ParanetOnline
The Dresden Files => DFRPG => Topic started by: Aminar on December 29, 2011, 05:09:08 PM
-
This topic was inspired by an un-named RPG based on a book series by one of my favorite authors. In it social conflicts are handled in a way I find much more comfortable than the ones in the DFRPG. My party has never had a social conflict in DFRPG because it feels better to just roleplay them out(as the DM), skipping the whole damage bit. In this other RPG social conflicts are used differently, they aren't used as witty banter back and forth trying to get someone to socially withdraw(Which has never made much sense to me...) They are more like political campaigns, working to slander or defame your opponents, make yourself look better, etc. This feels more right...(Especially in a group setting) But it isn't perfect because in the DFRPG your reputation is twofold. The Supernatural one and the Mortal one. In addition it doesn't work as well with the consequences, seeing as most of the time damage dealt by this should be a permanent consequence like "Social Pariah."
Anyway, staring the session after my PC's get back from preventing Nicodemus from stopping the crucifixion I want to use this, but I'm not sure quite how to work it out.
Any thoughts.
-
Social stress can represent reputation, too. I'm not sure what the problem here is.
-
Remember that Dresden Files RPG does not define how long a combat turn takes. You could set up a Presidential Election campaign as a single social combat in which each "round" of combat is a week on the campaign trail.
-
Any thoughts.
Are you referring to Exalted? If so, you may want to talk to TheMouse on RPG.net. I think he's working on a FATE conversion.
-
Not exalted...
Anyway, its more the interaction with the consequence system being off.
-
Anyway, its more the interaction with the consequence system being off.
Can you give more examples of what you dislike about the social consequence system?
Taking your "Social Pariah" example - to me, that's probably a Severe consequence (or maybe extreme, depending on how you look at it). A Severe consequence takes a fairly long time to "heal", and even after the consequence slot has opened up again, the character may still be dealing with the repercussions.
-
You don't need to deal with the fallout of in-game-events using the aspect and consequence system, you know.
Don't get me wrong, I love them. They offer an abstraction that gives nebulous mental and social setbacks real heft. But just because they are there doesn't mean you have to use them for everything.
If an enemy outflanks your characters socially over the course of an adventure, you could handle that with a severe social consequence. You could ask some or all of the players to rework one of their aspects to reflect their new status as social lepers. Or you could handle it like you would in any other game, letting it drive the narrative in sessions to come and keeping it mind whenever the players interact with someone who would be affected.
Your particular game will determine which of those approaches is appropriate, but at least keep the last one in mind. There are plenty of things that will happen in a game that have lasting repercussions, but don't warrant consequences or changing anyone's character sheet.
If none of that helps your issue, then I would like to hear a few more specifics on your problems with the system. Hearing what you don't like will help us figure out a way to make it work to your taste.
-
Anyway, its more the interaction with the consequence system being off.
Yeah, I know where you're coming from. I'm working on a Diaspora inspired model for play testing.
Essentially creating a list of relative zones, using maneuvers to move between zones and consequences to determine the permanency of such moves. Take a seduction scene as a potential example: zones might be "Intimacy, Affectionate, Just Friends, Acquaintances, Indifferent, and Unfriendly". Maneuvers would be used to move yourself or your opponent to another zone, blocks ("I'm watching football.") would set up barriers between zones, and consequences would determine how permanent the move was...with extreme being essentially permanent.
-
dont social stresses wipe at every new scene like normal stresses?
Hard to have week long stresses.
-
dont social stresses wipe at every new scene like normal stresses?
Hard to have week long stresses.
Yes, stress always clears at the end of a scene. But how long is a scene? The game never defines it. A conversation in a bar, followed by a bar fight might be one scene. Or, a montage of political campaign stops over the course of three months could be a single scene. It's all up to what makes sense in the current context of the game.
-
As EdgeofDreams said, stress does go away at the end of a scene...which is a fairly flexible set of time. Consequences however last multiple scenes to becoming permanent, depending on the level of consequence.
