1. SpecializeI'd add a caveat that if the thing you're bad at is important (Like a primary social attack roll in a game you just realised is heavily political) or critical (like defense rolls against attacks), then it might be worth it after all. It's all about value for Refresh
If improving something you're good at costs the same amount as improving something you're bad at, improve the thing you're good at. Since you're good at it, you'll probably try to do it a lot. That'll give you more chances to use that improvement. For example, if you have a +1 spirit control specialization, a Refinement giving you +1 spirit power and control is better than one giving you +1 spirit and fire power. You'll cast more spirit spells than fire spells, so you'll use the spirit bonus more.
3. Have a planIf you have a character concept that requires disjointed powers, it might be worth working something out with your GM to tie it into a unified set of rolls. In my games, for example, I allow wizards with Inhuman Strength to gain the benefits of it in their magic - so they inflict 2 additional stress when attacking targets with physical spells and gain a +1 to control rolls for such spells, and gain +4 complexity to spells aimed at moving heavy things or similar Might-replacement rituals. Fluff wise, the same force that empowers their physical bodies also empowers their magic (think Harry Dresden becoming stronger and more magically powerful after becoming the Winter Knight)
Make sure your powers fit together properly. Don't take Inhuman Strength and Channelling (Fire). Have a goal in mind, and build towards it. This is easy for some Templates like the Wizard, which have a good plan built in. It's not so easy for some Templates like the White Court Vampire, which inherently pull in multiple directions at once.
In a couple of recent threads I got to talking about optimization. But I didn't really explain my perspective on DFRPG optimization in general. That's what this thread is for.Good list. I kind of swing back and forth between making story characters and power characters, and this is pretty much what I do when going for power perfection.
With regards to this, thoughI'd add a caveat that if the thing you're bad at is important (Like a primary social attack roll in a game you just realised is heavily political) or critical (like defense rolls against attacks), then it might be worth it after all. It's all about value for RefreshI think the idea is that if you have a low skill and raise it to an almost low skill, you are still very likely to fail whatever you do. Instead of failing badly you would just fail. Instead, own up and maybe even look for a compel to fail. All or nothing, so to speak. You can make up for it by being even more awesome later on. That's actually the idea of how the flow of the game is supposed to work.
With regards to this, thoughI'd add a caveat that if the thing you're bad at is important (Like a primary social attack roll in a game you just realised is heavily political) or critical (like defense rolls against attacks), then it might be worth it after all. It's all about value for Refresh
AlsoIf you have a character concept that requires disjointed powers, it might be worth working something out with your GM to tie it into a unified set of rolls. In my games, for example, I allow wizards with Inhuman Strength to gain the benefits of it in their magic - so they inflict 2 additional stress when attacking targets with physical spells and gain a +1 to control rolls for such spells, and gain +4 complexity to spells aimed at moving heavy things or similar Might-replacement rituals. Fluff wise, the same force that empowers their physical bodies also empowers their magic (think Harry Dresden becoming stronger and more magically powerful after becoming the Winter Knight)
Also, I know this is a matter of opinion, but a general rule of thumb I use to determine if a power/stunt is good is to equate 1 Refresh worth of power/stunts to 1 free Fate Point every session. If it's at least equivalent in value, then it's a good buy. For example, a stunt giving a +1 to your primary attack roll will be used at least 3-4 times in a combat scene, so it's equivalent, all in all, to maybe a +4 bonus, or 2 fate points. Assuming combats occur somewhat frequently, then its value is as good as a free Fate Point per scene, so it's a good choice.
Maybe this is obvious, but it never was to me and I put a lot of thought into skill trees. Or maybe I'm missing something...but I always put as many skills into the highest cap as my pyramid will allow. The extra skills for not doing so are usually too low to make a big difference in game.
