ParanetOnline
The Dresden Files => DFRPG => Topic started by: Silverblaze on August 08, 2012, 01:28:30 PM
-
Lots of stuff to discuss here...
Lots of questions to be addressed...
Have at it...
I've seen many genre's "hacked" into this system, including superheroes.
A large part of superhero games can be loss of powers temporarily. In some cases this comes from containment cells ( which can be represented by a high threshold ). In some cases it is the presence of an item or being. (Something that carries a threshold with it - only having an effect on certain beings powers).
How would you model someone (Marvel's: Scrambler) or something (gadget) that neutralizes powers?
I'm looking for a way to weaponize a threshold. Maybe a new power; maybe a new way of using an old game mechanic.
Ideas?
Along this same line of thinking: Some superheroes are simply immune to having powers neutralized (due to narrative or some other strange factor). For purposes of this thread we are going to assume the whole "too powerful to be neutralized is not the reason for this immunity).
How does one model an immunity to thresholds? (other than the new power/rewrite I created and Sanctphrax helped to heavily edit along with the rest of the community) Compel/tag/invoke an aspect? Is there any reason to create or reskin a power for this phenomenon?
(If using the Immunity power: how much should immunity to thresholds cost in refresh?)
Also, is it possible to create a power additive? (at least for this superhero genre)
Example: neutralize immunity - this power is immune to the effects of thresholds/neutralize (- ? refresh)
Each power that was immune would cost -X refresh.
What could/should such a cost be?
Could a normal DFRPG game set in normal setting benefit from a power like this?
-
I think the core of this is pretty simple. Block vs Power use. Stating that one is immune to said neutralization would simply end up being a declaration (probably with FP expenditure).
The trick is the nitty gritty. Specifically, what is used to block vs what is used resist the block. A couple ideas:
1. Number of refresh spent=number of refresh blocked. You could roll fate dice for variety, I suppose. So if you purchased Neutralization [-5] you'd be able to block up to 5 points of refresh (give or take).
2. A cheaper power would be one where it is keyed off a skill. Say, Conviction. So it'd be Conviction roll to establish a block. Character must beat that block to use a single power.
It's an interesting idea, to be sure. I like the second option better. Designate skill, establish block. I'd probably cost it at -2 or -3 (would need to playtest). Have "enhancements" that would allow it to last longer, be more potent, affect a wider variety of powers.
I think this works really well in a system that has power origins, like Strands of Fate posits. So you could say that this could shut down Technological, Mutation, Alien, or Supernatural, then charge additional refresh to affect a wider variety of options.
-
I agree that it should be a block. I also would personally prefer a "base skill" of some kind, although which skill is most appropriate is going to depend on the source of the Nullify effect. Conviction, Lore, Scholarship, maybe even Performance depending on how and what is doing the neutralizing.
I get how a target could overcome or be affected by the block for actions like "cast a fireball". Either the target of the nullify draws up enough power and makes a Discipline roll to overcome the Block, thus casting their fireball, or they fail, and there's no fireball. What about Inhuman Strength? If the target tries to punch someone, they're going to get to make that attempt regardless of your nullify, the question is just whether they get their Strength power bonus or not. How does that get checked?
-
I get how a target could overcome or be affected by the block for actions like "cast a fireball". Either the target of the nullify draws up enough power and makes a Discipline roll to overcome the Block, thus casting their fireball, or they fail, and there's no fireball. What about Inhuman Strength? If the target tries to punch someone, they're going to get to make that attempt regardless of your nullify, the question is just whether they get their Strength power bonus or not. How does that get checked?
I'd address those sorts of Powers with armour (at half the value of the relevant block strength, and determined in the same manner) that reduces only the supernatural portion of the resultant effect.
-
Thresholds are blocks, they reduce supernatural effects also. They work four fold I think. That's why I found them a rather elegant way of using the system.
Blocks work too, but Superman (once upon a time) could not just roll high and ignore a room full of kryptonite or red sun radiation. If the door was sealed he could not crawl out.
That is why I prefer thresholds.
-
If I remember correctly in Small Favor, one of the Knights of Denarius did a similar trick against wizards by using his tentacle things to create a circle around the enemy, this should act like a threshold penalty.
