ParanetOnline

The Dresden Files => DFRPG => Topic started by: Rechan on May 08, 2011, 06:29:50 AM

Title: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Rechan on May 08, 2011, 06:29:50 AM
So, I understand that when you do a were-form, you become the animal. Not a super charged or super animal, just the animal with a guy inside.

But does the animal form you take have to be an example of the real animal, or can you mess with it? Specifically I'm talking about size here.

For instance, the example of the wereraven has Diminutive Size. Could I choose to just forgo the diminutive size and have a raven the size of a dog? That's Not a raven that currently exists (except for say, maybe an eagle or condor), so is that legal?

Or, let's say I want to be a were-spider, but instead of diminutive size, I want to be a spider the size of a wolf. That defies existing animals. But from a 'strictly power purchasing' standpoint, it would be legal.

So are these kosher?

Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: BumblingBear on May 08, 2011, 06:33:10 AM
You can do whatever you want to do as long as you pay the refresh for the powers.

The book actually says that doing larger size is easier than smaller size.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Rechan on May 08, 2011, 06:41:42 AM
Side question: If I wanted to create something with poison, how would you do that, as there doesnt' seem to be a poison-based power from a glance through of the rules. Would that just give a larger Weapon effect to say, claws, but only works on biological things?
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: BumblingBear on May 08, 2011, 07:48:15 AM
Side question: If I wanted to create something with poison, how would you do that, as there doesnt' seem to be a poison-based power from a glance through of the rules. Would that just give a larger Weapon effect to say, claws, but only works on biological things?

"Venomous" (I think) is a power right after "claws" for -2 refresh.  It stacks on top of claws and gives the ability to do a maneuver to poison.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: MarkB on May 08, 2011, 09:12:30 AM
One thing to bear in mind is that the main advantage of using existing animals is that you have a working template to build from, that's been refined through millions of years of evolution. The more you mess with that template, the less functional it will be unless you do a lot of 'design' work to compensate.

For instance, a raven's wings aren't designed to support something the size of a dog, so that form may not fly without significant customisation. Likewise, a spider the size of a dog will break all its limbs just trying to lift its own weight.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Belial666 on May 08, 2011, 10:00:25 AM
As for wereforms that should not be, were-shoggoth. 'nuff said.  ;D
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Haru on May 08, 2011, 10:33:24 AM
There were extremely large spiders in TC, when Harry is using the ways to get to Edinbourgh. Granted, they were Fae of some sort or another, but nevertheless, they exist.

Combine that with Bobs comment on Were-Forms: "William, just a note, there are some were-forms that are supercharged or innately magical."

And I think there is nothing that would speak against it. Other than, maybe, the fact, that a spider the size of a small car is bound to get noticed pretty fast ;)

I would not say you would have to work especially hard to make those forms work, after all it is magic.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Team8Mum on May 08, 2011, 11:01:55 AM
Side question: If I wanted to create something with poison, how would you do that, as there doesnt' seem to be a poison-based power from a glance through of the rules. Would that just give a larger Weapon effect to say, claws, but only works on biological things?

Depends on the type of the poison.
If it is damaging it could just be a bonus to the stress applied following a successful attack
If it's something that hangs round you could apply a Tag of POISIONED following a successful attack that you can then tag for the effect you want e.g
*If it anaesthetic that slows you down gives a negative to alertness roll (and thus initiative)
*Paralyse where you would be using grapple rules against the "might" of the poison- which would probably default to the stress inflicted by the initial attack(I.e. The amount of poison you got into them) unless set independently. (for "just one drop has the strength to kill a thousand people" style poison)
*It could be 'addictive' like the vampire saliva.
*Apply on going stress each exchange until the Tag is removed with a 'first aid' or 'recovery' type test. (e.g First aid  or might check verse the strength of the poison)

Being Fate there are as many ways of doing it as their are poisons ;) work out the 'effect' of your poison and calculate it back from there.
Worse case treat it as a magic item : poison using the potions rules :) see the example on pg 281 YS


Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Shecky on May 08, 2011, 12:43:13 PM
When it comes to size, remember the weres we've seen in the books - they tended to have the same mass as the untransformed human. It would seem reasonable that that's the easiest transformation; changing mass would have to do something with the "lost" or "gained" mass-energy, and I'd imagine that adds a big level of complexity to the magic involved.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Valarian on May 08, 2011, 02:12:00 PM
changing mass would have to do something with the "lost" or "gained" mass-energy, and I'd imagine that adds a big level of complexity to the magic involved.
And then there's the question of where does it go while you're transformed. Not sure I'd want a percentage of my mass hanging out in the Nevernever while I'm having fun flying around.