2. Avoid overlap
Being able to do the same thing in multiple ways is rarely an efficient use of resources. Superb Fists and Superb Weapons are both fine, but having both is not as good as having either and Superb Rapport. Combine this with the first principle and you'll get a character who's great at multiple mostly-unrelated things, so they can be effective in a wide variety of situations.
Like the tough guy who goes for Superb Fists, and figures because he's got that he doesn't have to worry about other combat skills...but then the first time he gets grappled he's rolling his Mediocre Might
...and the first time someone swings at him with something he can't use Fists to dodge he's using his Average Athletics, etc.
I find it is even easier to run into those problems with social skills, where often the GM will hear your roleplaying and be like "That sounds like Intimidation, not Rapport".
Because there are a lot of skills in DFRPG...The veteran GURPS player/GM looks at the post and laughs long and hard... ;D
If the GM thinks your roleplaying is too Intimidation-y, you can just roleplay differently. But you can't roleplay your way around a lack of Athletics so easily.
Athletics is so useful that I think "Achieve the highest Athletics/Dodge modifier your build and concept will permit" should have its own entry. Toward the top. Getting killed is highly detrimental to character development.On the other hand, getting killed in DFRPG is very difficult - the available consequences (including extreme) can soak a truly absurd amount of stress, anything short of a one-hit kill leads to concession rather than character death, and even in cases where the player chooses not to concede, the books make it clear that death should not be the default result of a take-out.
Athletics is so useful that I think "Achieve the highest Athletics/Dodge modifier your build and concept will permit" should have its own entry. Toward the top. Getting killed is highly detrimental to character development.
Of course, no sane GM would allow it so it is kind of moot.
For most other games, I'd agree that specialisation is a very good idea. For DFRPG and Fate games, I am not certain it is such a good idea.I feel like it's even more important. Or maybe to put it another way: it's good to specialize in what you aren't good at. What I mean by that is, you should have a good idea of your characters blind spots and have some good ways available to compel on them. Since they are areas you are absolutely not good at, you don't have to bother spending any skills on them and just take them head on. In return, you can be brilliant at what you're good at. As long as you and your group understand that sucking at something doesn't have to mean the death of your character, that makes for a natural rise and fall in your story.
Good aspects and lots of compels is actually good meta gaming.As I read the Compel rules, the more a particular compel isn't going to cost you more than the FP you earned, then it is more likely it is Compel unworthy.
You just have to be careful if a particular compel is going to cost you more than the FP you earned.
I feel like it's even more important. Or maybe to put it another way: it's good to specialize in what you aren't good at. What I mean by that is, you should have a good idea of your characters blind spots and have some good ways available to compel on them. Since they are areas you are absolutely not good at, you don't have to bother spending any skills on them and just take them head on. In return, you can be brilliant at what you're good at. As long as you and your group understand that sucking at something doesn't have to mean the death of your character, that makes for a natural rise and fall in your story.So that means that if I as the GM see that you are likely to not succeed in a course of action, then I won't offer a Compel on that course of action. It is simply just not Compel worthy unless that Compel puts you in an even worse situation that if you had pick up the dice rolled and failed.
Or at least it's that way in theory. I constantly forget to compel myself, though I'm trying to get better at that.
So that means that if I as the GM see that you are likely to not succeed in a course of action, then I won't offer a Compel on that course of action. It is simply just not Compel worthy unless that Compel puts you in an even worse situation that if you had pick up the dice rolled and failed.If you are playing GM vs. Players, yes, but that's not going to be fun for too long, in my experience.
If you are playing GM vs. Players, yes, but that's not going to be fun for too long, in my experience.One of the best tests of optimisation is asking yourself, "If my GM goes full a-hole, how long can my character survive?"
The idea is more along the lines of "There's an easy way and a hard way. Too bad [circumstances] force you to take the hard way."
As I read the Compel rules, the more a particular compel isn't going to cost you more than the FP you earned, then it is more likely it is Compel unworthy.
So that means that if I as the GM see that you are likely to not succeed in a course of action, then I won't offer a Compel on that course of action. It is simply just not Compel worthy unless that Compel puts you in an even worse situation that if you had pick up the dice rolled and failed.