Frankly I have always been surprised that Harry or another wizard hasn't used fire magic to burn a circle into the ground around a wizard or other supernatural nasty sealing them in, or negating a spell defensively.
I think mechanically this would be using a spell to create an aspect and then invoking it?
-
That makes sense.
I got another idea.
I may be over complicating things however.
Could a potion (in this case a singole shot ray gun or something) create a temporary threshold (not per the dresden files lore) but an effect for neutralizing powers. Say with a duration in shifts put intothe potion (ray gun)?
Say anti - mutant grunt shoots a mutant with his neutralizer: he hits with the "potion". Said potion had an effect of creating a hostile threshold with a rating of ...4 for a day on the target.
-
Thresholds are blocks, they reduce supernatural effects also. They work four fold I think. That's why I found them a rather elegant way of using the system.
Blocks work too, but Superman (once upon a time) could not just roll high and ignore a room full of kryptonite or red sun radiation. If the door was sealed he could not crawl out.
That is why I prefer thresholds.
I reread the pertinent Threshold info and I agree with using the Suppression mechanism of thresholds. It seems pretty solid to me. I also agree (having some Mutants and Masterminds experience) with InferrumVeritas that designating some sort of "source" or descriptor for powers will help narrow down the nullify's focus. Nothing really codified, you can probably use common sense and look at High Concepts and stuff like that.
-
Yeah.
That makes sense also.
Say Wolverine got his powers shut off by a....Genoshan Collar.
If he had a friend like...Spider-Man...and they foolishly put a collar on Spider-Man. Spider-man gets all wise cracky and then continues doing whatever a spider can, tagging his "Radioactive Spider Bite - origin aspect". This is legal, since he has no aspect related to being a mutant. Then since he is; of course being an "epic wise ass" he compels that for a fate point. He then uses said fate point to help him get to Wolverine and rip the silly collar off his neck.
Makes sense to me.
-
Here's an odd idea that occured to me with respect to evocation blocks:
1) A block effect can either be defensive (working against things that try to harm you) or offensive (working against stuff the target tries to do).
2) A block can be designed to have either have a "block rating" or an "armor rating".
So what keeps you from designing a "suppressive block" that acts as "armor" against any inhibited action the opponent attempted? So instead of, say, a strength 6 block that negated powers (until the 6 shifts was overcome), it would subtract 3 shifts of net success from everything for the full duration of the spell. It wouldn't completely prevent anything, but it would reduce the effectiveness of everything.
Just an odd thought, and (as near as I can tell) perfectly legal per RAW on YS252.
This doesn't do exactly what the OP wanted (it's a evocation mechanic, rather than a specific power mechanic), but it could be adapted.
-
So what keeps you from designing a "suppressive block" that acts as "armor" against any inhibited action the opponent attempted?
I used that in an early game but it was a ward trap created by thaumaturgy. The block was against movement and ended up mostly locking them down (one character could move with near immunity and another went around) until they attacked the ward to take down the block. Gave the NPC enough time to set up a ritual upstairs. :)
I do think I want limits on such things though - kinda leaning towards double Lore as a limit for any given single effect. Haven't had to bring it up yet, my friends seldom actively try to break the game. ;)
-
I don't see how any of this is workable by the RAW.
Blocks can only block actions, and I don't recall anything about suppressive blocks that aren't armour.
Am I forgetting something?
-
Blocks can only block actions...
Blocks affect attacks, blocks, maneuvers, movement (YS210) and perception (as a veil).
...and I don't recall anything about suppressive blocks that aren't armour.
Thresholds. But perhaps more to the point, I don't remember seeing anything saying armor style blocks won't work for things other than damage. Have I missed something?
A few of the spell examples also seem to be persistent - Nevernerver Crossover Detection and, perhaps, your favorite spell.
-
Blocks affect attacks, blocks, maneuvers, movement (YS210) and perception (as a veil).
Thresholds. But perhaps more to the point, I don't remember seeing anything saying armor style blocks won't work for things other than damage. Have I missed something?
A few of the spell examples also seem to be persistent - Nevernerver Crossover Detection and, perhaps, your favorite spell.