-
Yes, stress always clears at the end of a scene. But how long is a scene? The game never defines it. A conversation in a bar, followed by a bar fight might be one scene. Or, a montage of political campaign stops over the course of three months could be a single scene. It's all up to what makes sense in the current context of the game.
Assuming nothing relevant to other aspects of play comes up in three months...Say another case file or something...yes? Scenes remind me of how they measure time in White Wolf. Which I like, but I don't. The time system for scenes is a little to ill defined in my opinion. Yeah it can be good, but it also can create situations where three months = one scene which I find annoying save for special circumstances.
-
My issue is that a consequence to reputation, unlike a consequence to someones ego, should not harm their ability to function in the other arenas. I'm thinking of giving each character a reputation score for the city and the Supernatural World. From there that reputation will be used in the upcoming session and modified by attacks dealt to it, and attacks they deal. Consequences can be dealt, but they are only taggable in social situations where somebody would know of them and they will have a separate group set of social consequences that function for the whole party(IE one mild for the party, one moderate for the party, etc. Unless somebody comes up with something better.
Or maybe I'll just drop the idea... Leave social conflicts by the wayside, and do the political intrigue schtick in my other campaign where the rules allow for it...
-
My issue is that a consequence to reputation, unlike a consequence to someones ego, should not harm their ability to function in the other arenas. I'm thinking of giving each character a reputation score for the city and the Supernatural World. From there that reputation will be used in the upcoming session and modified by attacks dealt to it, and attacks they deal. Consequences can be dealt, but they are only taggable in social situations where somebody would know of them and they will have a separate group set of social consequences that function for the whole party(IE one mild for the party, one moderate for the party, etc.
Ok, that makes sense. I've seen other people also post that they wished Social consequences were separate from Physical/Mental consequences. A few comments:
* Keeping track of separate social consequences is perfectly fine, as they rarely have much effect on combat and magic anyway, unless you're in the habit of using social attacks as a way to "soften up" your players before throwing physical threats at them. The Dresden Files RPG chooses to make all three types be on one consequence track for narrative reasons, but if you have different reasons for keeping them separate, whether for narrative or for realism, then go for it.
* A numerical reputation score could work, but that might involve working out some mechanics and add complexity to your game. I'd tend to shy away from that mode, especially as reputation is usually more complex than just good or bad, positive or negative. On the other hand, if you ARE going to have a numerical rep system, I do like the idea of having separate rep scores for different groups (Mundane Vs Supernatural) or even for specific factions (You might be popular with the Summer and Winter Courts, but not on good terms with the White Council).
* Aspects (and consequences ARE aspects) can only be tagged, invoked, or compelled by a character who is aware of that aspect. That's just part of the default rules of the game.
* A set of Social consequences for the party makes sense to me IF the party is commonly viewed as a group by others. So, for example, if the party is entirely made up of detective and police consultants for SI, it makes sense to me that others would have an opinion of SI as a whole that would be relevant. But if the players do not always run in the same social circles and are only loosely joined by the coincidence of working a few cases together, I'm not sure a party-wide consequence works quite as well.
-
My issue is that a consequence to reputation, unlike a consequence to someones ego, should not harm their ability to function in the other arenas.
I understand your point of view though I don't quite agree completely. To a point, social and mental consequences should affect how well you fight. At best they're a distraction from combat and, at worst, they're motivations against self preservation.
However, I don't really think they should heal at the same rate. This alone makes me lean towards multiple tracks at times.
That said, I'll probably leave it as one consequence track purely for simplicity and game play. No need to add more pieces to track.
-
* Aspects (and consequences ARE aspects) can only be tagged, invoked, or compelled by a character who is aware of that aspect. That's just part of the default rules of the game.
Do you have a reference for this? Aspects are useable by the player, whether or not the character knows about them. Fate points are a meta-game resource. The book's statement is "...any aspect that your character is aware of or has access to can potentially be invoked."
-
Do you have a reference for this? Aspects are useable by the player, whether or not the character knows about them. Fate points are a meta-game resource. The book's statement is "...any aspect that your character is aware of or has access to can potentially be invoked."
