ParanetOnline

The Dresden Files => DFRPG => Topic started by: McNulty on June 12, 2013, 01:22:21 PM

Title: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: McNulty on June 12, 2013, 01:22:21 PM
We finally have some sessions of DFRPG under our belt (I'm GMing), there's already a bunch of situations that could use some expert POV. So I was wondering instead of having X number of threads for each of these, I'll put them all under the same topic. Other newbies can participate as well of course and maybe this can be the "sticky" thread for this sort of simple/single issues/questions at some point.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: McNulty on June 12, 2013, 01:30:29 PM
One of my players has a geomancer (earth magic) focused practitioner and a situation warrants him to break into a safe, preferably without the owner being any the wiser. The logical course of action is to prepare an earth elemental ritual to access the safe in a way that it will look unaccessed afterwards (details of how this happens don't really matter here I think).

What I would like to hear is some guidance how to determine the complexity of such ritual.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: narphoenix on June 12, 2013, 01:47:03 PM
That one is simple: how high would the Burglary roll have to be if they were breaking in mundanely, in theory, to keep from having tracks? Set the complexity of the ritual equal to that difficulty.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Mr. Death on June 12, 2013, 03:27:28 PM
Well, personally, I'd up the complexity by +2 for the "make it look unaccessed afterward" part.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: blackstaff67 on June 12, 2013, 03:55:30 PM
and maybe another +2 if you want to pace the Aspect "Psychic finger prints were wiped clean" in case there are any spellcasters in the OpForce.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Haru on June 12, 2013, 04:08:04 PM
(details of how this happens don't really matter here I think).
But that's the juiciest part. (wall of text incoming) :P

No, seriously. Having a description of what is going on can actually help you determine the difficulty. Different approaches to the same problem can have different difficulties entirely.
You could, for example, say the caster is manipulating the lock magnetically, sending out a pulse to know exactly where each piece is and feeling his way through the combination to know how he has to turn the dial. Would be very easy to open a lock that way, and it would leave virtually no trace.
On the other hand, you could rely on pure force to rip the safe apart at the seams. Doable, especially with magic, but extremely taxing nonetheless. And don't even talk about the difficulty of putting it back together without anybody noticing what happened. I'd probably go with 3-5 for opening, if he had some sort of symbolic link (like the glasses of the owner, because they've seen him open it so many times). 10+ for smashing open at least and even more for closing it again. And even with all that, there might be some traces it has been opened regardless of how good he tries to hide it.

Or you could get really creative. I'm assuming he wants to get at some document inside the safe, to see what is written inside and then leave things as they were. In that case, he could sort of make a photocopy spell, if the ink the document is written in has some sort of magnetic or similar in it. Graphite in a pencil would work best, but we'll take what we got. Then he could paper and the same kind of ink (maybe if he gets hold of the printer or the pen it was written with), press his left hand on the safe and let the magic scan for the letters on the document, while his right hand is moved by the magic he pours into it and sort of copies the entire document without the need to actually open the safe.

This last one, I would probably not even let him roll on. If he has the necessary ingredients (ink, pen, paper, all preferably at linked somehow to the ones in the safe), of course. It's just a pretty cool idea to get what he wants, and the difficulty lies in the planning, not the execution. If you don't want someone to fail, don't roll. Let them fail where it matters, when he is trying to get the ingredients for the spell. And don't necessarily make them final. If he can't get to the pen one way, he might be able to come up with a different plan.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Quantus on June 12, 2013, 05:28:41 PM
All of which assumes that the safe is purely mechanical and not prone to accidental Hexing; many these days have electronic components.  If say he attempts to manipulate the door bolts and internal mechanisms of the latch portions of the safe, you can always force him to do so while maintaining energy levels low enough to not short out the electronic portions of the lock.  In any electronic safe there will be a functional divide between the code circuitry and an electromagnetic actuator that actually moves the physical pieces, usually some form of magnetic solenoid.  In that instance it would be very easy to energize the magnetic coil directly with magic, thus bypassing the electronic "lock" entirely, but if the PC isnt careful it would still work, but would short out the circuits and thus leave evidence. 

Such tiered success situations appeal to me, personally.  But not everyone agrees.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: dplanken on June 12, 2013, 07:29:49 PM
If I can ask my newbie questions here, that would be great! I hate to clutter the boards with my topics.

I was wondering, does every faerie type have a Sidhe? Like for summer ogres and a snow ogres (proven guilty). Is there a Sidhe Ogre of the Summer court and a Sidhe Ogre of the Winter Court? And if it does work like this, are the Sidhe's of the extraordinary ugly faeries also ugly? Or more humanised and pretty. Because I thought I read somewhere that all Sidhe are unearthly beautiful, but not all faeries (they are just extraordinarily... something).
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Dr.FunLove on June 12, 2013, 07:34:54 PM
My take on this is that there are always Sidhe for each faerie breed. Each breed might even have a progenitor Sidhe (Cait Sith is eluded to possible be THE King of the Malks). Regarding their appearance: beauty if in the eye of the beholder and I'd imagine the sidhe of any given breed represents the best of the elements that make that breed.

Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Mr. Death on June 12, 2013, 08:34:23 PM
Yeah, Sidhe seems to be something of a rank or title. I've seen the Erlking referred to as a Sidhe of the goblins, for instance. It seems the ruler--or ruling class--of a given type of Faerie is Sidhe.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: dplanken on June 12, 2013, 08:35:24 PM
Alright cool, I had the same idea. I'm glad you guys agree!
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Dr.FunLove on June 12, 2013, 08:38:10 PM
You're spot on dplanken! If we take that the Fae are a feuadalistic society, the sidhe would comprise the ruling class nobility in a societal later just below the various Monarchs of Faerie. It's a great part of the sandbox!
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: polkaneverdies on June 12, 2013, 08:56:08 PM
A couple of Woj that reference the sidhe.

Toot-Toot
2009 Lexington signing:
Q:  How big will Toot get?
A:  Depends on how much influence he has in the world.  That’s how the sidhe gain their size and power.  Mab wasn’t always as big as she is now.
2010 Bitten by Books Q&A:
#150 Is Toot-toot’s increase in size due to his actions, or the title and followers he has acquired doing Harry’s bidding?”
It’s due to /Harry’s/ actions, mostly. Toot done hitched his star to Harry’s wagon. As a result, he’s taken actions he never would have taken on his own, some of which had major consequences. Toot has effectively become a much more powerful being than he was as an independent dewdrop faerie. The physical growth is a reflection of that fact.
I mean gosh, where do you think the Sidhe came from in the first place?
2009 Kansas City Q&A @41:45
With all the things Toot Toot and the Za Lord's guard have done that made a difference, and with Toot getting bigger, is that going to upset the balance in the Summer court?
The answer is no, because they are not Summer anyway, they are wildfae.  And everybody over in summer is going to blame Harry for everything they do.  They regard them as a tool and Harry is the guy holding it.  Harry would tell you that he's probably the tool but...  Anyway Toot Toot's been growing because that's where the Sidhe came from to begin with.  They weren't always all tall and glamorous, they kind of got that way. 
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: ReaderAt2046 on June 13, 2013, 02:37:50 PM
If I can ask my newbie questions here, that would be great! I hate to clutter the boards with my topics.

I was wondering, does every faerie type have a Sidhe? Like for summer ogres and a snow ogres (proven guilty). Is there a Sidhe Ogre of the Summer court and a Sidhe Ogre of the Winter Court? And if it does work like this, are the Sidhe's of the extraordinary ugly faeries also ugly? Or more humanised and pretty. Because I thought I read somewhere that all Sidhe are unearthly beautiful, but not all faeries (they are just extraordinarily... something).

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Troy on June 13, 2013, 05:47:18 PM
What's the practical difference between the Skills Presence and Rapport?

From what I understand, the difference is one between passively having charm or the ability to get attention and actively being charming and getting attention. It's a fine line... and I think that Fate Core was wise in doing away with the distinction. For the Dresden Game the writers may have felt a need for the two different Skills... but I'm having trouble seeing it with my own eyes.

What do you guys think?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Quantus on June 13, 2013, 05:51:57 PM
What's the practical difference between the Skills Presence and Rapport?

From what I understand, the difference is one between passively having charm or the ability to get attention and actively being charming and getting attention. It's a fine line... and I think that Fate Core was wise in doing away with the distinction. For the Dresden Game the writers may have felt a need for the two different Skills... but I'm having trouble seeing it with my own eyes.

What do you guys think?
Thats about my take on it, but admittedly Ive never been in a game where the difference became a huge deal.  It is, to my mind, very similar to the distinction between the Charisma and Manipulation attributes in the White Wolf system, which is basically the same passive/innate vs conscious/active means of interacting with others.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Haru on June 13, 2013, 05:58:55 PM
I think it is like the difference between respecting someone and liking someone. Presence demands respect. You can go into a room, shout orders and people start doing what you say, maybe reluctantly, but they do it. Rapport is sort of the opposite, people like doing things for you, maybe even before you ask. And when you ask, you have that certain something in your voice that makes people want to do what you ask and more.

So I could see a military leader having high presence and low rapport. On the other hand a seductress could have high rapport, low presence.

And then there's Lara Raith, who has both skills as high as possible.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Troy on June 13, 2013, 08:25:32 PM
I think it is like the difference between respecting someone and liking someone. Presence demands respect. You can go into a room, shout orders and people start doing what you say, maybe reluctantly, but they do it. Rapport is sort of the opposite, people like doing things for you, maybe even before you ask. And when you ask, you have that certain something in your voice that makes people want to do what you ask and more.

So I could see a military leader having high presence and low rapport. On the other hand a seductress could have high rapport, low presence.

And then there's Lara Raith, who has both skills as high as possible.

I can see that but it leads me to ask... Why does it matter?
Either way, people are convinced to do as you want. The military leader doesn't care if you like him and the seductress doesn't care if you respect her. What happens is that people are swayed to see things your way or to do as you'd like them to do. Can't the Trappings and ... flavor ... of both skills be represented by a single Skill without affecting the game?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Quantus on June 13, 2013, 09:48:39 PM
A couple differences are the cross-over scenario, and the time involved.  The Presence Guy can walk into a room of complete strangers and get them to do what he wants, whereas the rapport guy needs to buy them a beer first, establishing said Rapport.  The people will naturally go out of their way to do things for the Rapport guy because they like him whether they are around or not, but the presence guy needs to be actively pushing them.  There are specific differences in ability and application.  One is a conscious thing, while the other is just a natural extension of your personality. 

Now, whether those differences require separate Skills from a rules balance POV rather than just as somethign that you need to keep in mind as part of an individual character's spin on some more all-encompassing skill, that depends more on your table's style I think.  It reminds me of the long d20 debates Ive seen over whether Hide and Move Silently should be combined into a generic Stealth Skill; the end always seemed to be situational
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Amelia Crane on June 13, 2013, 10:57:24 PM
I always saw the difference between the two skills being about who they target rather than active vs. passive.  I always thought about Presence as being for dealing with groups of people and Rapport for being about dealing with individuals.  Because presence is used on groups rather than individuals, it covers what we think of as more general and passive interactions with people like reputation and social fortitude.  Rapport covers more specific and active interactions with people like dialogs and developing relationships.

Could the two skills be combined?  Maybe.  But you have to ask yourself how finely separated you want the skills to be.  There are other skills you could combine as well.  Or others you could split apart.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Troy on June 14, 2013, 12:09:11 AM
The question comes up because I'm hard pressed to think of a situation in which a PC would need to roll Presence. In play testing the game, every time this sort of thing comes up, it seems like it would be a Rapport roll.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Haru on June 14, 2013, 12:20:12 AM
That's why Rapport is the default skill there.

