In my group there is a panzer-werewolf who already has 8 boxes when shapeshifted so I was curious in case he upgrades further. But it's no big issue really. Additional stress tracks work just fine.

Anyway I was thinking about possible upgrades or changes to your site. These are really just thoughts, not even suggestions. The site is great the way it is. Still:

• Apart from characters it might be possible to add locations or even faces.
• It could be useful if there were a "save as" functionality. What I have in mind – I did a few RCVs and putting all their powers in manually over and over again got a bit tiresome.
• Showing/hiding entries from other users? Useful for GMs.
• Organising the links in the main list somehow. Alphabetically? Or possibly groups (PCs vs. NPCs)?
• As mentioned earlier, a printing feature.

But as I have already said, I find the site very useful the way it is, as a lightweight character repository and actually a sharing platform. Good job so far, really!

Pile of Poo ... must ... unsee... Ok, I'll just go with a mental consequence for a while. Thanks for sharing the experience! :-D

Regarding the encoding: The site is showing the accented letters now but it substitutes them for another font/charset. I looked at the source code and found the names of fonts used (Armata http://www.google.com/fonts/specimen/Armata and Metamorphous https://www.google.com/fonts/specimen/Metamorphous if I am correct). Both of them should have those accented glyphs in them but the site's behaviour is different. That's the maximum I can do with looking at the code, though, as I am really not a computer man. Anyway, thank you for your interest in obscure languages and their constant problems with fonts.

Also, I'd be careful using this for NPCs. I built the site for easy sharing, so there's no way to hide the characters from your players if they can guess your username.

Point. But in case of my players I'm reasonably safe I think :-) Anyway, maybe another request/suggestion. Being a native Czech speaker and having my campaign located in Prague, Czechia, I would very much appreciate if the site were using Unicode or some other kind of accented-characters friendly encoding. Sure, I can always go without diacritics but it's nice to have the language the proper way. "Kateřina" is just much much better than "Katerina" even if it's probably no significant difference for non-Czechs.
(This is the list of our special glyphs: říšžťčýůňúěďáéó / ŘÍŠŽŤČÝŮŇÚĚĎÁÉÓ)

Ok, thanks for your insights. I went with the turned-on enchanted item being magical and possibly law breaking. The player uses his gun turned off and is very happy when the inhuman nature of the opponent allows him to turn in on. Everyone is happy :-)

I think some of the previous posts have summed it up very nicely. Thanks for them.

I've already downloaded the core rules but I'm still busy reading DFRPG between necessary excursions to real life (work, for instance :-) I'm not that quick.

Besides that I think that there's some misunderstanding between us, based on this imperfect medium of a webforum – if we were to meet and/or even game together we would find common ground very quickly I think. I agree with most of what you have said, especially with that "failed novel" concept. This is exactly what happens when the story becomes more important than the PCs. Maybe it doesn't seem so from my previous posts but I'm really not that kind of GM. Or I hope at least :-) You presented the kicker/bang concept – but that's exactly what I'm doing, believe me. If you know Shadowrun, there (at least in the 2nd edition) were those 20 questions every player had to answer about his character. We have been using these (plus an at least page long text on the character's background) for many many years. In many systems and settings. And of course that I, as a GM, make use of this information extensively. Nothing hooks a PC into a story better than incorporating elements from his background. No story is better than a story based either on previous game events or facts important to the PC. Preferably both.

On the other hand I see no problem with using pregen adventures or my own story ideas, either. A good GM, I am convinced, should be able to weave ideas from a pregen adventure with loose ends of PCs' background information to create fun for the whole table. There are many approaches, and again, I'm for using them, combining them. There's nothing bad in pushing the game sometimes in one or another direction, if it is done sparingly and in a discreet and unobtrusive way (now I had to consult my dictionary for expressions, so I hope I chose the right words).

As for the Big Bad Guy example from your last paragraph – I think, it again depends on how and how often the GM does this. There are extremes and there are decent and fun-friendly ways. If the PCs are going to kill BBG, you have to react in any case – either modify (read: cheat) the story now and let him escape (thus creating a kicker) only to harass the PCs later (bang) or let the action take its course now, with BBG possibly dying (kicker), and letting BBG's henchmen harass the PCs later (bang). This is an example but I hope you undestand me. There's nothing about any competition between the GM and the players or about making the "failed novel" be more important than the PCs, really. It can be done both ways and both ways may provide good fun if done properly. This is, at least, my experience, both as a GM and a player.

There are really some issues with FATE I'm trying to solve here but they are on a different level, I think. The first one is blurring the line between "narrator" and "stars". We have already addressed that in previous posts and I'm starting to be curious how this change will work out for us. And the other are some meta elements or meta GM-player conversations in those parts of the game that have been solved in our group on the level of role-playing and in-character interaction. Again, I'm not saying that it's bad per se. It's just very different from what we are used to and I'm a bit worried what impact this will have on people (including me) who have already done it in a different way for years.

Please, don't take this post amiss. Your insights are very appreciated, thanks a lot! I'm just trying to clarify the situation and my point of view.

JDK002: I have already come to terms with this rule and I am going to start it the way we discussed earlier in this thread but just a bunch of thoughts: I agree that PCs are able to wreak havoc and destroy all GM's plans. We all probably know it and have lived through it personally. On the other hand I wouldn't tell my players "Well, Mr. Villain has just conceded so let's say it happened so and so." We aren't used to such meta conversation so if I really wanted to save the villain I would just change the path of planned events without ever mentioning a concession. And I would have done it before I even knew about the concession rule – in fact I have already done it a few times. The story mustn't be more important than the PCs but if the PCs are going to tear it apart completely the GM is there for saving the fun for all. In my opinion the GM is fully entitled to cheat on behalf of the players' fun.
As for the second paragraph: Again, I, as a GM, am entitled to modify the scene and even my rolls as the scene needs. So if the thugs designed as a minor hindrance came out killing the party off, let's just weaken them a bit, worsen their rolls, make them less able. If they, on the other hand, are ridiculously weak, ok, let there be, for instance, a sniper on the roof. The PCs have to take cover and possibly a more indirect route to their goals. Nothing is more variable in my combat than the opposition. In my opinion improvisation is one of the biggest powers of the GM and should be applied constantly for creating tension and fun. And of course the players shouldn't know about it :-)
That said, this applies to my table and others may favour different approaches.