The change to animal form without affecting the mass transformed is the default. To get hulking size or diminutive size, you have to spend points.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Team8Mum on May 08, 2011, 04:06:38 PM
And then there's the question of where does it go while you're transformed. Not sure I'd want a percentage of my mass hanging out in the Nevernever while I'm having fun flying around.

scary thought....
(http://granades.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/doctor-who-adipose-alien.jpg)

(And this is where we see the extent of cross over in the Dresden and Dr Who fan bases...)

http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/Adipose if you are not a who fan...
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Shecky on May 08, 2011, 04:10:30 PM
And then there's the question of where does it go while you're transformed. Not sure I'd want a percentage of my mass hanging out in the Nevernever while I'm having fun flying around.

The change to animal form without affecting the mass transformed is the default. To get hulking size or diminutive size, you have to spend points.

Yup, on both of these points.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Set Abominae on May 08, 2011, 06:28:27 PM
Certainly I misunderstood the gist of this thread, but the first thing that leaps into my mind is that were-squirrels should never be.  ;D
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Shecky on May 08, 2011, 06:32:08 PM
Certainly I misunderstood the gist of this thread, but the first thing that leaps into my mind was that were-squirrels should never be.  ;D

Were-sloths. :D
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: MarkB on May 08, 2011, 07:15:56 PM
I could mention the con game I played one session of, in which one of the characters was a were-poodle.

A promiscuous were-poodle.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: lordoracle on May 08, 2011, 08:40:02 PM
I had a player wanting to run a were-raccoon. We used stats for a cat as a template and modified it to account for a raccoon's dexterity with it's hand-like paws and such.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: citadel97501 on May 08, 2011, 09:49:23 PM
I think that this rule would conflict with the group. ;D


Life Rule #3
Never trust an animal with opposable thumbs. . .
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: BumblingBear on May 08, 2011, 11:11:44 PM
I always thought it would be cool if someone were a giant were ant.

In that case, mythic strength would be more than permissible. :)
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Haru on May 08, 2011, 11:18:52 PM
Riding a pony sized were-ant into battle might be almost as epic as riding a t-rex, I assume. It would definitely turn heads :o

That is, of course, if your were-ant buddy doesn't just eat you for making the suggestion  ;D

Uuuuh, what about a whole colony of giant ants under a city? If you could get them to help you, you could have your whole group riding on giant ants. Add classic western music and have your final battle take place at high noon in a deserted desert town.

Or I might have been in the sun for too long today...
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: mithrandirthewhite on May 08, 2011, 11:20:49 PM
On the evolution argument, arent the Alphas descriped as Ice Age wolves? Or am I thinking of McFinn?
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: InFerrumVeritas on May 08, 2011, 11:57:25 PM
On the evolution argument, arent the Alphas descriped as Ice Age wolves? Or am I thinking of McFinn?

I think you're thinking of Hexenwolves.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: MijRai on May 09, 2011, 12:11:02 AM
In Dead Beat when they save his bacon from Cowl, he says the Alphas look like remnants of a past Ice Age or something like that.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: BumblingBear on May 09, 2011, 12:24:57 AM
The books have said that the alphas are larger than regular wolves.

I've always figured they were dire wolves or some such.

I actually liked finding that out, since regular wolves (singly) are really not all /that/ dangerous to an armed human.  To a supernatural monster....

It takes a lot less suspension of disbelief to imagine direwolves attacking ghouls.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: MijRai on May 09, 2011, 12:43:58 AM
Well, if we assume the Alphas don't change weight when shifting, the lightest of the Alphas is still 20-50 pounds heavier then a normal wolf. The average weight is around 80 pounds, depending on location and subspecies.

Also, I made a (man-sized) were-scorpion, and I felt it deserved Supernatural Strength. A were-ant could qualify for more, I bet.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Sanctaphrax on May 09, 2011, 12:47:38 AM
I think that a human-sized ant would actually be weaker than you or me. As I understand it, the enormous proportional strength of insects is thanks to the square/cube law rather than any advantage of design.