Any way you are convincing someone to do something for you, that's rapport, and it's the friendlier approach. Presence would be more demanding, I think.

And it's an active/passive thing as well, and that's not to be taken lightly. At a quick glance, you can get a lot done with presence, just by looking good or charismatic or something. If you have low rapport with that, people will quickly see that this is just a facade. So maybe not so much an active/passive thing, but a short/long term thing. Do you want something from someone now, without much fuss? Go the presence route. They might not like you after that, maybe they even tip someone off about you. Rapport takes time, you need to establish a connection first, that takes time. But those people will do a lot more for you, they will take risks for you, tell you if someone asked about you, etc.

It's different types of people skills, and for the DFRPG, I think it's good that they are the way they are.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Sanctaphrax on June 14, 2013, 02:33:59 AM
Presence gives you a good social stress track and lets you lead a group. Rapport is good for social attack and defence rolls.

Narratively they're similar, but mechanically they're distinct.

That being said, I would do away with both if I were writing the skill list. (http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,34362.msg1622071.html#msg1622071)
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Bedurndurn on June 14, 2013, 04:05:30 PM
So I could see a military leader having high presence and low rapport. On the other hand a seductress could have high rapport, low presence.

And then if you throw in Intimidation, there's the question of do people do what you want because they love you or because they fear you?

I still think Presence is kind of a bad skill because favoring Rapport over Presence gives you a more active character, which is way more entertaining in play.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Quantus on June 14, 2013, 05:22:43 PM
But rapport takes more time to establish, relative to Presence.  You can use Presence on complete strangers with little to no communication, whereas you kinda need to establish Rapport with people before you can influence them, and language barriers become a bigger concern, at least by my interpretation.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Mr. Death on June 14, 2013, 05:45:30 PM
Presence is, "Holy crap! Robert Downey Jr came into my restaurant! He's such a big star, I'm going to give him a special discount!"

Rapport is, "Robert Downey Jr. came into my restaurant last week, he talked to my kid about Iron Man for an hour, and he was just such a nice guy to everyone. He bought a cheeseburger but tipped a hundred bucks. Next time he comes in, he eats free."

Presence is about who you are, Rapport is about what you do.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on June 14, 2013, 05:52:49 PM
@mr. Death:  nice

I use presence as a gauge to how people will treat the person initially.  Like how "initial reactions" work in dnd.

A poor presence might mean people are gruff and rude to you initially.  This might make rapport a bit tougher at first, but someone with a good rapport can win people over.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Dr.FunLove on June 14, 2013, 06:08:24 PM
@Mr.Death
I think that's the simplest way I've ever heard those broken down. Fantastic!

@Taran
I like that. Thinking to Odyssey, I think that is a concept I wouldn't mind including in the future. How would you work that? As a roll? As a modifier? Would it be best to use Rapport modified by Presence as a secondary skill?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on June 14, 2013, 06:36:46 PM
@Taran
I like that. Thinking to Odyssey, I think that is a concept I wouldn't mind including in the future. How would you work that? As a roll? As a modifier? Would it be best to use Rapport modified by Presence as a secondary skill?

I'll read it up.  I think Presense modifies rapport where reputation is in play...so, Robert Downy Jr. would have an easier time winning people over because of his reputation. (don't have my book right now)

It might just be an rp thing.  You ask the guy a question, but he thinks you're a jerk-face so he refuses to answer thus forcing you to use rapport to get the info.

If he likes you initially, he might just answer questions without needing rapport at all.

In the presence skill, it mentions that you can put an aspect on yourself like "lookin' good" that you can tag for rapport.  If you fail that bad enough, it might turn into an aspect like, "stinky smelly jerk"

I always figured the GM would do this roll secretly or ask everyone to roll.  Someone with a high presence is going to average a higher roll and, at worse, people would be neutral to them.  Someone with a low presence are going to have people neutral and, at worse "hostile".

Like if you walk into a bar, I just might have everyone roll presence and see what happens.  The other option is just look at their base presence skill and have that dictate the way people interact with them.  Let the players choose if they want to set up maneuvers themselves.

This also plays into how Haru mentions Presense...someone with high presence can command people because people's initial reactions are to listen without having to be convinced (less rapport rolls and more presence rolls)
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Dr.FunLove on June 14, 2013, 06:50:48 PM
@Taran
While I do think a lot of these social context scenarios can come down to roleplaying, socially-based characters want to make sure they get proper advantages for their investments. Good roleplaying always trumps good dice-rolling with me, but still. Something to ponder...
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Crazy Wilhelm on June 15, 2013, 09:48:01 PM
YS compares it to the split between Alertness and Investigation with respect to the Presence trapping "Charisma." As it says, "As a rule of thumb, the GM may ask you to roll Presence to gauge impressions when you are not actively focusing your efforts on making one. Further, when you use Rapport to make a deliberate impression, you can call in Presence to complement the skill." Presence is used passively. You enter a social situation, and your Presence passively affects the people therein, like when you walk down a hall and Alertness triggers on its own (because of ninjas or something.) Presence is also your Reputation and Social Stress Track, so it's a big part of Social Fortitude. A tanky socialite needs a high presence to be able to resist their foes in Social combat. The Command trapping is also a big deal for teamwork stuff, like coordinating a big maneuver or something cool. Looking at the RAW vol.1, Rapport's trappings are pretty much just brass tacks actions for someone who has already initiated a Social Conflict, and not much else (except the Chit-Chat trapping, which is some aces stuff.)
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: dplanken on June 16, 2013, 01:50:36 PM
Does anyone have experience with someone having the ghost speaker power? My player has it, but beyond the obvious "a ghost comes to you and wants your help with x" and "rolll a contacts roll to see if the ghosts know anything" I don't know how to help him shine in my game.

Any ideas?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on June 16, 2013, 01:55:32 PM
I'd invoke it to distract him during social situations :)
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: UmbraLux on June 16, 2013, 02:39:17 PM
Does anyone have experience with someone having the ghost speaker power? My player has it, but beyond the obvious "a ghost comes to you and wants your help with x" and "rolll a contacts roll to see if the ghosts know anything" I don't know how to help him shine in my game.

Any ideas?
He can also do a fair amount of information gathering (I had a player trading favors done in the physical world for information ghosts knew or could find out), use them as trackers / spies (for a favor again), find sites where people were killed recently (ghost, if there is one, may be too traumatized to speak), or even use them for minor maneuvers in the physical world (this either needs to be something the spirit is willing to risk existence on, cost a lot, or require the ability to command spirits).  Basically, anything a spirit can do he may be able to bribe them into doing for him...costs depending on how risky it is to the spirit, how much it aligns with the spirit's goals, and seldom having much to do with money.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: McNulty on June 16, 2013, 02:44:58 PM
Does anyone have experience with someone having the ghost speaker power?

No quite, but ghosts have a prominent role in our campaign so my advice is to you is to bake in some dead people in your storyline(s). It can start as a simple "there's an angry ghost in the attic" scenario, but once they actually try to solve the case and wander deeper into the rabbit hole, some awful truths will be revealed (necromancers, vampires, etc. etc. what ever suits the story).
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: ReaderAt2046 on June 17, 2013, 11:56:19 AM

Also, you could rule that this means ghosts have to acknowledge him (so he bypasses their immunity Power), and then throw in a Agatha Hagglethorn or similar.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on June 17, 2013, 12:09:37 PM
No quite, but ghosts have a prominent role in our campaign so my advice is to you is to bake in some dead people in your storyline(s). It can start as a simple "there's an angry ghost in the attic" scenario, but once they actually try to solve the case and wander deeper into the rabbit hole, some awful truths will be revealed (necromancers, vampires, etc. etc. what ever suits the story).

This.

Most cities have ghost stories and companies that do halloween ghost tours.  Research these and turn them into adventures, or as side quests to solve bigger plot issues.

Most ghost stories are very colourful and offer a lot in the personality of each ghost.

I had a character with ghost speaker.  the character was a cop who murdered his partner.  I made The partner into an npc who helped the character, now looking to redeem himself, solve mysteries.   He always went back to the same creepy car garage at the time of the murder to go chat with the ghost.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: ReaderAt2046 on June 20, 2013, 02:51:07 AM

What's the difference between Worldwalker and Swift Transition? Conceptually, both seem to allow you to jump in or out of the Nevernever pretty much anywhere.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Troy on June 20, 2013, 03:13:29 AM
What's the difference between Worldwalker and Swift Transition? Conceptually, both seem to allow you to jump in or out of the Nevernever pretty much anywhere.

It seems like Swift Transition is for creatures who have a natural affinity to the Nevernever... as in, that's where they belong. So they can pop in and out as they like.

World Walker makes portals, which allows a person to bring other people with you. It also conveys other abilities that make it easy to find places to make these portals, and navigate the Nevernever.

That's what it looks like.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Sanctaphrax on June 20, 2013, 07:16:36 AM
It seems like Swift Transition is for creatures who have a natural affinity to the Nevernever... as in, that's where they belong. So they can pop in and out as they like.

World Walker makes portals, which allows a person to bring other people with you. It also conveys other abilities that make it easy to find places to make these portals, and navigate the Nevernever.

That's what it looks like.

Yep, I agree.

Except for one thing. I'm not sure that Swift Transition lets you pop back from the Nevernever whenever you like. It seems to be one-way, going by a legalistic reading of the write-up.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Dracorex on June 20, 2013, 08:10:15 AM
Swift Transition is two-way. It's the kind WCVs have, isn't it? That's how Thomas and Michael got back out in Grave Peril. Michael was complaining about how they came out in a 'flesh pit' or something; Thomas was protesting about how he can only jump in and out via 'places close to his heart', and that it was a 'gentleman's club'.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Sanctaphrax on June 20, 2013, 08:25:56 AM
White Court Vampires do not have Swift Transition. Transitioning at thematically appropriate places is probably a High Concept Invoke for Effect.

And while it seems as though it should be two-way, it doesn't actually say anything about going from the Nevernever to Earth.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Quantus on June 20, 2013, 01:26:56 PM
White Court Vampires do not have Swift Transition. Transitioning at thematically appropriate places is probably a High Concept Invoke for Effect.

And while it seems as though it should be two-way, it doesn't actually say anything about going from the Nevernever to Earth.
By the novels at least White Court Vampires are able to come back from the NN to the mortal world at those personally significant locations, and can navigate to and from them.  But as you say, that is not the same thing as Swift Transition.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Wordmaker on June 20, 2013, 03:30:46 PM
I figured the way supernaturals can enter the Nevernever through thematic locations was a type of Common Ritual available only to them.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: McNulty on June 21, 2013, 12:00:34 PM
On a parallel storyline some of my players encountered a boogey man harrassing some elderly lady. They rightly posited that it is a some sort of fetch that gained an entry through a mirror (yes very basic, but most of us are not familiar with the books ;)). They're (somewhat surprising) solution was to bolt two iron bars across the mirror, thinking it will keep the fetch (being a creature of the fair folk) at bay. Will this work, or does the fetch have some tricks in the sleeve perhaps?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: narphoenix on June 21, 2013, 12:12:23 PM
On a parallel storyline some of my players encountered a boogey man harrassing some elderly lady. They rightly posited that it is a some sort of fetch that gained an entry through a mirror (yes very basic, but most of us are not familiar with the books ;)). They're (somewhat surprising) solution was to bolt two iron bars across the mirror, thinking it will keep the fetch (being a creature of the fair folk) at bay. Will this work, or does the fetch have some tricks in the sleeve perhaps?