Thoughts?
If you want a more badass Morgan writeup, check out Deadmanwalking's (http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,16552.msg799862.html#msg799862). Maybe add some Mental Toughness to it now that that's a thing.Regarding the "needlessly high Weapons skill": Summer decorated him for cutting down three RCV Dukes standing between him and the Red King. I guess it all depends on ow you define "cut down."
Anyway, optimization-wise Morgan's biggest problems are his number of wasted specializations and his needlessly-high Weapons skill. To strengthen him I'd swap Weapons and Discipline, then replace his current specialization set-up with
Evocation (earth, fire, spirit): +3 earth control, +2 earth power, +1 spirit control
Thaumautrgy: +1 crafting strength
which frees up 3.5 Refinements. I'd invest the savings in a defensive enchanted item, a strong offensive earth focus, and maybe an Intimidation stunt or a secondary focus in crafting or Inhuman Mental Toughness.
Assuming he's got a valid pyramid, he's rocking at least 52 skill points. If his cap is Fantastic he should absolutely take advantage of that, but even if it's not he should probably raise another skill to Superb. Maybe Intimidation or Lore. To make room, I think I'd raise Alertness by 1 and drop Rapport by 2.
Strictly speaking, he'd probably be better off dropping swordsmanship completely and swapping earth for spirit. And some non-Wizard stuff, like 1-Refresh Supernatural Toughness, would be really useful. But I don't want to change his concept.
Thoughts?
Regarding the "needlessly high Weapons skill": Summer decorated him for cutting down three RCV Dukes standing between him and the Red King. I guess it all depends on ow you define "cut down."Another thing to note is that the high Weapons skill enables him to take down targets without needing to cast a single spell if he needs to do so. IIRC, the White Court had stuff that enabled them to be immune to spells, I do not doubt that Red Court would have had something similar.
Another thing to note is that the high Weapons skill enables him to take down targets without needing to cast a single spell if he needs to do so. IIRC, the White Court had stuff that enabled them to be immune to spells, I do not doubt that Red Court would have had something similar.
-Endurance, I waffled with. . I'd thought about taking a stunt that would let me base his stress track on Fists or Deceit, but He's a 70 year old man. I thought it fitting to leave him with low endurance.
- Forgery is being used quite a bit...
-redirect force and attack: I didn't see him as an offensive character. Those two stunts let him do maneuvers or attacks. Mostly, I wanted to play with them. I may drop one eventually
-I may get rid of read the surface. But it, generally, gives you two empathy rolls where you'd normally get one.
Another character: why don't you choose someone from the paranet papers that particularly annoyed you. (stat-wise)
I don't think it[Empathy] works that way. And even if it does, you're probably better off making a Rapport roll. Why use the lower skill more than you have to?
Does nobody have anything to say about that?I've been trying to lay my hands on a hardcopy PP. I'm old fashioned that way. So without knowing the Aspects and what they can be Compelled for...
If you want a more badass Morgan writeup, check out Deadmanwalking's (http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,16552.msg799862.html#msg799862). Maybe add some Mental Toughness to it now that that's a thing.
Anyway, optimization-wise Morgan's biggest problems are his number of wasted specializations and his needlessly-high Weapons skill. To strengthen him I'd swap Weapons and Discipline, then replace his current specialization set-up with
Evocation (earth, fire, spirit): +3 earth control, +2 earth power, +1 spirit control
Thaumautrgy: +1 crafting strength
which frees up 3.5 Refinements. I'd invest the savings in a defensive enchanted item, a strong offensive earth focus, and maybe an Intimidation stunt or a secondary focus in crafting or Inhuman Mental Toughness.
Assuming he's got a valid pyramid, he's rocking at least 52 skill points. If his cap is Fantastic he should absolutely take advantage of that, but even if it's not he should probably raise another skill to Superb. Maybe Intimidation or Lore. To make room, I think I'd raise Alertness by 1 and drop Rapport by 2.