And I'd let a were choose more or less anything as an alternate form.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Belial666 on May 09, 2011, 01:17:33 AM
Well, it's both due to square/cube law and the mechanics of their bodies. Insects are a lot stronger than mammals for the same mass because a) they are made of considerably tougher materials and b) they are made of somewhat lighter materials. Besides, insectoid bodies are far less vulnerable than human bodies.


On the other hand, giant insects have problem existing because their breathing systems are less effective and thus can't easily power human-sized bodies. If someone tries to make a normal spider human-sized, the spider will die of lack of air. You need to use the "blueprints" off pre-Permian man-sized insects for them to actually work.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: citadel97501 on May 09, 2011, 01:37:02 AM
You had to mention the thing, that gave my science class insect phobias didn't you.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Silverblaze on May 09, 2011, 01:51:14 AM
Were-Temple Dog should not be.

Yet, see craziest concept thread.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: BumblingBear on May 09, 2011, 02:29:08 AM
I own tarantulas.  I like spiders.  But if arachnids got any larger than a 1 foot leg span, I would have a kill on sight policy. :/

Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: ways and means on May 09, 2011, 02:30:18 AM
A Were Kangaroo Boxer should never be.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: citadel97501 on May 09, 2011, 02:39:14 AM
A Were Kangaroo Boxer should never be.

I am fine with that character, as long as he has a twin (another player), that is a were-mouse.  Please tell me someone catches the reference. . .
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: deathwombat on May 09, 2011, 04:11:57 AM
Were Squirrels!!
Were Poodles!
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: mithrandirthewhite on May 09, 2011, 04:17:47 AM
were worm
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: toturi on May 09, 2011, 04:44:33 AM
Were-dropbears
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Richard_Chilton on May 09, 2011, 04:53:06 AM
Well, if we assume the Alphas don't change weight when shifting, the lightest of the Alphas is still 20-50 pounds heavier then a normal wolf. The average weight is around 80 pounds, depending on location and subspecies.

I thought Bob explained how when the Alphas (or people like them) shifted shape the extra mass was stored in the Nevernever.

But it's been a while since I read that book so maybe not.

Richard
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: MijRai on May 09, 2011, 05:10:12 AM
I thought Bob explained how when the Alphas (or people like them) shifted shape the extra mass was stored in the Nevernever.

But it's been a while since I read that book so maybe not.

Richard

He said the people who change their size store (or use) extra mass in the NeverNever. You don't have to do that however, since it is a whole lot more work. The were-grizzly would have to, or the were-squirrel, but the were-normal sized creature would be just fine.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: qfdies on May 10, 2011, 03:07:56 PM
Weretribble
Wereseasponge
WereFaintingGoat
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Shecky on May 10, 2011, 03:12:40 PM
Wereslug. All your base are belong to us.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Valarian on May 10, 2011, 03:21:25 PM
I am fine with that character, as long as he has a twin (another player), that is a were-mouse.  Please tell me someone catches the reference. . .
Suffering Succotash ... someone watches too many cartoons ;)
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Belial666 on May 10, 2011, 03:37:20 PM
Wereworms make for good bruisers. Especially if they change to Dune Sandworms and not any standard Earth variety.



I still prefer were-shoggoths though.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: fantazero on May 10, 2011, 04:01:10 PM
man eating were-pugs
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Bruce Coulson on May 10, 2011, 05:47:29 PM
Were-Outsiders (any variety)

were-platapi (seriously, I think they are Outsider left-overs...)

Were-Sperm Whales...
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: devonapple on May 10, 2011, 05:58:45 PM
Were-Narwhal
Were-Virus
Were-Surfer
Were-Hobbit
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Team8Mum on May 10, 2011, 06:24:48 PM
Were-Virus

Oh but that would be SOOO cool.
"Mess with me and I'll infect you with Ebola!"
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: MorkaisChosen on May 10, 2011, 06:29:48 PM
Were-Human.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Team8Mum on May 10, 2011, 06:34:35 PM
Were-Human.
Is that not just some form of Multiple personality disorder?
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Haru on May 10, 2011, 06:42:07 PM
Hmm, how about some sort of animal-animal-were form. Like a squirrel that can turn into a bear, or a dog that can turn into a canary. Would make for a strange pet to an even stranger wizard  :D
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Wolfwood2 on May 10, 2011, 07:10:04 PM
When it comes to size, remember the weres we've seen in the books - they tended to have the same mass as the untransformed human. It would seem reasonable that that's the easiest transformation; changing mass would have to do something with the "lost" or "gained" mass-energy, and I'd imagine that adds a big level of complexity to the magic involved.