Roll and find out.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Cadd on June 21, 2013, 12:12:46 PM
I find the idea good. Simplistic, but to the point. If it works should really be up to the story:
Would it fit to have the fetch be barred by it and thus dealt with?
Or should the fetch be a "larger" antagonist and require a more direct approach?
Or should it be both - the bars blocked the fetch but it knows who did it and is now mightily annoyed at the interference?

If it fits the story, I'd definitely allow it to work. But I could just as easily say "tough luck, you just turned that single mirror into several different mirrors, it can still get through".
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Joelok314 on June 21, 2013, 05:28:49 PM
I find the idea good. Simplistic, but to the point. If it works should really be up to the story:
Would it fit to have the fetch be barred by it and thus dealt with?
Or should the fetch be a "larger" antagonist and require a more direct approach?
Or should it be both - the bars blocked the fetch but it knows who did it and is now mightily annoyed at the interference?

If it fits the story, I'd definitely allow it to work. But I could just as easily say "tough luck, you just turned that single mirror into several different mirrors, it can still get through".

This is a good idea. If you want to truly go with the story, remember that the huge scarecrow used a tiny side mirror on a van to get through, so really I don't think the size of the mirror matters.

But, if the story didn't need this to be a huge thorough affair, then you could rule it works...
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Sanctaphrax on June 21, 2013, 10:16:14 PM
I'd say it works. The bars are iron, after all, they should shut down pretty much any and all faerie stuff.

But there will be other mirrors in the area. A bathroom mirror next door, a rearview mirror outside...blocking one mirror isn't likely to keep the fetch away completely.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Mr. Death on June 21, 2013, 11:44:49 PM
I'd say it works. The bars are iron, after all, they should shut down pretty much any and all faerie stuff.
Provided a boogieman is Fae, anyway. Does Harry specify?

Quote
But there will be other mirrors in the area. A bathroom mirror next door, a rearview mirror outside...blocking one mirror isn't likely to keep the fetch away completely.
I imagine, though, that if it runs into the iron bars, it may well injure itself or otherwise be diminished from the contact with iron.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Sanctaphrax on June 22, 2013, 04:00:33 AM
Provided a boogieman is Fae, anyway. Does Harry specify?

...

I imagine, though, that if it runs into the iron bars, it may well injure itself or otherwise be diminished from the contact with iron.

McNulty said it was a faerie fetch.

I was assuming it'd be able to tell the iron was there before trying to pass through, on the grounds that even proximity to iron makes fey uncomfortable, but that might have been a mistake on my part.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Dr.FunLove on June 22, 2013, 06:14:28 AM
@Sancta
You're right on the Fae and iron score. When Harry meets Mab for the first time in Summer Knight is a good example of the Fae's strong aversion to it. It is an awful death for them after all.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Mr. Death on June 22, 2013, 12:55:46 PM
@Sancta
You're right on the Fae and iron score. When Harry meets Mab for the first time in Summer Knight is a good example of the Fae's strong aversion to it. It is an awful death for them after all.
Well, Mab could see the nail, is the thing. I'm not sure if the fae can 'feel' iron they haven't touched yet. If they could, Lea may not have been tricked by the aluminum nails. And the Gruffs run headlong into the Carpenters' steel door (though perhaps given he was running, he might not have had time to stop anyway).

Of course, I suppose there's nothing stopping the boogieman from seeing the iron through the other side, or maybe the iron bars would make it so the boogieman simply can't open that passageway in the first place.

Anyway, lots of different ways you can play this.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: McNulty on June 22, 2013, 02:42:24 PM
@Sancta
You're right on the Fae and iron score. When Harry meets Mab for the first time in Summer Knight is a good example of the Fae's strong aversion to it. It is an awful death for them after all.

That was my take as well that the fae aversion to iron is very strong and they can even sense its proximity. This is why I was considering that this will stop the fetch going through the mirror, even if it could slip through a small fragment of mirror in other circumstances.

But there will be other mirrors in the area. A bathroom mirror next door, a rearview mirror outside...blocking one mirror isn't likely to keep the fetch away completely.

But of course there is always this..  As I would like to reward my players for their fair solution, I need to decide how the other mirrors will affect the situtation. Maybe it just buys them a bit more time to try to find out what is going on?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Tedronai on June 22, 2013, 03:12:10 PM
Alternatively, the Fetch could come through the barred mirror, but be weakened by the unexpected iron, thereby making the subsequent conflict more manageable for the creative players.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Sanctaphrax on June 22, 2013, 10:12:32 PM
But of course there is always this..  As I would like to reward my players for their fair solution, I need to decide how the other mirrors will affect the situtation. Maybe it just buys them a bit more time to try to find out what is going on?

If they block all but one mirror, they can lay a trap for the fetch when it comes through the last remaining mirror.

Dunno whether your players would think of that, though.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: martellian on June 26, 2013, 01:21:14 AM
You could have the fetch come through the mirror, get burned, and retreat back to the Nevernever. The party thinks, woo, that did the trick, it's miller time, but later on the fetch and some of his buddies show up elsewhere to get the party for daring to use iron against them.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: PirateJack on June 27, 2013, 06:08:29 AM
There have been a number of options listed, but I like the idea of lowering the Fetch's toughness by one notch for the next fight, given that its catch has been satisfied by the iron trap. Also, I'm pretty sure Faeries can't sense iron (Cold Days spoiler).

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: McNulty on July 04, 2013, 01:53:29 PM
So we've had some combats under our belt now but we're still occasionally struggling to figure out the DF combat paradigm. Here are some examples, maybe you can comment on them through rules expert goggles.

Exhibit A:

Our focused practitioner (geomancer) attacks an major NPC who is giving orders to his goonies. Instead of inflicting stress he just wants to stop him to give out orders. Our geomancer has a bag of sand that he magically blows against the NPC. So he does a Maneuver to inflict an aspect like "Sand in the windpipe". How does this actually stop the NPC then.. should the player compel that Aspect (and giving the NPC a fate point) or what? Or is the NPC unable to command until he removes the manouver. And what's the difficulty in removing the aspect in this case, against the original channeling roll or something else?

Another option is to do a block with the sand, I guess, but maintaining the block takes his following action(s)?


Exhibit B:

Our living dead reporter (yes) grapples a NPC goonie and uses his might to throw the goonie against the wall. Then he proceeds to ask "so how much damage does the NPC take from the throw..? ". "Err.. none", I answer with a straight face. As This was followed by disappointed looks, so I relented and gave the NPC an aspect "Spread eagled on the floor". This was probably not within the rules, but within the paradigm I think.

So now we have an NPC with "Spread eagled on the floor" aspect. How does this effect him? Is he on the floor until he removes the aspect? Or is it only taggable bonus for our PCs? Or both? And what's the difficulty in removing the aspect in this case, against the original grapple/throw or a standard "Get on your feet -roll"?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Haru on July 04, 2013, 02:16:01 PM
Exhibit A:

Our focused practitioner (geomancer) attacks an major NPC who is giving orders to his goonies. Instead of inflicting stress he just wants to stop him to give out orders. Our geomancer has a bag of sand that he magically blows against the NPC. So he does a Maneuver to inflict an aspect like "Sand in the windpipe". How does this actually stop the NPC then.. should the player compel that Aspect (and giving the NPC a fate point) or what? Or is the NPC unable to command until he removes the manouver. And what's the difficulty in removing the aspect in this case, against the original channeling roll or something else?

Another option is to do a block with the sand, I guess, but maintaining the block takes his following action(s)?
If the aspect is established, it does exactly what it says, the NPC now has sand in his windpipe. However, that doesn't necessarily mean that it brings a bonus or penalty to each and every roll involving the NPC. When you create the aspect, you get a free invoke, called a tag. You can spend this tag like it is a fate point that you can only use on this aspect.

You can spend the tag (or after that fate points) to invoke the aspect. You can do that
1. either for a +2 bonus or a reroll when you are fighting the NPC and the aspect would be appropriate. Since sand in the windpipe should be pretty distracting, that should be almost always the case.
2. or you can go for an "invoke for effect" (YS99). This means, that you invoke the aspect either with your tag or with a fate point, and then specify an effect that is happening. For example, you could establish that he is unable to talk or even scream, as you say.

The difficulty to remove the aspect is equal to the shifts the maneuver was created with. If you do a 4 shift "sand in the windpipe" spell, then it requires a 4 shift action to get rid of it.


Quote
Exhibit B:

Our living dead reporter (yes) grapples a NPC goonie and uses his might to throw the goonie against the wall. Then he proceeds to ask "so how much damage does the NPC take from the throw..? ". "Err.. none", I answer with a straight face. As This was followed by disappointed looks, so I relented and gave the NPC an aspect "Spread eagled on the floor". This was probably not within the rules, but within the paradigm I think.

So now we have an NPC with "Spread eagled on the floor" aspect. How does this effect him? Is he on the floor until he removes the aspect? Or is it only taggable bonus for our PCs? Or both? And what's the difficulty in removing the aspect in this case, against the original grapple/throw or a standard "Get on your feet -roll"?
Well, what did he do, when he threw him against the wall? There are 3 actions you can do: attack, block, maneuver. A grapple is a type of block. If he keeps the grapple up, that's his action, and a block does not do any damage. However, when you do a grapple, you can chose to do 1 shift of damage (or more, if you have strength powers) as a supplemental action. That means that the strength of the grapple is reduced by 1 shift, but the character that is held in the grapple gets 1 shift of stress, which he can't defend against.

If, on the other hand, the grappler wants to inflict stress by throwing his target against the wall, that would be an attack action, and since he doesn't keep up his grapple, the target is automatically free now, but has to defend against the stress of the attack.
It's the same for a maneuver, the grapple ends, too. However, you can also put an aspect on the target as a supplemental action, if you like, just like the 1 shift of stress above.

If he doesn't do any of those actions, then throwing his target against the wall is just the way he describes him keeping the guy under control.

The NPC is effectively on the floor until he removes the aspect, yes. This should, of course, also mean that some actions are limited to him. Moving around, for example.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Wordmaker on July 04, 2013, 02:20:47 PM
On Exhibit A: Because the player created the aspect, they can use their free tag to compel the NPC to be unable to give orders. The NPC gets a Fate Point, but the player doesn't have to spend any for that first use. Aspects never have an effect on dice rolls or characters' behaviour and actions unless invoked, tagged, or compelled.

Removing the aspect depends on how well the player rolled to put it on the NPC in the first place (you did have him roll for it, right?). If he rolled just equal to the NPC's Discipline roll to defend, then the aspect is removed automatically after the first tag. Essentially in this case it would mean the sand is coughed out quickly. If, however, the player rolled above the NPC's Discipline roll, the aspect is "sticky," meaning it doesn't go away until some action is taken to deal with it.

In this case, that could mean a number of things, from the NPC stopping to cough up the sand, receiving the Heimlich Maneuver, or some other action that would unblock his windpipe. The difficulty to do this is up to you, depending on the circumstances. Out of combat, it typically shouldn't take anything other than time. In combat, for something simple (like throwing water over someone to remove the aspect "On Fire") no roll should be required, but for clearing a physical blockage in someone's throat, that might need a skill roll.

A good rule of thumb is, whenever you do call for a skill roll to remove an aspect, to set the difficulty at the same level as the result on the player's skill roll to place the aspect initially.

Re: blocks, you are correct, the player would have to continually apply the block in order to maintain the effect.

Exhibit B: In this case, the player could have simply treated the throw as a regular Fists attack, rather than using the grapple rules, especially if his goal was to hurt the NPC.