Strictly speaking, he'd probably be better off dropping swordsmanship completely and swapping earth for spirit. And some non-Wizard stuff, like 1-Refresh Supernatural Toughness, would be really useful. But I don't want to change his concept.
Thoughts?
I think he has such high weapon skill because he worries about breaking the first law. If he uses magic he has to hold back, but if he uses his sword he can chop off heads all day and unlike Dresden most of the people he fights are humans.
Esmerelda of the Eebs needs a rewrite as well, given a substandard build even I spotted.
I think it's valid to note that there's optimization within a concept too. So for Donald Morgan, that concept is "Warlock Hunter" essentially. Given that, I'd build him with the idea that his excellent evocation skills center around maneuvers and counterspells rather than direct attacks. For direct attacks, he'd use his sword.
Plus, it'd be tricky to get good at maneuvers and counterspells without getting good at attacks too.
It almost has to be an aspect specialization like Harry's not-so-subtle or Molly's Subtlety is its Own Power.
On the other hand it is literally the point of the warden sword.
The talk of spellcasters made me think of this guy I built. Maybe you could take a look at this character and see what you think.
Does that sound about right to y'all?
He's fairly powerful. He could be stronger, but looking at the other PCs I wouldn't recommend strengthening him. Then again, that game was stillborn. So...
High Intimidation and Lore in human form matched with physical skills in beast form looks like a good call to me. But I'm not sure Channelling is the best way to go. It's mostly for combat, which overlaps with your beast-form stuff. Ritual or Thaumaturgy might be better. If you did make that change, you could reduce Conviction to boost some other skills.
You can free up a bit of Refresh by attaching Human Form to your Modular Abilities. Would you ever use those powers without using Beast Change first, anyway?
You can also do without Second Set Of Eyes. +1 Alertness, only in one form, only under the right conditions? Seems weak. And not important to your concept.
It's usually best to attach Item of Power to as few Powers as possible, so losing it is less problematic. Alternately, you could make Voss into the IoP for flavour reasons. You won't be using those Powers without Voss around, will you?
I'm not sure if Superb Endurance is pulling its weight in Voss's list. An extra mild consequence isn't that great. With Speed you'll be using Athletics for defence a lot, so maybe raise that? Or go for Superb Stealth and be really sneaky? Or keep your human-form Discipline, so mental attacks are less scary?
Fire is a fine catch, and fitting, but you could get the same rebate from something harder to exploit. Then again, the Catch is already powerful enough without gaming it.
Yeah, that makes good sense. I think I've seen you say elsewhere, possibly even in this thread, that optimization and building toward a theme are not mutually exclusive. I'm seeing a pattern emerge in these optimizations though that seem to go against that thought. At least to some degree.
You mention that guns should be dropped because claws are so powerful, but thematically, Esmerelda is just as good with guns as with her claws. The same with Morgan. Magic is more powerful than Weapons on his sheet, so drop Weapons, but thematically, Morgans relies heavily on his sword skills.
How would you address these thematic strengths while sticking to your optimization criteria?
That's interesting. I felt the overlap there as well, but rather than drop it entirely I decided to focus the magic on defense (see the rotes and focus) and let the transformations take the offense. Grabbing ritual instead though, opens up more out of combat utility. That is a marked upgrade except where group defense is concerned. Or maybe it just shifts defense into an advanced preparation focus rather than an on the fly focus.
Yeah, this stunt could have been better spent, but I wanted to reflect the heightened senses of a wolf or hawk in the character.
-Fists and gun use are a bit redundant with Channelling.That was a deliberate choice on my part. The Telepathy aspect of Spirit Channeling was intended for crowd control and battlefield manipulation, and attacking someone mentally is pretty hard to do without smacking up against the Laws. That said, I don't have a problem with compromising on my original plans and going for full on Telekinesis.