Your Story, Page 20:
Scenes, other characters, locations, and other things of dramatic importance can have aspects. Sometimes they’re obvious, and sometimes they’re less so. You can spend a fate point to invoke an aspect which is not on your own character sheet, if you know what the aspect is. This is covered in greater detail in Aspects on page 105.
As a rule of thumb, invoking someone or something else’s aspects requires a little more justification than invoking one of your own aspects. For scene aspects, it should be some way to really bring in the visual image or the dramatic theme that the aspect suggests. For aspects on opponents, you need to know about the aspect in the frst place, and then play to it.
Edit: Also, on page 105:
Your character also needs to have reasonable access to the aspect in question. With scene aspects, this is easy—your character usually just needs to be present in the scene to interact with the aspect. There are several ways you can gain access to an aspect that is on another character or scene:
Š Discover it via assessment (page 115)
Š Create it with a declaration (page 116)
Š Establish it with a maneuver (page 207)
Š Infict a consequence (page 203)
If your character can interact directly with the owner of the aspect in an appropriate manner and has reasonable access to the aspect in question, you may use that aspect in a number of different ways.
-
Your Story, Page 20:
The entire Fate Points section from p19-20 appears to be talking about player capabilities, not character abilities. Note the first paragraph of the section on YS19 in particular: "Fate points are central...they are basically a measure of how much power you have to influence the story in favor of your character." And the beginning of the second paragraph: "Each player begins the first session of the game with a number of fate points..."
Rereading the text you quoted with the section's context in mind, it seems apparent the player needs to know about aspects in order to use them, not the character.
Edit: Also, on page 105:
Yes, as you quoted, the character needs "reasonable access" to the aspect...which is different from knowledge. Also part of your quote, simple presence in a scene is usually enough to use scene aspects. Presence, not knowledge.
Flip back to YS98 and the beginning of that section on aspects, it states: "When you can apply an aspect to the situation your character is in, is can be used to give you a bonus." Again, it's the player applying the aspect and not the character.
Closing the book and going purely from a 'what makes sense' point of view, I'll still allow players to invoke things their character may not know about. Consider a situation where the characters are entering a fight with someone who already has "Broken Ribs" - I think that injury is potentially relevant whether or not the characters know it. It would certainly affect most fighters. The same applies with less obvious scene aspects or even city aspects, and why have city aspects if you'll never use them?
-
I understand your point of view though I don't quite agree completely. To a point, social and mental consequences should affect how well you fight. At best they're a distraction from combat and, at worst, they're motivations against self preservation.
However, I don't really think they should heal at the same rate. This alone makes me lean towards multiple tracks at times.
That said, I'll probably leave it as one consequence track purely for simplicity and game play. No need to add more pieces to track.
See, a traditional social consequence from a conversation would affect combat, but consequences on a grander social scale really don't. Things like "Blacklisted by the Mob" and the like. That said, most of the traditional social consequences strike me more as mental consequences, seeing as they will almost always be an emotional reaction, which is a mental thing. Look at incite emotion. It does mental stress for a reason.
-
See, a traditional social consequence from a conversation would affect combat, but consequences on a grander social scale really don't. Things like "Blacklisted by the Mob" and the like. That said, most of the traditional social consequences strike me more as mental consequences, seeing as they will almost always be an emotional reaction, which is a mental thing. Look at incite emotion. It does mental stress for a reason.
I suspect I'd worry if I thought the Mob had put a hit out on me. :) But I do understand your point and, as I mentioned, there are other potential reason for separate consequence lists. However, there's also the question of simply keeping game play simple. I already find it difficult to incorporate all aspects players have, adding another list to track would simply make it more difficult.
Edit: Please note, these are personal reasons & conclusions. Don't let me stop you or anyone from using multiple lists if that's what you prefer!
-
I still don't see the problem. If you have the severe consequence BLACKLISTED BY THE MOB, how does that affect you in combat?
So far as I can tell, it doesn't. Sure, you can't take a severe physical consequence, but your character couldn't do that anyway. Taking consequences is a player action.