Players should be encouraged to think beyond the mindset that they need secondary beneficial effects to their actions. The only things that happen in a DFRPG game are the things that the players themselves choose to do. So, the player must decide whether they want to inflict stress, place an aspect, or perform a block. How they then describe that is up to them, but can absolutely include description to the effect of throwing someone against a wall, if they choose.

As for the aspect you chose to apply, yes doing so was specifically against the rules, and not exactly in keeping with the paradigm, either. Temporary aspects in combat are only applied to characters through maneuvers and consequences. You don't get to impose an aspect as a bonus to a different action.

An aspect like "Spread-Eagle on the Floor" is kind of poor, because the only way for it to remain in effect is to continually compel the NPC to remain on the ground, unable to get up. It's perfectly rules-legal, but you're players are going to burn a lot of Fate Points and he's going to quickly build up enough that he can buy off the compel and still be sitting pretty on a nice stack of points to spend against them.

If he stands up, the aspect is gone. No difficulty, no dice roll.

If you want to represent a character being at a disadvantage due to a maneuver, you're better off coming up with one that describes a more general condition. Something like "thrown off balance" is good, because it doesn't inherently suggest that a character can't act, but it's still an aspect that can be reasonably tagged, invoked or compelled to create difficulty for the character.

But remember, aspects like that are inflicted through the use of maneuvers only. The only time an attack can inflict an aspect is when the character chooses to take consequences.

If you want a character to be put in a situation where their ability to take action is more seriously impacted, you're better off using a block.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: dplanken on July 07, 2013, 12:28:44 PM
Some random questions and situations I've been struggeling with that I hope someone can help me with. Don't worry about answering them all, if you can even answer a single one I'm a happy girl.

1. Are all Sidhe immortal?

2. Can Sidhe harm mortals without cause or connection, or are they not allowed like the Faerie Queens are not. And what about regular faeries like ogres and trolls.

3. Any ideas for non faerie-monsters that aren't vampires or ghouls?

4. When a manoever has been placed and the person who has been affected chooses to spend his action to remove it. Does he have to beat the difficulty of when it was placed, or does the person who placed it get to "defend" to keep the manoever in place.

5. How do you deal with the party splitting up, and one person entering a physical conflict away from the others. Physical conflict usually lasts pretty long, and the others will get bored waiting for it.

6. I've discovered that as a GM I'm struggeling with finding good compels during a session. I maybe compel each character once per session, and usually for something that isn't that cool to the story. Does anyone have tips for me to compel characters more often?

7. What kind of situations/scenarios are good to let a knowledge focused character shine? One who doesn't have social/battle skills (he's a true believer). Getting information is usually resolved in a single roll while conflicts get much more screen time.

8. I have followed the rules in YS about scaling the opposition. But even when the opposition is much stronger than my player's characters, they fly through conflicts without so much as a consequence on them. I don't get it, what am I doing wrong?

That's it, sorry for so many questions! I hope you guys understand!
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: InFerrumVeritas on July 07, 2013, 01:03:27 PM
WCV's popping in and out of the Nevernever at strip clubs and such would, IMO, be a temporary power gained by invoking their high concept or scene aspect.

Swift Transition only works for you. Worldwalker let's you open a portal that anyone reasonably close to can also use.  The difference is Swift Transition is something you can use without a skill roll and as often as you want.  Worldwalker requires a skill roll and is limited in the number of uses it has per scene. 

Neither is specifically better, but Worldwalker is more of a PC power.  It lets you bring your group and has limits which wouldn't really matter to NPCs.  Swift Transition looks to be designed as an NPC ability.  It works whenever, but only for one creature.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on July 07, 2013, 01:22:42 PM
Some random questions and situations I've been struggeling with that I hope someone can help me with. Don't worry about answering them all, if you can even answer a single one I'm a happy girl.

1. Are all Sidhe immortal?

2. Can Sidhe harm mortals without cause or connection, or are they not allowed like the Faerie Queens are not. And what about regular faeries like ogres and trolls.

3. Any ideas for non faerie-monsters that aren't vampires or ghouls?

4. When a manoever has been placed and the person who has been affected chooses to spend his action to remove it. Does he have to beat the difficulty of when it was placed, or does the person who placed it get to "defend" to keep the manoever in place.

5. How do you deal with the party splitting up, and one person entering a physical conflict away from the others. Physical conflict usually lasts pretty long, and the others will get bored waiting for it.

6. I've discovered that as a GM I'm struggeling with finding good compels during a session. I maybe compel each character once per session, and usually for something that isn't that cool to the story. Does anyone have tips for me to compel characters more often?

7. What kind of situations/scenarios are good to let a knowledge focused character shine? One who doesn't have social/battle skills (he's a true believer). Getting information is usually resolved in a single roll while conflicts get much more screen time.

8. I have followed the rules in YS about scaling the opposition. But even when the opposition is much stronger than my player's characters, they fly through conflicts without so much as a consequence on them. I don't get it, what am I doing wrong?

That's it, sorry for so many questions! I hope you guys understand!

1.  Dunno.  probably not?

2. I think the lower on the totem pole you are, the more you can interact.  In one of the short stories a troll told Dresden that he was allowed to eat a little girl because the accords allowed it.  But I don't think the whole Queen thing has anything to do with the accords.  Short answer: I dunno

3.  demons, outsiders,

4. Both.  They have to beat the value of the maneuver, but if it's reasonable that someone can defend, they are allowed to do so.  Take the higher value of the two as the target number to remove the aspect.

5.  Compel other players to join or do it in snippets.  Run an exchange or two of combat, then spend some time rping the other PC's.  I find this is a common problem any time the party splits up - combat or no.  I usually just rotate through the different pc's, ending their bit with something they have to think on so they can use that time to figure out their next move.

6.  I usually have one or two character compels ready per session.  Some major/minor plot stuff for each character.  The rest is based on City aspects or maneuvers from opposition or scene aspects.  If the room is dark, compel the hell out of your players so that the story reflects that fact.  This drives the fp economy, I feel, and keeps it interesting.  Sometimes character aspects come into play, but they're trickier depending on the situation and the character - so make sure you keep a list of all your players aspects

7. extended conflicts where the  target number is high and he needs several rolls to get shifts to succeed.  Or, for combat, Creating aspects in advance that he can tag in a combat.  I have a high scholarship character who uses his iphone to google everything from legends to the layouts of public buildings (since they're often publically available) and he racks up tonnes of useful aspects in advance of a fight.

8.  I dunno.  I'm bad at this stuff as well.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: InFerrumVeritas on July 07, 2013, 01:32:33 PM
Some random questions and situations I've been struggeling with that I hope someone can help me with. Don't worry about answering them all, if you can even answer a single one I'm a happy girl.

1. Are all Sidhe immortal?

2. Can Sidhe harm mortals without cause or connection, or are they not allowed like the Faerie Queens are not. And what about regular faeries like ogres and trolls.

3. Any ideas for non faerie-monsters that aren't vampires or ghouls?

4. When a manoever has been placed and the person who has been affected chooses to spend his action to remove it. Does he have to beat the difficulty of when it was placed, or does the person who placed it get to "defend" to keep the manoever in place.

5. How do you deal with the party splitting up, and one person entering a physical conflict away from the others. Physical conflict usually lasts pretty long, and the others will get bored waiting for it.

6. I've discovered that as a GM I'm struggeling with finding good compels during a session. I maybe compel each character once per session, and usually for something that isn't that cool to the story. Does anyone have tips for me to compel characters more often?

7. What kind of situations/scenarios are good to let a knowledge focused character shine? One who doesn't have social/battle skills (he's a true believer). Getting information is usually resolved in a single roll while conflicts get much more screen time.

8. I have followed the rules in YS about scaling the opposition. But even when the opposition is much stronger than my player's characters, they fly through conflicts without so much as a consequence on them. I don't get it, what am I doing wrong?

That's it, sorry for so many questions! I hope you guys understand!

1. Close enough to it that it doesn't matter if ageing is involved.  They can be killed though.
2. They're like the Queens, otherwise there would be no reason for the Knights.  They could just order a lesser Sidhe to do it.  This is not directly stated in the cannon as far as I can tell, however.  Regular fairies are tougher to say.  The Gruffs attack Michael's children, Malks attack everything, etc. so I'd probably say that they don't in cannon.  Or that minor reasons are commonplace enough that they might as well not.
3. I pull a lot from Greek myths in my game, with hydras, chimeras, etc.  You've also got Demons, ghosts, sasquaches, wedingos, chupachabras, and basically anything you've ever heard of in folklore, mythology, or urban legends.
4. I just have them have to meet the difficulty which it was placed at.  I like to eliminate as many extra dice rolls as I can to speed things up.
5. I switch scenes every couple turns.  So do a couple exchanges, then cut to what the rest of the group is doing, then cut back.  Kind of like a comic book or movie.
6. I don't have any advice for this.  Sorry.
7.  That's a tough one.  Generally I'd say make getting information more than a single skill roll.  Have a series of challenges that aren't strictly pass/fail but instead sway the overall outcome.  Example:  I want to know about this fairy.  One bit of research could be about the general abilities of this type of fairy, strengths and weaknesses, etc.  The other could be for information about this specific fairy or group, and include motivations or personality (Aspects), and finally I could research individuals who have come in contact with this fairy and their families.  These would use different skills (Lore, Contacts, Investigate, and Scholarship), or could use the same skill to create/discover different aspects which I could use to my advantage.  In combat, I let the amount of info they discover exist as aspects (so a Fair roll could generate one aspect, a Superb roll 2, etc) whose free tags can be used buy that individual or passed to the group.
8.  Refresh doesn't matter.  It's about potential combat skill.  If my group averages Fantastic attacks and defenses, then I'll need about the same number of creatures at around Superb to give them a combat they will win but will challenge them.  A smaller number of creatures at the same level will do about the same.  A good deal more two steps lower will be a bit more challenging, but unlikely to inflict harm unless they're using actions to help each other (maneuvers to make a couple really good attacks rather than several weak ones).  It's probably a mix of tactics and numbers that are causing this problem.  I had it too when I started.  I just made combats harder and always left an out if I screwed up.  Eventually you get a feel for it.  Extra stress boxes help if they're getting killed too early, as does having your monsters take consequences.  Avoid having the party going up against 1-2 big bads.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Troy on July 07, 2013, 05:23:41 PM
What's the least amount of time it takes to cast a ritual using Thaumaturgy?

I brought up this question here (http://www.ragnarok.gamingsandbox.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=110&start=10#p915) and I'm satisfied with the answer, but wanted to get veteran players' take on the question. Looking for more insight, I guess. I adore crowdsourcing brains.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: UmbraLux on July 07, 2013, 05:42:00 PM
What's the least amount of time it takes to cast a ritual using Thaumaturgy?
Probably a scene...which isn't very exact. 

How are you defining time?  Scenes and exchanges within the game?  Real world minutes and hours?  Or time taken in the emergent narrative?

Thaumaturgy relies heavily on Declarations.  They often take no time from a current scene which really leaves the number of exchanges it takes to draw and control power as your 'current game time' minimum.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Haru on July 07, 2013, 06:15:19 PM
I'm going to go with "As long as it takes". Which is about the best and the worst answer I could give, I assume.

Let me elaborate. The time it takes to cast a spell is not always an important factor. If you've got the afternoon off, it doesn't really matter if the spell takes 2 seconds, minutes or hours, you'll have easily finished it in the time you have.

For casting a spell when you are under pressure, there are already rules for that. Just gather the shifts you need over the course of a few exchanges, and as long as you aren't interrupted or fudge up the roll, your spell works as planned.

