ParanetOnline
The Dresden Files => DFRPG => Topic started by: Theonlyspiral on January 12, 2013, 07:14:47 PM
-
So last night we had the first combat in our game. The party threw down with a group of demons, in a home. The building burned down, police were called, all the fun stuff. Now our Knight of the Cross went head to head with two of them, and refused to concede. He filled his physical stress, consequences and refused to concede. He was forced to take his extreme consequence in order to avoid getting killed. Now I'm not 100% sure what an appropriate consequence would be for being slashed with a demon's claws. Any help or ideas for appropriate consequences would be appreciated.
-
Well, any permanent debilitating injury, such as 'Permanent Limp', 'Lost Half A Lung', or 'My Left Arm Doesn't Work' would have an appropriate scope...but an Extreme consequence modifies an existing Aspect, such as changing "Knight of the Cross" to "Half-Crippled Knight of the Cross" so...what are his Aspects? We can't really tel you how to modify an Aspect when we don't know what it is, y'know?
He's also very likely to spend the next little while (ie: at least a few weeks) in the hospital. This is a potentially career ending injury. Think Michael at the end of Small Favor, y'know? It might not be quite as bad as his long-term, but the hospital stay's gonna be equivalent barring magical pain-avoidance or something.
-
I sounds like your Knight of the Cross doesn't appreciate the seriousness of an extreme consequence. Unless maybe the fate of the world was at stake or something. Extreme consequences are supposed to represent a last choice, something to resort to when your character/characters MUST succeed in a conflict and defeat/conceding is absolutely 110 percent unacceptable. And this happened during your FIRST combat? Something might be wrong here. Either the combat difficulty was set too high or your Knight doesn't understand that conceding doesn't necessarily mean utter defeat (in fact, it usually doesn't).
As for an appropriate extreme consequence? Honestly, the first thing that comes to mind is losing a limb. An extreme consequence is permanent but somehow I doubt your Knight would be okay with losing a leg or something. How about losing an eye? Or he could be so scarred that he's disfigured. But these are just my ideas. And there are players out there with more experience than I have.
-
That's an excellent point actually. Extreme Consequences are bad. Conceding is better the vast majority of the time...I probably wouldn't let a player do that during their first combat. Not without looking them in the eyes and asking if they're sure they want a new character anyway, since this will very likely take them out of play permanently. that's an exaggeration...but not much of one for a physically inclined human character and a physical Extreme Consequence. Something like becoming a paraplegic is very much on the list of possibilities and likely to never get better no matter what.
Why didn't he concede? Because I'm guessing it was something like 'My character wouldn't give up.' which is a total misunderstanding of how conceding works...it's the player doing something, not the character. You might want to clarify this and ask, if he'd known this, would he still have taken the Extreme? If not...well, I don't usually like retcons, but...
-
Here's the link to the Obsidian Portal page:
http://www.obsidianportal.com/campaigns/the-wyrd-west-eldrich-calgary/characters/john-bluefeather
So the Consequence gets added as an aspect, and it modifies an existing one? I thought the injury aspect replaced an existing one.
In terms of the combat difficulty... The set up was the party being jumped by 5 unknown demons. The party's demonologist had never seen their like before. The only clues they had were that they appeared to be unaffected by thresholds, all five had hellfire, and to the mystical senses of the knight they were indistinguishable from Denarians.
We talked for two minutes about his different options in conceding but he was sure he was ok. He had just gutted one of them and was feeling damn confident in himself after inflicting 16 stress over two attacks. His problem was not having any more fate points. I did everything but tell him to concede. As did the other 4 PCs. It was more that this player is kind of...obstinate sometimes.
-
As already stated, extreme consequences are a huge deal. They are permanent, they more or less turn one of your aspects into a second Trouble aspect.
For example: A character I sometimes play as took an extreme consequence from being caught in an explosion. He almost died and lost his hand in the process.
Once when I was the GM a player was going to take an extreme on a minor conflict that was basically just a way to convey how strong the enemy was. That if they tried to take him on unprepaired and on his terms, the players could NOT win. I flat out told the player no to taking an extreme and had to lay out my intent of the scene.
I would absolutely talk with him and possibly revise the aftermath of the fight. Make sure he understands concessions are sometimes (pretty much always) better then filling up you stress and consequences. Also make it clear that the players aren't always going to win every fight, it just won't happen, and if he keeps going in with an all or nothing mentality that he is not going to have fun playing, and his character is going to end up a permenantly disfigured cripple by the end of the first scenario.
One last thing, in a case where all but one player are okay with concession, go with majority rules. Let the one player brood or pout while you handle the aftermath of everyone else. Hopefully by the time you get to him he will see concessions don't equal the death of his character.
-
Yup, consequences are bad, and extreme ones even more. That Knight ought to have to spend months in hospital and then afterwards with physical rehabilitation. He probably got all of his intestines ripped out, maybe a broken back and so on. It will take a while before he is back in full action.
Heck, it took Dresden how long to heal his burned hand?