-
I still don't see the problem. If you have the severe consequence BLACKLISTED BY THE MOB, how does that affect you in combat?
So far as I can tell, it doesn't. Sure, you can't take a severe physical consequence, but your character couldn't do that anyway. Taking consequences is a player action.
This is exactly what I mean when I say that Dresden Files puts all three types of consequence in one track for the sake of narrative.
What I think some people are afraid of is that you're gonna go into a physical combat with some monster who then tags/invokes your "Blacklisted by the Mob" consequence to improve his attack against you. Of course, I would never let that happen, as the monster probably doesn't know about the consequence and it's a bit of a stretch to justify that invoke anyway.
As for "Now you can't take a physical severe consequence" complaint, I say "Yes, exactly, that is the price you pay for having failed in social combat." Social consequences, at least in my mind, should have, well, consequences, they should cost you something.
Still, I understand why some people have a different view on this issue. As always, "what works for you and your table" reigns supreme.
-
I still don't see the problem.
Problem? Not exactly sure what you're referencing.
If you have the severe consequence BLACKLISTED BY THE MOB, how does that affect you in combat?
Depends entirely on the situation. In most it probably won't have an effect. But, if you're chased into a Mob controlled area of town, it may...
If you're looking for game effects, I'd probably compel it to limit choices of action - if it came up. "Do you really want to run into that Italian restaurant?"
-
As I read through this I suppose what it comes down to is that I see little difference between mental and social attacks. Both are aimed at disrupting the psyche(Whether through lying, flattering, sweet talking, bribery, or anything else. They all have the same target, just different approaches.) Thus I would rather have the social conflicts be something different, and I really like the way the other RPG works.(What are the rules for discussing other RPGS here? Mentioning the system would possibly help a ton.)
-
Fire away with the name. I have seen many people reference other games here and it has never seemed to be an issue.
-
Why not just make the social track into a reputation track? Then make mental attacks possible with normal social skills and use the mental track for persuasion/intimidation/seduction/etc.
PS: You can discuss other games here if they relate to DFRPG. We do it all the time.
-
What Sancta said...both statements actually. I've considered (but have not yet tried) redefining social and / or mental attacks.
As for other games, I believe the rule is 'no copy written material or other illegal use of IP'. Names are fine.
-
Alright. The Mistborn RPG(based on Sanderson's novels) is frickin Great. It works off a very similar system in a lot of ways. There are consequences that work akin to aspects, but they are not cumulative and instead of being a complete health gauge like in Dresden they happen when a hit of enough severity happens. The system has three health bars-Physical Health, Reputation, and Willpower. Reputation comes from Charm and a social Status stat called influence. It just feels like a more complete system for a group based game. I feel like the Dresden RPG was built for solo-gameplay in a lot of ways. Social conflicts get really weird really fast when you have enough enemies to match the party and its never felt comfortable, which is why I avoid them as DFRPG RAW works them, but the system as seen in Mistborn feels right(to my intuition at least).
Which BTW is almost exactly what Sancta said. In the end I'll talk it through with my players, but in an odd turn I'd bet I'm the only person upset by the lack of social conflicts. My sessions default to a pretty easy formula.
Big sign something is wrong.(Usually a small fight, a threatening note stuck to the door, or the like. Last time it was Nicodemus walking into the church and asking the Priest(one of my PC's) for help to atone for his sins.)
Party splits up to contact the people in town that can help them find out whats going on.
Somebody tries to prevent them from figuring things out.
They track the bad guy down and stop him, or fail to do so.(hence them being at the crucifixion next session.)
-
There are consequences that work akin to aspects, but they are not cumulative and instead of being a complete health gauge like in Dresden they happen when a hit of enough severity happens.
Could you explain further? I'm intrigued.
-
Could you explain further? I'm intrigued.
If you take 1/4 of your current health in one hit you gain a complication that your opponents can tag for an extra dice.
There's a step up for a hit that does 1/2 you current health and then 1 more step up from there.