Of course, then YS goes on the have one of the sample characters at the back of the book be a weremouse who drops herself down to mouse size.  I'm sure that was to demonstrate that guidelines like that need not apply to cool folks like the PCs.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Set Abominae on May 11, 2011, 01:02:58 AM
For anyone familiar with the WoD games, I always found were-sharks to be insulting. I mean really, real sharks are bad enough, but now we get were-sharks?

Not setting foot within a mile of the coastline.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Stormraven on May 11, 2011, 01:33:05 AM
Were-Unicorn? :)
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: wyvern on May 11, 2011, 04:06:50 PM
Were-wolf-were.  You're a person, who can turn into a wolf, who can turn into a (different?) person!  Now that just should not be.

I like the were-unicorn or platypus notions, though.  Might have to use one of 'em sometime.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: SunlessNick on May 11, 2011, 04:33:32 PM
Werecoral.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Shecky on May 11, 2011, 04:47:19 PM
Of course, then YS goes on the have one of the sample characters at the back of the book be a weremouse who drops herself down to mouse size.  I'm sure that was to demonstrate that guidelines like that need not apply to cool folks like the PCs.

I think you're assuming more than is written. There's a lot of stuff in the books about the conversation of mass-energy; it would be most reasonable to presume that the mass-energy must be dealt with somehow.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: BumblingBear on May 11, 2011, 06:10:38 PM
Were - Gilbert Gottfried.

/thread
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: ways and means on May 11, 2011, 06:14:47 PM
Wear-Bear Stare
Wear- Ninja Turtles
Wear- May Fly
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Lanodantheon on May 11, 2011, 07:19:39 PM
I'm surprised no one's said Were-Rabbit

or Were-Vorpal Rabbit.

As a GM I would probably be leary about a Were-Dinosaur.


Were-Human.

A specific Were-human would drive me to violence: Dr. Butters.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Bruce Coulson on May 11, 2011, 08:13:23 PM
Sadly, all were-may flies died upon transformation, as all of them were long past the life expectancy of the insect...

Most campaigns don't have the refresh to allow a were-rabbit; you'd need Superhuman Speed, Flight, Claws, at least Inhuman Strength and Stamina, with the catch of Holy Items.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: jadecourtflunky on May 12, 2011, 01:12:19 AM
Not just holy items, the holy hand grenade!

In all seriousness, how about a were-mole. Or a were-Pidgeon. Or even a were-(Insert video game character who is also an animal here). Or even worse... sonic the werehog.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: mithrandirthewhite on May 12, 2011, 01:53:19 AM
but then he'd be a pig! :D Now I have an image of a man walking around looking like a Pigman from Minecraft.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: ways and means on May 12, 2011, 02:12:48 AM
Pac Wear or Wear Man
Wear Hare
Wear Jessica Rabit
Wear Donald Dispicable
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Lanodantheon on May 12, 2011, 03:49:13 AM
Nobody spotted the bad pun.

Were-Human Butters = ...

Were-Waldo. >_<
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: MorkaisChosen on May 12, 2011, 09:52:43 AM
*facepalm*

('Course, where I'm from, he's called Wally.)
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Cyberchihuahua on May 13, 2011, 02:27:46 AM
Were-Human.

Ranma 1/2. He can change from a man into a woman.

Also, man-were-bear-were-pig.
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: ways and means on May 13, 2011, 02:59:31 AM
Bee Were Jaberwocky
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: devonapple on May 13, 2011, 03:36:51 PM
Bee Were Jaberwocky

Half-a-Bee-Were-Jabberwocky
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: Richard_Chilton on May 13, 2011, 07:29:13 PM
In the movie "Vampires Suck" their version of Jacob has were-form that should not be.

Richard
Title: Re: Were-forms that should not be?
Post by: evileeyore on May 14, 2011, 12:47:13 AM
Bee Were Jaberwocky
I see what you did there.