We had a situation in the campaign I play in that would have been just as bad the example you gave, but that was solved due to who and what the character was. A changeling, and his father was real high up in the Summer court. so the GM solved that with the father basically coming in and grabbing his son and bringing him to the Summer court for some heavy treatment, which in NeverNever took months but in the real world only took a few days. Otherwise that player would have had to make a new character, and that wouldn't have been fair given it was his first session, and the extra trouble he got into was due to another player.
-
So to be clear, you guys think the best thing to do is retcon the fight and think of it as a lesson learned? Or come up with a narrative way for him to resume his service?
-
I don't think you need to retcon anything. Just have the guy take a disfiguring facial scar or something and Compel that every once in a while.
Not all Consequences are debilitating; the only concrete mechanical consequence of a Consequence is that the relevant slot is filled. Everything else is worked out through Aspect mechanics.
A guy with no nose is gonna suffer some social problems, but he can still fight evil.
And for what it's worth, I don't think your player's decision was necessarily wrong. Sometimes it's worth taking whatever consequences you need to take.
-
So to be clear, you guys think the best thing to do is retcon the fight and think of it as a lesson learned? Or come up with a narrative way for him to resume his service?
You should at least make sure the player knows how serious it is. I would then suggest that you talk to the group and ask them how they want to handle it. Some people are fine with their characters being crippled or seriously injured. Others sort of want a "hero's immunity" so that they are in control of what happens with their characters.
One alternative could of course be to let it stand as it is, but offer the player of the Knight to play an alternative character (maybe some kind of minor NPC that the group knows) while the Knight heals up. Everyone should have the chance to have to have the same amount of fun...
-
You should at least make sure the player knows how serious it is. I would then suggest that you talk to the group and ask them how they want to handle it.
This. What option you should take should be discussed with the group and especially the player in question. Personally, if the player knew what he was getting into, I'd be inclined to let it stand. Should give all the characters some thoughts on their own mortality, which could be a very cool vibe.
If he wants to keep going as-is, my first post includes several possible long-term issues that won't keep the character out of play indefinitely, and Sanctaphrax's suggested horrible facial scarring is also a valid option. In either case though, to maintain immersion, he's probably gonna need some time in a hospital in the near future (or with a magical healer, or something) in order to recover enough from all his other Consequences to be up and about.
-
Burn his face and throat with hellfire. Make it impossible or extremely painful to speak. Make his visage nightmarish.
Then he can be Snake Eyes with a Sword of the Cross, which is turning your frown upside down.
-
Then he can be Snake Eyes with a Sword of the Cross, which is turning your frown upside down.
Who's Snake Eyes?
-
An Extreme Consequence replaces a permanent aspect, so I think it doesn't have to be purely physical at all.
I mean, yes, Dresden barbecuing his hand was physical, but the Aspect part of it was that he was psychologically unable to cast fire magic.
In that way, an Extreme Consequence might well be fairly minor physically--but extremely damaging psychologically.
So maybe this Knight of the Cross--having had such difficulty fighting--now has the Extreme consequence of, "A Crisis of Faith" because he thought he was 'On the Job' but the level of injury he sustained means he might have been very wrong. Maybe the Extreme consequence makes him hesitant to even pick up the Sword again.
That aside, I kinda agree with the others. If the first combat is resulting in an Extreme Consequence, then someone on either end of things is missing something about how the game works.
-
In addition to what others have said, I would suggest that, in the future, a discussion about the purpose, scope, etc. of any conflict scene be had at the beginning of that scene, as it is being introduced, including defining the goals of the various parties to that scene, which will help to inform Concessions and Take-out results, later, or even suggest other means of representing the scene mechanically (cat-and-mouse conflict, for instance, or a quick consequential contest)
-
Ooh! If he refuses to back down on the Consequences thing, how about "Demonic infection" ?
Maybe he suddenly finds Hellfire backing up some of his attacks when he's really angry (Hellfire punch to the face type of thing). He knows that continuing to allow that to happen is likely to at best drive him away from God, and at worst Unmake the sword, but anger is so hard to control sometimes, the power is so useful, and "I'll give it up just as soon as I use it to take out X" is such an easy thing to think....
-
Who's Snake Eyes?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snake_Eyes_(G.I._Joe)#Profile
Edit: LeviathanZero has a cool idea, although, this early in the game does the player want a conflict of faith? I mean, if he did, he probably would have built the character with that built in.
-
Who's Snake Eyes?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snake_Eyes_(G.I._Joe)
If you're not actually just messing with me with that question, and truly haven't heard of him before now, then my suggestion isn't going to be the right one for your group.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snake_Eyes_(G.I._Joe)
If you're not actually just messing with me with that question, and truly haven't heard of him before now, then my suggestion isn't going to be the right one for your group.
I'm not messing with you. GI Joe was never my cup of tea.
There are some great ideas here guys. I'll bring it up with our table. Maybe even point hem towards this thread.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snake_Eyes_(G.I._Joe)#Profile
Edit: LeviathanZero has a cool idea, although, this early in the game does the player want a conflict of faith? I mean, if he did, he probably would have built the character with that built in.
That's rather the point of an extreme consequence--it changes what you had built in. The game's all about change and growth of a character, after all. You don't build a character who's going to remain static.