooting the guy, and then decided that they don't want him to die. At that point, I'm still willing to listen to how their explanation of how that doesn't kill him, but I'm skeptical.

The point is they succeed on the action they attempted, which was a potentially lethal action. They tried to shoot him, and succeeded. That should mean they shot him. If you read the metaphor differently, fine, it's your table and all that, but that I find that strains verisimilitude, as well as straining the feel of restricted power, which is a recurring element in the series. Yes, I could compel when they come into a situation like that, (provided they have an aspect like that, which they might not) but unless it's ruminatively appropriate for which I can come up with examples, I'm not going to put forth the compel, forcing them to make a player choice. They can always say it's a self compel if it complicates their life though, and if it really does, great.

Addicted2aa:
I forgot to address the point that this possibly gives creative players the edge. First off, Fate in general gives creative players and edge that games like gurps and certain incarnations of D&D don't. Second, if a player has trouble coming up with a reason and it's a serious problem that he kills the person, there are alot of options. Get the table involved to come up with an explanation, let it go with a flimsy explanation, retcon and reskin the attack, whatever. The point is that shouldn't have to happen. He should be aware of the potential consequence before the attack resolves. If it's a huge narrative deal, like this is the guy with the information they need, then I should have compelled him before he attacked to just kill the dude. You should be in a situation where it's a big deal that NPC X is likely dieing from an attack. It shouldn't blindside him. It shouldn't f him over. Because that's not fun, and if it's not fun, why are you doing it?

Haru:

--- Quote from: Addicted2aa on November 07, 2012, 03:32:15 PM ---The reason I'm not going to put a compel after an action is because I'm not introducing the complication. The player is. They put forth a course of action "I'm going to try and shoot the bad guy" I confirmed "With your fifty caliber machine gun, that fires a minimum 3 bullets at a time and uses armor piercing explosive rounds?" They confirmed "Yup". They succeeded on their intended action, shooting the guy, and then decided that they don't want him to die. At that point, I'm still willing to listen to how their explanation of how that doesn't kill him, but I'm skeptical.

--- End quote ---
I think what Mr. Death (and me too, to an extend) are trying to say is, that in the moment where you ask

--- Quote ---"With your fifty caliber machine gun, that fires a minimum 3 bullets at a time and uses armor piercing explosive rounds?"
--- End quote ---
you would also offer a fate point, if the character has an aspect that makes him prone to overkill. That way, he knows what's at stake at this moment, and you can justify having someone come after him for that kill. On the other hand, if he has aspects suggesting the opposite, you'd compel him out of using that thing. I have often enough said stupid things as a player, that would have made absolutely no sense for my character in that moment, and we usually resolved it with a short discussion about that. Sometimes you just don't think about every single consequence, it just doesn't come to mind. Reminding the player in an obvious way is a good way to make him think about the scene and maybe change his action. For example, he could do an attack with the above mentioned gun and describe it as "I shoot a few feet behind the guy, keeping up with him and forcing him into a corner." That would still be an attack with the gun, and on a taken out, he would have him cornered.

And you partially agree with it already, the only difference is, that you let the player paint himself into a corner first and then let him try to find a way out of it. If that is the way your group likes to play, far be it from me to say that is a bad thing. But I thought you still didn't see what we mean, so I thought I'd give it another try in explaining our point of view.

Lavecki121:
I think that we are getting away from the original thread, which was awesome things that happened in your games. Its cool to argue theory but in the end its your game and you're gonna do what you want.

Does anyone have Funny/Epic/Legendary stuff that happened in their game that they would like to share, because I really want to hear it.

Addicted2aa:

--- Quote from: Haru on November 07, 2012, 03:51:35 PM ---I think what Mr. Death (and me too, to an extend) are trying to say is, that in the moment where you askyou would also offer a fate point, if the character has an aspect that makes him prone to overkill.
And you partially agree with it already, the only difference is, that you let the player paint himself into a corner first and then let him try to find a way out of it. If that is the way your group likes to play, far be it from me to say that is a bad thing. But I thought you still didn't see what we mean, so I thought I'd give it another try in explaining our point of view.

--- End quote ---

A) what if he has no aspect related?
B) What if him killing this guy isn't really going to create any other consequence? Basically what if it's not interesting?

I get Mr Death and your approach. I don't think it fits the feel of the fiction. That's all.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page