For the SK spell you talk about in your link, the casting process doesn't even have to be part of the equation. The GM compels the "mind fog" scene aspect on Murphy and Harry. Murphy's player doesn't want to go to lala land, so she decides to buy the compel off. The GM asks her how that happens, and she says "Well, can't our wizard here do something?", and they decide that is a good idea. Harry's player doesn't have that many fate points to spare, so he accepts the compel. He'll still be able to fight against the mind fog invading him, but at times, that's going to take his full concentration, so he'll be way less effective in the ensuing conflict. Hell, he might even do something stupid like throwing marbles on the floor in order to stop an ogre.

The things that take time for any thaumaturgy spell is the preparation. Getting the right ingredients can be a session on its own, if you want it to be. Preparing the circle, making arcane calculations, ritual cleansing, meditating and what have you all (can) take time. But it always depends on what kind of spell you have, too. For Harry, it makes sense to have a quick tracking spell, that's his bread and butter, so he can do a spell like that with a rough chalk circle and a piece of string. Other wizards might need a lot more to do that, but they can make a tree grow with just an effort of will, for example.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Troy on July 08, 2013, 02:22:38 PM
I'm going to go with "As long as it takes". Which is about the best and the worst answer I could give, I assume.

Let me elaborate. The time it takes to cast a spell is not always an important factor. If you've got the afternoon off, it doesn't really matter if the spell takes 2 seconds, minutes or hours, you'll have easily finished it in the time you have.

For casting a spell when you are under pressure, there are already rules for that. Just gather the shifts you need over the course of a few exchanges, and as long as you aren't interrupted or fudge up the roll, your spell works as planned.

For the SK spell you talk about in your link, the casting process doesn't even have to be part of the equation. The GM compels the "mind fog" scene aspect on Murphy and Harry. Murphy's player doesn't want to go to lala land, so she decides to buy the compel off. The GM asks her how that happens, and she says "Well, can't our wizard here do something?", and they decide that is a good idea. Harry's player doesn't have that many fate points to spare, so he accepts the compel. He'll still be able to fight against the mind fog invading him, but at times, that's going to take his full concentration, so he'll be way less effective in the ensuing conflict. Hell, he might even do something stupid like throwing marbles on the floor in order to stop an ogre.

The things that take time for any thaumaturgy spell is the preparation. Getting the right ingredients can be a session on its own, if you want it to be. Preparing the circle, making arcane calculations, ritual cleansing, meditating and what have you all (can) take time. But it always depends on what kind of spell you have, too. For Harry, it makes sense to have a quick tracking spell, that's his bread and butter, so he can do a spell like that with a rough chalk circle and a piece of string. Other wizards might need a lot more to do that, but they can make a tree grow with just an effort of will, for example.

Interesting. What about the same scene in Summer Knight Harry considered escaping via a portal to the Nevernever. If that were an in-game situation that sort of ritual would not have taken longer than the exchanges needed to summon up the power to do that?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Haru on July 08, 2013, 02:48:15 PM
Well, it depends on how you run it. If it is like I said above, a compel for both players, and both players decide to buy out of the compel, the escape to the nevernever could just be the way you narrate the buy out. Or they don't buy out but rephrase the compel so that they escape to the nevernever, where the really nasty surprise waits. Again, no roll required, it just happens as part of the agreement of the compel.

Or, if there is no compel involved, you could do it as a cat and mouse contest. Both parties roll a number of times (say 3 for this example), and whoever has more shifts at the end wins the contest. If Harry and Murphy win, they escape to the nevernever. If the Winter agents win, Harry and Murphy don't have to be caught, but they could be forced to fight, because Harry wasn't quick enough to open the door. Or he managed to open the door, but they weren't able to make it through and are now cut off from the opening. The next scene, they have to fight their way to the opening through their opponents.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: InFerrumVeritas on July 08, 2013, 02:48:41 PM
Time Increments extrapolated from RAW:
At best, a ritual takes a few minutes to set up.  Obviously rituals can take hours, etc, but you asked for the shortest period of time.
An exchange is likely "a few moments" to "half a minute" in most combat scenarios.  We'll use "half a minute" because it makes the numbers easier.

If a character wants to cast a ritual during combat, I increase the complexity by 2 because "half a minute" is two steps higher on the time chart than "a few minutes".  This is only to set up the ritual (and requires no roll).  Any maneuvers they need to take to increase their complexity take an exchange. 
When it comes to summoning power, each time they have to roll to control the power is one exchange.

This was the QAD system I've come up with for my games, as thaumaturgy in combat has come up a surprising amount.  If they don't want to increase the complexity, I have it take 3 exchanges to set up the ritual (+1 for each point needed, essentially, although my players haven't caught on to that). 

Really, having it cost a potion slot and happen in one exchange is a more efficient method, mechanically.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Troy on July 11, 2013, 10:02:26 PM
When you cast an Evocation, you take one mental stress. When you bump the power up beyond your Conviction, you take one mental stress for every shift over your Conviction. So, if you have Conviction 3 and you want to summon up Weapon:4 for your attack, that's 2 Mental Stress.

When you mark off your Stress box does it mark off two boxes or just the 2nd box?

Would it look like this?
[X][X]

or like this?
[ ][X]

Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Wordmaker on July 11, 2013, 10:07:51 PM
The second. With all kinds of stress, you fill a single box at a time, no matter how high.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Troy on July 15, 2013, 03:46:39 PM
Here's a question we've been bandying around in my circle...

What's the advantage of  carrying an enchanted item(s) over a potion(s)? In other words, why wouldn't you just have some Potion Slots that you can fill each session with whatever you'd like?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Mr. Death on July 15, 2013, 04:11:43 PM
Here's a question we've been bandying around in my circle...

What's the advantage of  carrying an enchanted item(s) over a potion(s)? In other words, why wouldn't you just have some Potion Slots that you can fill each session with whatever you'd like?
Potions take time and resources each time you want to make them, while an enchanted item has to be recharged.

It's the difference between buying more ammo for a gun and having to build a new gun from scratch every time you wanted to shoot someone.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Troy on July 15, 2013, 04:39:47 PM
Potions take time and resources each time you want to make them, while an enchanted item has to be recharged.

It's the difference between buying more ammo for a gun and having to build a new gun from scratch every time you wanted to shoot someone.

The way it's presented in the book, it doesn't seem like you have to do much of that sort of thing unless you are telling that part of the story. The way I read it, we begin a session and I state I have potions X, Y, Z on me. Also, I can spent a Fate Point and have potion X on me without having stated it beforehand, or do the same thing with a successful declaration on a Lore roll. Is that not how it works?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on July 15, 2013, 04:51:49 PM
Yes, you are correct
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: cold_breaker on July 15, 2013, 04:55:31 PM
The way it's presented in the book, it doesn't seem like you have to do much of that sort of thing unless you are telling that part of the story. The way I read it, we begin a session and I state I have potions X, Y, Z on me. Also, I can spent a Fate Point and have potion X on me without having stated it beforehand, or do the same thing with a successful declaration on a Lore roll. Is that not how it works?

Yes, and no. You're glossing over the hard bits.

The whole point of keeping slots open for potions is essentially to have variable enchanted items that you can use to make the right tool for the circumstances. If you start out with X,Y, and Z potions then you effectively give that advantage up. So, no real advantage or disadvantage to doing that I suppose, short of being able to change them from one story to the next.

As for declarations? Well, you've glossed over the key word there: successfully. The declaration needs to succeed - which means that it has to make sense. You can't just coincidentally have a climbing potion when you're surprised with a mountian trek in the middle of an adventure.

Essentially, potion slots give you an advantage when you have time to think ahead. If they're played any other way, you're effectively munchkining as far as I'm concerned.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: GryMor on July 15, 2013, 05:22:14 PM
Yes, and no. You're glossing over the hard bits.

The whole point of keeping slots open for potions is essentially to have variable enchanted items that you can use to make the right tool for the circumstances. If you start out with X,Y, and Z potions then you effectively give that advantage up. So, no real advantage or disadvantage to doing that I suppose, short of being able to change them from one story to the next.

As for declarations? Well, you've glossed over the key word there: successfully. The declaration needs to succeed - which means that it has to make sense. You can't just coincidentally have a climbing potion when you're surprised with a mountian trek in the middle of an adventure.

Essentially, potion slots give you an advantage when you have time to think ahead. If they're played any other way, you're effectively munchkining as far as I'm concerned.

Open potion slots allow the CHARACTER to think ahead. This is represented by a successful Lore declaration (either roll or fate point) at the time of use If you actually have time to whip something up, you don't need the declaration at all. This is the 'deceleration as flashback' and achronal narrative aspect of Fate being used to maximal dramatic effect.

Also, it helps if you can see the future and have aspects like 'Crazy Prepared'
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Tedronai on July 15, 2013, 05:40:17 PM
Conventional Enchanted Items can be used beyond the uses paid for via enchanted item slots, specializations, and foci by spending a point of mental stress.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Mr. Death on July 15, 2013, 06:12:25 PM
Open potion slots allow the CHARACTER to think ahead. This is represented by a successful Lore declaration (either roll or fate point) at the time of use If you actually have time to whip something up, you don't need the declaration at all. This is the 'deceleration as flashback' and achronal narrative aspect of Fate being used to maximal dramatic effect.

Also, it helps if you can see the future and have aspects like 'Crazy Prepared'
It still has to make sense, though--the 'new potions every session' thing assumes time passing between sessions for the potions to be made.

Say a session ends with the wizard having his potion slots filled up with X, Y, and Z potion. If the next session begins five minutes later in-universe, then they can't have changed to A, B, and C potion. Likewise, if a session ends with said wizard having established that he's out of potions, the next one can't have his stock refilled unless enough time has passed.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Wordmaker on July 15, 2013, 06:47:02 PM
I run pretty loose with the potions-crafter in my current campaign. I let him make declarations for potions he needs. I see it as being similar to the rule in Feng Shui where a character with the Gadgets skill can not only build items in-play, but also roll to have "just the thing" when a particular situation arises.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Haru on July 15, 2013, 06:59:47 PM
Potions vs. enchanted items is, as some already said, a decision between versatility and security. Enchanted items always work. And depending on how good you are at making them, they will work a lot better than your average evocation for about the same cost. A potion, even if you have it prepared explicitly, will be gone after the deed, and there is nothing you can do about it. If you don't have it prepared, you might not get to use it at all.

Now for some things, potions make sense. A spell to open a specific door, for example, you won't use that again, and you probably don't have much time to create it anyway. Both factors against the enchanted item but for the potion. And this works very well retroactively.

I won't let somebody roll on a potion or spend a fate point, if it makes sense they'd have prepared something like this. Water breathing potion for an adventure on the sea? Sure. If it's something where I have difficulty believing that the character would have prepared something like this, I let him roll, depending on how improbable I feel his potion is. If I think that there is no chance in hell he would have prepared himself for something this obscure, I'll let him spend a fate point for it. That way it stays within what the character would do, but if he really wants to, he can be lucky and have just what he needs. Maybe he took the potion he wanted by mistake, while reaching for another one.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: McNulty on July 15, 2013, 07:06:36 PM
A question came up in my group regarding the potions.. how long does it take to concoct one? The RAW is bit vague on the subject (on purpose I think), and my take is that it doesn't usually matter, but there can be occasions when timing is be crucial. Any good rule of thumb for these?

Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Wordmaker on July 15, 2013, 07:10:55 PM
If you pass the declaration, no time at all. For concocting specific potions in-play, I usually say it takes a scene to make them.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Mr. Death on July 15, 2013, 07:11:58 PM
I think it takes a couple hours of simmering, according to the novels. Storm Front goes into detail on what making them entails.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: cold_breaker on July 15, 2013, 07:21:26 PM
A question came up in my group regarding the potions.. how long does it take to concoct one? The RAW is bit vague on the subject (on purpose I think), and my take is that it doesn't usually matter, but there can be occasions when timing is be crucial. Any good rule of thumb for these?