I LOL'd.
Seriously though....
I think I'll try both the armor block and the threshold idea in a mock game or a "one-night-wonder" game sometime and tell you guys the results.
-
Blocks affect attacks, blocks, maneuvers, movement (YS210) and perception (as a veil).
Thresholds.
Those are actions.
But perhaps more to the point, I don't remember seeing anything saying armor style blocks won't work for things other than damage. Have I missed something?
A few of the spell examples also seem to be persistent - Nevernerver Crossover Detection and, perhaps, your favorite spell.
Armour as a concept only applies to damage. I don't see any reason to assume that there's an analogous effect for, say, perception.
And yes, spells can last a while. Did I imply otherwise somehow?
PS: Thanks for pointing out the Threshold bit.
-
I don't see how any of this is workable by the RAW.
Blocks can only block actions, and I don't recall anything about suppressive blocks that aren't armour.
Am I forgetting something?
The following quotes are per YS252:
Blocks are usually set up as a defense against damage—particularly if the wizard is especially focused on combat. But not all wizards are, and in such cases a blocking spell can be used as something other than a shield—an evocation-based veil, for example, is often done as a block, but what it blocks isn’t damage, it’s perception
Note: establishes that blocks can be set up in self-defense against damage, or alternatively to inhibit "something" from occuring.
Hey Billy, would you use a “block” effect to hold a target in place, sorta like Elaine did to me in the SUMMER KNIGHT case?
Probably, yeah. The thing to remember with any “how would I” question is that there are probably multiple answers. You could model an entangle spell as a maneuver (the aspect used to slow you down), a block (against movement), or that special sub-type of a block, the grapple (page 211).
Note: Establishes that blocks can be placed "aggressively" on other people in addition to "defensively" on yourself or allies.
Optionally, instead of block strength, you can opt to have the effect work as Armor or as a zone border instead. If you choose the Armor effect, the armor rating is equal to half (rounded down) the shifts put into the spell. The advantage to doing this is that the Armor effect only ends when the spell duration ends—the armor survives a bypassing attack.
Note: Establishes that a block can either have a "block strength" or an "armor rating" or a "zone border". Regardless of which mechanic is chosen, however, it's still a "block", and:
A Block Is a Block Is a Block
So the above is how I make the claim that a block spell could be designed to inhibit spellcasting (first quote) by foe (second quote) by means of the armor mechanic, subtracting shifts from the final result after success is established (third quote) and that the result would be a legitimate block, per RAW (fourth quote).
Oh, and look: quote 2 also explicitely establishes The Spell Which Shall Not Be Named... :p
-
Offensive blocks are totally kosher, as are blocks against movement or spellcasting or whatever.
But I don't think it's ever established that there's an armour equivalent for things that aren't attacks. In fact, you quote implies that there isn't by saying "bypassing attack".
It's important to remember that armour applies to stress, which is something non-attack actions don't have. It does nothing to the attack roll, it only affects the effect of that roll.
Hard to translate this to things which are all attack roll, with no separate effect.
That being said, it might not be a bad idea to try something.
PS: Magical grapples might be okay, if you had to follow the grapple rules to inflict them. The spell in question here gets to be cast without an Aspect invocation and without supplemental action penalties, because...because.
-
Offensive blocks are totally kosher, as are blocks against movement or spellcasting or whatever.
But I don't think it's ever established that there's an armour equivalent for things that aren't attacks. In fact, you quote implies that there isn't by saying "bypassing attack".
It's important to remember that armour applies to stress, which is something non-attack actions don't have. It does nothing to the attack roll, it only affects the effect of that roll.
Hard to translate this to things which are all attack roll, with no separate effect.
That being said, it might not be a bad idea to try something.
PS: Magical grapples might be okay, if you had to follow the grapple rules to inflict them. The spell in question here gets to be cast without an Aspect invocation and without supplemental action penalties, because...because.
We allow grapples, but you must use an action to make an action with it (the block remains in place, but if you want to maneuver or deal stress it's an action). We have a "targeting" roll be the same as an aspect invocation (so the person being grappled gets two shots to avoid in the first round). I know the second bit's a house rule, but it's easier that way.