-Splitting your foci between offense and defence isn't usually a good idea.Interesting, why not?
-Channelling + 1 Refinement isn't a very good way to do combat spell casting.As mentioned, Channeling was meant to be representative of his psychic abilities, but if it's more optimal to go for Evocation, then I don't mind the switch.
Evocation is, in this case, actually strictly better.
-Stunts are attached to lower skills, and some of them don't give you all that much bang for your buck.I'll defer to your superior wisdom here ;)
So how about...I like it, I'll see about steadily working him towards something like that as the game progresses. Thanks for the pointers!
(snip for space)
That was a deliberate choice on my part. The Telepathy aspect of Spirit Channeling was intended for crowd control and battlefield manipulation, and attacking someone mentally is pretty hard to do without smacking up against the Laws. That said, I don't have a problem with compromising on my original plans and going for full on Telekinesis.
Interesting, why not?
As mentioned, Channeling was meant to be representative of his psychic abilities, but if it's more optimal to go for Evocation, then I don't mind the switch.
I'll defer to your superior wisdom here ;)
I'm not saying you should compromise your plans. Using Spirit for telepathic effects is a perfectly fine plan. And while Fists isn't exactly optimal, you should still do it if you want to do it.Nah, it's fine. I always feel like I'm not living up to my potential if I have a sub optimal build, so it doesn't bother me much at all to adjust things based on that.
You can't use both bonuses at the same time, and +1 offence and defence power on a focus costs as much as +2 power on a specialization.Very interesting, thanks for the insight. I'll definitely keep it in mind, as I think I'll be slowly turn Isaac in to a dedicated caster. Probably not full Wizard, but definitely a caster.
Plus, I think it's usually better to focus on offence with Evocation. Shields are a bit situational, and offensive bonuses can apply to both blocks and maneuvers if you narrate them right.
It is more optimal. Your setup gives power and control 5 if you have your rings. Swapping Channelling + Refinement for Evocation, taking a spirit power specialization, and halving the strength of your rings would give you the same power and control with spirit, two extra elements, and slightly less focus reliance. And if you keep the Refinement or buy one later, you can spend it on specializations. Which are better than foci.
I'm not sure that's the best idea, but okay.Could you explain this?
I'd just ditch the optimization criteria. They're NPCs, who cares if they're optimal?
I'm talking about how to buff them here, but only to illustrate what I mean when I talk about optimization.
As for concept vs power, there doesn't have to be a conflict. And in a perfectly balanced game, there would never be one. Perfection doesn't exist, but DFRPG is pretty balanced so the trade-off isn't too common. And when it does occur, it's usually not too large. Morgan can have a decent Weapons skill and still be fairly optimal.
Most of the optimization I suggest here leaves the concept unchanged. That's why I'm not suggesting Aspect swaps. And in real games, optimizing tends not to change concepts significantly either. For example, did any of my suggestions involve changing who Paul Williamson is?
Thing is, evocation defence isn't as impressive as evocation attack. And in order to use it, he has to be in his comparatively fragile human form. So I doubt you'd get much mileage out of that.
Maybe invoke an Aspect? Or use Modular Abilities to pick up Echoes of the Beast/Supernatural Sense?
I don't really know your game, so my judgement might be off when it comes to the value of a stunt. Maybe +2 to black ops Scholarship is really quite valuable for you.Haha, that specific stunt was from a game that was over a year ago, and I just straight ripped the character sheet for my current game. At the time, I think I intended it to be used for "behind the scenes" political knowledge, blackmail material and stuff like that. It probably would have been useful in the old game, and I might find a way to make it useful in the current game.
I tend to come across as confident in my opinions and beliefs, even when it's not 100% warranted. I don't want people to be misled by that, or by whatever measure of "authority" I have around here.No, it's fine. You back your opinions up with math and research, rather than opinions presented as facts, so I'm willing to take you at your word far more than I would someone who just presents their opinions as facts.