Not sure if it's RAW, but I'd stick by the Thaumaturgy rules for simply casting the potions effect as a spell. So, probably not long considering how week the spell would be if you cast it the long way around.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: GryMor on July 16, 2013, 02:22:08 AM
I think it takes a couple hours of simmering, according to the novels. Storm Front goes into detail on what making them entails.

My mechanical interpretation of that was Harry buffing his potions via tagging at the point of creation. There are occasions where he whips up a (DFRPG mechanical) potion in a shorter period of time.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Wordmaker on July 16, 2013, 05:59:02 AM
Or it was Harry's player (Jim  ;)) figuring that he might need a potion or two for later and, so he wouldn't have to worry about the declaration later, decided to outright describe making them.

And the GM then used a compel to force Harry to make a love potion for Bob, which ended up causing particular problems later...
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: InFerrumVeritas on July 16, 2013, 01:42:41 PM
I know it was said, but it may have gotten lost if you were just reading about how difficult declarations should be.

Enchanted items can be used an additional time for one point of mental stress.  This means that you can probably squeeze a few uses out of them every scene if needed (in addition to the /session uses).  This is a HUGE advantage over potions.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Troy on July 17, 2013, 03:27:39 PM
I know that that Rote Spells in the book are to be taken with a grain of salt. I do, however, have a question about something they introduce to the game.

Magic dictates how the target of the spell Defends against the attack or maneuver. Is that a feature or a bug?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Mr. Death on July 17, 2013, 03:59:58 PM
I know that that Rote Spells in the book are to be taken with a grain of salt. I do, however, have a question about something they introduce to the game.

Magic dictates how the target of the spell Defends against the attack or maneuver. Is that a feature or a bug?
The nature of any attack or action, I feel, dictates how the target can defend against it.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Haru on July 17, 2013, 04:01:04 PM
It's a feature. Though, as you say, to be taken with a grain of salt.

The thing is, depending on how I describe my spell, some skills to defend against them make sense, others don't. A fireball can be dodged or miss, because I move a lot in a fight, so it makes sense to defend with athletics. If I do a wind attack causing a vacuum in your lungs, then you can't really dodge that, it happens inside you. Endurance as the defense skill makes more sense here.
And so forth.

The same should actually go for all actions, not just magic. At the same time, there should be some leeway for the defender to describe why another skill might be employed. Instead of endurance, I could use discipline to fight through the pain.

However, the choice of skills should not be made in a vacuum. You should always have a grasp on how your character employs his skills, and that in return should limit what he does and how he might limit his opponents defensive actions.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: UmbraLux on July 17, 2013, 06:15:04 PM
I know that that Rote Spells in the book are to be taken with a grain of salt. I do, however, have a question about something they introduce to the game.

Magic dictates how the target of the spell Defends against the attack or maneuver. Is that a feature or a bug?
Neither, it's false.  Or at least a major assumption made from flimsy evidence.

The narrative is what shapes the defense. 

Rote spells only show half the narrative - that defense may well be changed if / when the defender is able to modify the narrative.  Showing a default doesn't mean it becomes the "one true way".  ;)
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Troy on July 18, 2013, 12:46:38 AM
So, all Defense rolls are "default" or suggestions? Although, situations vary and, if appropriate, you can defend using whatever makes sense? That makes sense to me.

Are there ever situations wherein the default defense would not be allowed?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: UmbraLux on July 18, 2013, 01:21:06 AM
The skill descriptions define how they're used...so it depends on context.  Someone shoots at you - you probably dodge with Athletics.  But what if you're driving a car?  Athletics no longer makes sense.  Action instigates the reaction, it will almost always have the primary say in what gets used simply because it is proactive.  But, sometimes, you can add a twist to the narrative and change things...
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Quantus on July 18, 2013, 07:28:12 PM
The skill descriptions define how they're used...so it depends on context.  Someone shoots at you - you probably dodge with Athletics.  But what if you're driving a car?  Athletics no longer makes sense.  Action instigates the reaction, it will almost always have the primary say in what gets used simply because it is proactive.  But, sometimes, you can add a twist to the narrative and change things...
Well, it makes a little sense in that Athletics covers most of your reaction time and hand-eye coordination.  But if your driving skill isnt up to the task you would just end up over-correcting and probably crashing or something.  In that circumstance Id probably make you use whichever was the weaker of the two, viewing it as the skill Bottle-neck, so to speak. 
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: InFerrumVeritas on July 18, 2013, 09:28:52 PM
Well, it makes a little sense in that Athletics covers most of your reaction time and hand-eye coordination.  But if your driving skill isnt up to the task you would just end up over-correcting and probably crashing or something.  In that circumstance Id probably make you use whichever was the weaker of the two, viewing it as the skill Bottle-neck, so to speak.

I'd just have it restrict.  That way you get to duck or whatever.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: cold_breaker on July 19, 2013, 04:38:16 PM
Eh, depends on their wording of the defense. If they say they're going to drive in such a way to make the car difficult to hit, go for a driving roll. If they're going to sink down in their seat and continue driving, make it a dodge restricted by a driving roll.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: UmbraLux on July 19, 2013, 06:12:41 PM
Agreed. 

The defaults are there because they are common but don't fear changing the default when it makes sense.  Locking ourselves into a single method of reacting gets old. 
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: InFerrumVeritas on July 20, 2013, 03:32:47 PM
Agreed. 

The defaults are there because they are common but don't fear changing the default when it makes sense.  Locking ourselves into a single method of reacting gets old.

I hear what you're saying, but I will always allow the player to defend with the default skill (although possibly restricted by circumstances).  If another skill is appropriate, I'll let them use that instead if they wish (or will compel them to use that instead).  But I've found that "pick the skill you want them to defend with" generally leads to players trying to game the system more than I like. 

If a player has a stunt that lets them defend with a different skill, this is a pretty cheesy way to negate that stunt.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Troy on July 30, 2013, 06:33:31 AM
Evocation & Thaumaturgy: do the bonuses from specializations and focus items apply prior to the roll or after it?

If I need a FAIR roll to control the power of my spell and my bonus is +3 power, do I need a SUPERB roll to control my spell? Or would the fair roll do, and then my spell had 5 shifts of power?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Cadd on July 30, 2013, 08:16:59 AM
You always count based on the sum of skill+dice+modifiers (like invocations), so I suppose that would be "before" in your description. The only thing a Power bonus does is give you higher effective Conviction, it sets the amount of power you can use without taking extra stress higher.

The way I read it is:

So really your example skips a step in the beginning. If you "need a FAIR roll to control the power of my spell" you have already decided on drawing only 2 shifts of power for the spell.
If you instead look at "How much power can I draw for only 1 Mental Stress" you'll add your Conviction+Power bonus and then ask yourself "Do I want to try to control this much, or do I want to set the spell lower to be safer?"
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Troy on July 30, 2013, 01:01:57 PM
You always count based on the sum of skill+dice+modifiers (like invocations), so I suppose that would be "before" in your description. The only thing a Power bonus does is give you higher effective Conviction, it sets the amount of power you can use without taking extra stress higher.

I can understand that, but Invoking an Aspect can be done after the fact. I roll Fair, I want better, I Invoke an Aspect. My roll becomes Great.

Bonuses for Thaumaturgy and Evocation do not work this way, then?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Cadd on July 30, 2013, 03:22:32 PM
I'm saying it doesn't matter when you add something, as the Power part is a done deal before any dice hit the table.

You decide on a power amount, and calculate how much stress that will cost. The Power you draw can be absolutely any number you want. If however it exceeds your Conviction + Power (+ invokes, it's not 100% clear if the rules allow invoking aspects here, but I think most allow) it costs more than the single mental stress.

After that is complete, and you have decided how much power you draw (whether or not that exceeds your "almost effortless" limit), then you try to control that amount of power.


You have to look at the spellcasting as two separate "rolls", even though you only actually roll dice for one of them. First you set the power, then you control it. Once you move to trying to control the power, the amount is set and won't change.

Evocation example:
I have Good Conviction, Fair Discipline, a Power bonus of +3 and a Control bonus of +2.
I decide to draw 7 shifts of power. This exceeds my Conviction (3) + Power bonus (3) by 1, so it will cost 2 Mental stress.
Then I have to control the 7 shifts. My Discipline (2) + Control bonus (2) adds up to 4. I still need 3 more from the dice and invokes, so I'd better have a few FP saved up.

For thaumaturgy, the only real difference is that the stress cost is one lower, since you don't pay anything up to you "effortless" level.

Does that clear it up?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Troy on July 31, 2013, 11:51:22 AM
Yes. Thank you.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Troy on August 09, 2013, 01:14:36 PM
Is there a reason why the rules for doing a Grapple are different from all the other rules involving Maneuvers and Blocks? Would it disrupt things to make it work like everything else?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on August 09, 2013, 02:58:18 PM
I don't feel grapples deviate much from regular rules.

Blocks end when it makes sense for them to end(except for spellcasting).  The same goes with grapples.  It also makes sense to have a rule-set to prevent people from sprinting or moving zones.  They're pretty basic compared to grapple rules I've seen in other systems.

How would you do it?  Just make it a maneuver: "grappled"?

Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Haru on August 09, 2013, 04:05:25 PM
Well, grapples add a few things you wouldn't be able to do otherwise. You can inflict stress as a supplemental action, which means you can easily wear down someone, while they can do nothing against it, because they are blocked. And you can move them around, something that's not usually possible as well.

But you could take a lesson from Fate Core and introduce "active opposition". Instead of a block, you put up the aspect "grappled" (or something more descriptive) on the target, and then you can roll against any action the target is trying to attempt, as long as the aspect is in place. If you win the roll, the target can not act. Of course he can attempt to remove the aspect as his action, as well.
On the other hand, the grappled aspect can cut both ways, and the grappled could use it as justification to stop you from doing things as well, since you have to keep most of your focus on your target, unless you already took him out.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Troy on August 09, 2013, 04:35:40 PM
I don't feel grapples deviate much from regular rules.

Blocks end when it makes sense for them to end(except for spellcasting).  The same goes with grapples.  It also makes sense to have a rule-set to prevent people from sprinting or moving zones.  They're pretty basic compared to grapple rules I've seen in other systems.

How would you do it?  Just make it a maneuver: "grappled"?

I thought Blocks had to be maintained, too?

And I like doing things the Fate Core way, but it's hard to convince my compatriots.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on August 09, 2013, 05:07:10 PM
They do, every exchange.  So I don't really see how a grapple is that much different.  The only difference is that the advantages and disadvantages of a grapple are maintained (such as not being able to sprint or move zones and the grappler being able to add aspects or do damage every exchange) each round unless the victim can break the block in a way that justifies breaking the grapple.

The person putting up the block still has to re-roll every exchange just like a regular block.

I haven't read Fate Core...so I can't really compare.

My biggest complaint about grapple rules is they are too simlistic.  I like the idea of both people in the grapple being able to hurt the other.  The way the rules are are a bit one sided.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: JDK002 on August 09, 2013, 05:37:06 PM
They do, every exchange.  So I don't really see how a grapple is that much different.  The only difference is that the advantages and disadvantages of a grapple are maintained (such as not being able to sprint or move zones and the grappler being able to add aspects or do damage every exchange) each round unless the victim can break the block in a way that justifies breaking the grapple.

The person putting up the block still has to re-roll every exchange just like a regular block.

I haven't read Fate Core...so I can't really compare.

My biggest complaint about grapple rules is they are too simlistic.  I like the idea of both people in the grapple being able to hurt the other.  The way the rules are are a bit one sided.
You could use the rules as is to make that possible I believe.  Instead of trying to break the grapple, the you could instead set up your own maneuver to initiate a grapple AGAINST the person holding you.  Thus kind of causing both characters to be in a grapple with each other.  This could cause an interesting tug of war of the characters dragging each other around, doing damage, or trying to break the others grapple before their own gets broken.  It would also mean neither could just release the grapple without being stuck in the others grapple.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on August 09, 2013, 06:01:36 PM
Yeah, except you can't block a block...that's kind of the weird thing about it...
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Sanctaphrax on August 10, 2013, 06:54:32 AM
Pretty sure you can block a block.

Is there a reason why the rules for doing a Grapple are different from all the other rules involving Maneuvers and Blocks? Would it disrupt things to make it work like everything else?

Making grapples work like everything else would mess with dedicated wrestler characters and people who have Strength Powers. Plus it'd remove the ability to force movement on an opponent, and the ability to gradually defeat them while blocking their actions.

So yes, it would disrupt things. Not hugely, though.

FWIW, I don't much like the Fate Core approach to blocks.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Troy on August 10, 2013, 01:55:16 PM
Is it because of the extra options a Grapple provides that you're required to Tag or Invoke an Aspect for "permission" to initiate one?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Sanctaphrax on August 10, 2013, 07:29:24 PM
It's probably the main reason. But I can't read the minds of the writers, so...well, you'd have to ask them for a proper answer.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Troy on August 11, 2013, 12:56:18 PM
Here's what we're thinking about doing when it comes to grappling. It deviates from the book but I'm not 100% confident that this sort of interpretation won't disrupt something I haven't foreseen yet.

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on August 11, 2013, 01:07:54 PM
I might set it up as a mini-combat:

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Sanctaphrax on August 11, 2013, 09:54:56 PM
I would like to run a Grapple like this:

Colossus and Wolverine are in the thick of a training scenario in the Danger Room. The exercise sounded simple enough: capture the Wolverine and bring him back to base. After spending more than twelve hourse engaged in guerilla hand-to-hand combat with the clawed canuck, Colossus finally sees Logan starting to sweat, starting to tire. Indefatiguable, Colossus has no problem spending all night engaged in grueling rigorous combat and chases. Seeing his opportunity to strike, Colossus's player makes his move and rolls Physique to manuever against Wolverine. The roll is Fantastic (+6) and the Aspect Trapped In a Bear Hug[/i] is applied to Wolverine! Now if Wolverine wants to take any action beyond what is reasonable whilst Trapped In a Bear Hug he must score greater than Fantastic (+6) on his roll. Otherwise, he remains trapped and Colossus can carry him back to the base and reign victorious in this training scenario.

Definitely not a good idea.

Normally blocks only last one round. You're letting this one last as long as the Aspect does, and throwing in a free tag as you do so. This combines the strengths of a DFRPG block with the strengths of a Fate Core "block" to create a single super-duper strong action.

You'd be a fool to make normal maneuvers, with this sort of option available.

Inflicting Stress/Attacking While Grappled
Colossus gets a hold of Wolverine, placing the Trapped In a Bear Hug[/i] Aspect on him. The Russian decides he wants to choke Wolverine out or something. So, he rolls Physique to attack Wolverine and he can Invoke the Trapped In a Bear Hug[/i] for +2 on his roll. Wolverine can defend using Physique or Fight, or anything else the player might suggest that seems appropriate. This would represent the struggle and difficulty of trying to choke Wolverine out.

I think this idea has potential.

Moving Across Zones While Grappled[/u]
By the book, you roll Physique -1 and freely move one zone.
Our way, I think that the victim of the Grapple opposes the movement, right? So, you roll Physique to drag the person wherever you want and the victim tries to stop you by resisting (Physique or Fight?) or distraction (Deceit or Intimidation?) or by any other means that makes sense, right? If the attacker succeeds, you move one zone. If the defends succeeds you don't get to move at all. Hence, why choking someone out is an option.

If I were you, and I wanted to remove the special rules for grappling, I'd create a general set of forced movement rules. Then grapplers could use them like everyone else.

Maneuvering[/u]
This one seems pretty straight forward.
By the book: roll Physique -1, if successful your Maneuver is applied.

Not quite.

By the book, the maneuver is applied automatically. Your roll need not succeed. Which is good, because your roll is a block roll, and blocks never succeed or fail.

But you can't start maneuvering until you've held someone for at least a turn, since you can't take a supplemental grapple action the turn you establish the grapple.

Someone initiates a grapple by tagging an aspect.

Does this take an action? If not, when can you do it?

Now both characters are subject to "grappling" which can be tagged/invoked by anyone in the combat.

Who gets the free tags?

Apart from those issues, I think this idea could work. Probably not better than what we have in canon, but probably not worse either.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on August 11, 2013, 10:19:06 PM
Does this take an action? If not, when can you do it?

Who gets the free tags?

Apart from those issues, I think this idea could work. Probably not better than what we have in canon, but probably not worse either.

#taking an action initiating the grapple
Just like how it works currently: you just tag the aspect then perform the grapple/block.

The difference with this method is you can do more than just block (since that's done automatically), you can do a maneuver or attack etc...

Although, now I'm seeing how this method can be abused.  If you have a high Might+Supernatural STR, you could tag an aspect and set up an Epic block on a wizard without even having to roll dice.  Granted, this block doesn't impede/block the wizards ability to blast you...so maybe that's the balancing factor...dunno.

#Free tags:
Anyone NOT in the grapple, I'd think?  I'd be happy to do away with this, but I just figured there's lot of things that people outside the grapple could do to people who are stuck in a grapple.  I just figured it'd be easiest to model the "disadvantage" of being locked in a grapple is by using an aspect.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Sanctaphrax on August 12, 2013, 04:43:01 AM
#taking an action initiating the grapple
Just like how it works currently: you just tag the aspect then perform the grapple/block.

The difference with this method is you can do more than just block (since that's done automatically), you can do a maneuver or attack etc...

So it's part of your action, but it doesn't use up your action.

That's more powerful than what's in canon. Might be abusable.

Although, now I'm seeing how this method can be abused.  If you have a high Might+Supernatural STR, you could tag an aspect and set up an Epic block on a wizard without even having to roll dice.  Granted, this block doesn't impede/block the wizards ability to blast you...so maybe that's the balancing factor...dunno.

I don't think that's too terrible. You can do something similar in canon, after all.

#Free tags:
Anyone NOT in the grapple, I'd think?  I'd be happy to do away with this, but I just figured there's lot of things that people outside the grapple could do to people who are stuck in a grapple.  I just figured it'd be easiest to model the "disadvantage" of being locked in a grapple is by using an aspect.

I don't think that's a good idea. Tags go away when used, so if opposing characters both have access to one then it creates a perverse incentive for each character to use the tags before their opponents can.

I suggest making the Aspects non-taggable. People could still Invoke them, of course.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Dracorex on August 16, 2013, 06:55:38 AM
Quick question: If I have a wizard who's a better item-craftsman make an enchanted object for his apprentice's use, the item is -1 strength and uses the same number of slots as it would have for the maker, and that's all, right?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on August 16, 2013, 12:03:46 PM
Yes
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Sanctaphrax on August 17, 2013, 07:15:58 PM
Not sure exactly what you're asking.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Dr.FunLove on August 17, 2013, 07:22:18 PM
It would be -1 one if you didn't have a slot for it.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on August 17, 2013, 08:55:41 PM
It uses the creators slot even if someone else uses it and in order to do so the items power is dropped by -1
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Dr.FunLove on August 17, 2013, 09:40:49 PM
How many Enchanted Item slots must Luccio have then eh? Or are Warden swords just super special? If a person has a slot, that item should be able to fill that slot not the original creator.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on August 17, 2013, 09:52:03 PM
Those swords dont really follow any crafting rules so i ignore them.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Dr.FunLove on August 17, 2013, 09:54:47 PM
Or, one could make a slight adjustment that doesn't directly contravene the rules and thus they make sense? That's how I read YS278-282 anyway.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Sanctaphrax on August 17, 2013, 10:03:42 PM
Even if you let people use other people's items at full strength, the Warden swords still break the rules.

Anyway, the rules don't say anything one way or the other. It's up to the GM.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Dr.FunLove on August 17, 2013, 10:08:23 PM
@Sanctaphrax
#Warden Sword
Assuming the stats are right (I used the Luccio modeled in the Resource section) then the double effects are what are bought with the Item Slots - the strength and frequency of the item itself comes straight from Luccio. I guess one can say that having a multiple effect item is against the rules? Not sure about that right this second but that is how I would explain the Warden Sword based on the rules/what we know.

#Giving away Items
Agreed!
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Sanctaphrax on August 17, 2013, 10:11:57 PM
If each effect was purchased with a separate item slot, they'd each have their own pool of uses. They share the same pool.

I think the second slot was spent on the extra two uses.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Dr.FunLove on August 17, 2013, 10:14:35 PM
@Sanctaphrax
Well that very much depends on that statting of Luccio. Last time this came up in a thread, I looked at it what stats we have on the boards for her and it seemed to line up with my suggestion at the time. The only way I could explain them sharing the same frequency pool would be an attempt at balance on the writers part.

Anyway, as has been said often, it's a funky item.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Sanctaphrax on August 17, 2013, 10:21:32 PM
Not sure what Luccio's stats have to do with whether her swords follow the rules.

Unless you're saying she has some kind of special power that makes the Warden sword possible? There's an entry on the Sponsored Magic list that was intended to make that possible (Superior Crafting) but I don't think Deadmanwalking's Luccio has it.

The only way I could explain them sharing the same frequency pool would be an attempt at balance on the writers part.

That may have been the reason.

Regardless, the item isn't following the normal item rules. You can't explain it without invoking special item rules that aren't actually written in either book.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Dr.FunLove on August 17, 2013, 10:25:24 PM
@Sanctaphrax
Her Lore plus her crafting bonuses as justification for the strength/frequency of the effects. Two Item slots for each effect. That's how I would justify it based on normal rules. As you say though, there is still hinkiness. Got it? Good.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Sanctaphrax on August 18, 2013, 07:04:57 AM
I guess we're good.

But as you say, there's still hinkiness. So I'm not sure why you'd bother to try and justify anything under normal rules...rules-legality is kind of an all-or-nothing thing.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Dracorex on August 18, 2013, 12:48:58 PM
Clarification: The item strength/frequency/slots needed is using the maker's crafting stats. The person considered to possess the item is not the maker, as the maker crafted it for her.

Statement: Were the maker to borrow the item from her to use, he'd be the one taking the -1 strength penalty (as it's not actually his possession), and she'd be the one with the occupied slot (as the person who actually owns the item).

Query: Would you allow this setup? Impose any penalties? I require a more in-depth answer than "what does your GM say?", because I am the GM, wondering if this setup would be a little OP, and thus seeking additional opinions (my players can't help since every single one of them is new and working off the preorder pdf; I'm the one introducing them to DFRPG). Currently I'm having it as -1 strength, but occupying the owner's slot (the owner is also a wizard, so there's no issue on that front).
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Sanctaphrax on August 18, 2013, 09:15:58 PM
I wouldn't allow it.

First, because the -1 penalty to make an item usable by anyone applies even when the original owner is using the item.

Second, because sharing item slots is pretty abusable. Basically it gives every crafter in the group the crafting skills of the best crafter in the group, for free, as long as they spend downtime with the aforementioned best crafter.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Haru on August 18, 2013, 09:22:12 PM
There's always the good ol' bag o' tricks from the Custom Powers Master List:

BAG OF TRICKS [-1]
Description: For whatever reason, you have access to a few minor magical trinkets.
Skills affected: Contacts, Resources, Burglary, Lore.
Effects:
Enchanted Items. You have four potions, each with a strength equal to your Contacts, Resources, Burglary, or Lore skill. You may not increase their strength in any way. At the beginning of each session, you must declare which potions you have on hand.
More Trinkets [-1]. You have four additional potions. Furthermore, you may choose to leave potion slots open to be filled later with Declarations.

You can easily justify the items being from a wizard you know.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: PirateJack on August 18, 2013, 11:38:33 PM
For my game I've decided that Warden Swords are actually Items of Power, with a couple of custom powers attached to let them act as foci, counterspell enchantments and Unbreakable/Always Sharp. It makes more sense to me that since they're unique items created by a master craftswoman (and that she lost the ability despite having retained all her knowledge), that they wouldn't fit into the regular enchanted items rules.

EDIT: Of course I had to adjust the rules of IoPs slightly and make them cost -1 refresh, but screw it, they don't fit in the rules very easily in the first place.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: McNulty on September 03, 2014, 01:08:52 PM
So my players are in a night club run by a RCV and they are interviewing a couple of infectees. Of course the wizard wants to use the third eye when looking at them. What does he see (I have my own ideas of course but always nice to crowsource)?

On a parallel storyline they are involved with a demon that's been released from a long captivity. My twist is that the longer they wait to act, the stronger it gets. Their options are banishing or new imprisonment the entitiy but I'm still struggling to come up with the numbers of how difficult this would be. Our power level is waist deep, mind. Also am I correct in my thinking that banishing would be easier than bounding/imprisonment (to an object/place)..?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: PirateJack on September 03, 2014, 02:30:06 PM
So my players are in a night club run by a RCV and they are interviewing a couple of infectees. Of course the wizard wants to use the third eye when looking at them. What does he see (I have my own ideas of course but always nice to crowsource)?

These are the kind of moments I live for as a GM, though it's important to note that most Wizards interpret the Sight differently. Carlos hears Spanish guitar rhythms when he activates his Sight, for instance.

Red Court Infected are humans that have a parasite attached to them, feeding on their soul and pushing them to kill and drink the blood of another being. If we use Harry's Sight as a basis for this I'd go with something like   hideous bat-like creature latched on to the person's neck, feeding upon him, draining the colour from his spirit so that the blood flowing from the wound is all the more vibrant in contrast. Its taloned wings stretch around the person's face, clutching at his temples and driving the talons into his head. The man, though silent, appears to be murmuring to himself constantly. A moment's focus lets the Wizard hear the mumbles; "Kill them. Kill them all. Blood. Drink. Kill. Blood. Drink. Kill. Feast. Kill. Blood."

In the set up to this part of the scene I'd have made a point of noting the way he looks at certain people, maybe have the Wizard mistake the looks for lust instead of what they truly are. Red Court Infected usually don't stay like that for long if they don't have strong wills, too, so mentioning something along those lines would work as well. Perhaps an allusion to another addiction or having a battered spirit would give a bit of context for why the person became a half-vampire as well.

Soulgazes and the Sight are my two favourite parts of DFRPG because I get to really lay on the horror of what's going on.

Quote
On a parallel storyline they are involved with a demon that's been released from a long captivity. My twist is that the longer they wait to act, the stronger it gets. Their options are banishing or new imprisonment the entitiy but I'm still struggling to come up with the numbers of how difficult this would be. Our power level is waist deep, mind. Also am I correct in my thinking that banishing would be easier than bounding/imprisonment (to an object/place)..?

Banishing is usually done either by destroying the vessel the demon inhabits (i.e killing it) or with a thaumaturgic ritual. Naturally the latter needs a symbolic link strong enough to get the spell to target the demon, which generally means a Name or blood. That brings its own plot/problems to the fore, of course.

The difficulty for any ritual attempting to banish the demon would be a contest between it and the practitioner so it'd be Stress Track + Consequences + Roll (Max 4) + 1 to Take it Out. That's assuming the demon doesn't have any Fate Points to spend or a ward to hide behind though, which would raise the difficulty substantially.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: McNulty on September 10, 2014, 12:50:20 PM
this I'd go with something like   hideous bat-like creature latched on to the person's neck, feeding upon him, draining the colour from his spirit so that the blood flowing from the wound is all the more vibrant in contrast.

Big thanks, this was the sort of evocative comment I was looking for. ;)
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Quantus on September 10, 2014, 08:24:09 PM
These are the kind of moments I live for as a GM, though it's important to note that most Wizards interpret the Sight differently. Carlos hears Spanish guitar rhythms when he activates his Sight, for instance.

Red Court Infected are humans that have a parasite attached to them, feeding on their soul and pushing them to kill and drink the blood of another being. If we use Harry's Sight as a basis for this I'd go with something like   hideous bat-like creature latched on to the person's neck, feeding upon him, draining the colour from his spirit so that the blood flowing from the wound is all the more vibrant in contrast. Its taloned wings stretch around the person's face, clutching at his temples and driving the talons into his head. The man, though silent, appears to be murmuring to himself constantly. A moment's focus lets the Wizard hear the mumbles; "Kill them. Kill them all. Blood. Drink. Kill. Blood. Drink. Kill. Feast. Kill. Blood."

In the set up to this part of the scene I'd have made a point of noting the way he looks at certain people, maybe have the Wizard mistake the looks for lust instead of what they truly are. Red Court Infected usually don't stay like that for long if they don't have strong wills, too, so mentioning something along those lines would work as well. Perhaps an allusion to another addiction or having a battered spirit would give a bit of context for why the person became a half-vampire as well.
Thats pretty awesome!  I might add something to the imagery to note the fact that should he give into the beast it will completely destroy his Soul (as contrasted by, say, the Thomas Soulgaze that was very similar otherwise but didnt have that risk).  Perhaps add some sort of cliffs edge imagery to the setting, or maybe have the beast pulling his whole being in, so that every time it draws in blood, the spirit's hands and feat shrivel as his limbs retract inward a bit, as if he is an empty flesh-bag being drained.  You may also want to shift the mumbling to the Creature, depending on the level of control/resistance this particular Infected has going. 
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Jabberwocky on September 13, 2014, 08:36:29 AM
Well, according to the registration date I'm not a newbie but I don't post much so I will use this thread to ask a practical question myself. How long does it usually take for a new topic to be approved by the mods? I started one yesterday and it's still awaiting approval, which means nobody can see it. The moderator of the DFRPG section LCDarkwood hasn't been online since the 25 June 2013. Shall I wait some more or shall I PM somebody? Thanks a lot!
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Haru on September 13, 2014, 09:23:35 AM
All the mods can see them and react. Usually it happens pretty fast, but if all the mods are out partying, it might take a bit longer.
http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,41436.0.html
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Jabberwocky on September 13, 2014, 11:17:54 AM
Ok, thanks for the answer. Friday and Saturday are probably RL busy times :-) I'll wait.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Saracen on September 21, 2014, 06:07:00 PM
Hello everyone. I hope it's the correct thread to post this in. I'm new to the forum and to the game, and I have some questions:

1) Can supplemental actions follow the main action? Example: can I roll my Fists at -1 to attack, then move to an adjacent zone without rolling?

2) Can counterspells and... let's call them spell-prolonging spells be rote spells? Rote counterspells probably don't make much sense, but I'm curious anyway.

3) Can sponsored Thaumaturgy spells (with Evocation's methods and speed) be rote spells?

4) Do you consider acceptable making a stunt that gives a skill trapping a +3 while restricting its use? Example: would you allow  a stunt that reads "you get a +3 to Craftsmanship when building weapons (or possibly even just melee weapons)"?

Thanks in advance. Bye.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Haru on September 21, 2014, 06:36:28 PM
Hello everyone. I hope it's the correct thread to post this in. I'm new to the forum and to the game, and I have some questions:
Welcome. :)

Quote
1) Can supplemental actions follow the main action? Example: can I roll my Fists at -1 to attack, then move to an adjacent zone without rolling?
Sure. Though you should announce the supplemental action in advance. For adding a supplemental action after the roll, there's overflow (YS214).

Quote
2) Can counterspells and... let's call them spell-prolonging spells be rote spells? Rote counterspells probably don't make much sense, but I'm curious anyway.
Sure. Anything you can do with evocation can be a rote spell.
When it comes to spell prolonging spells, I usually allow for the same rote to be cast as the original spell, and have those shifts go towards duration instead. It's not exactly how rotes are described, but I feel like having an extra prolonging rote for each spell is kind of punishing. So if you have a shield rote, you can cast it once and use the same shield rote to prolong the shield for a number of exchanges equal to the power of the spell.
I would not, however, allow a rote that lets you prolong any spell.

Quote
3) Can sponsored Thaumaturgy spells (with Evocation's methods and speed) be rote spells?
Sure.

Quote
4) Do you consider acceptable making a stunt that gives a skill trapping a +3 while restricting its use? Example: would you allow  a stunt that reads "you get a +3 to Craftsmanship when building weapons (or possibly even just melee weapons)"?
Sure, if the limitation is narrow enough, you can increase the benefit. If it is or is not usually depends on the table and the campaign. Your example is something I don't really see played out, so I'm not really sure how it would apply in a game. People usually have the weapons they need, and if it is supposed to be a special one, it's usually enough to wrap a whole story around.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: PirateJack on September 21, 2014, 06:39:09 PM
1) Can supplemental actions follow the main action? Example: can I roll my Fists at -1 to attack, then move to an adjacent zone without rolling?

That's precisely it. If you take a speed power you can move 1/2/3 zones as a supplemental action without taking the -1 modifier to your main action as well.

Quote
2) Can counterspells and... let's call them spell-prolonging spells be rote spells? Rote counterspells probably don't make much sense, but I'm curious anyway.

I'm not sure what you mean here, but I don't see a reason why they can't.

Counterspells work by basically guessing the amount of power in an ongoing spell and then putting that much power or greater into your spell to stop it. If you have a rote counterspell with 4 power you could then use it successfully against any multiple round spell with 4 or less power behind it. You just wouldn't be able to scale the power if it's greater or lesser than 4. Counterspells aren't really that useful though because blocks do basically the same thing without the requirement of having to guess how much power is in a spell.

By spell-prolonging spells do you mean ones that have had power put into duration? If yes then that's perfectly fine for a rote as long as you always cast it with the exact same amount of power in the main effect and the duration.

Quote
3) Can sponsored Thaumaturgy spells (with Evocation's methods and speed) be rote spells?

I say yes to this one, because evothaum is basically evocation with a broader range of what it is capable of.

Quote
4) Do you consider acceptable making a stunt that gives a skill trapping a +3 while restricting its use? Example: would you allow  a stunt that reads "you get a +3 to Craftsmanship when building weapons (or possibly even just melee weapons)"?

Nope, it's pretty explicit in the stunt creation rules that you get +1 to a trapping, +2 to a specific use of a trapping and +3 only if it's otherwise very weak or you spend a fate point to activate it.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Tedronai on September 21, 2014, 06:44:55 PM
1) Can supplemental actions follow the main action? Example: can I roll my Fists at -1 to attack, then move to an adjacent zone without rolling?
So long as the penalty is included in the full action, I know of nothing preventing it from being followed by a supplemental action.

2) Can counterspells and... let's call them spell-prolonging spells be rote spells? Rote counterspells probably don't make much sense, but I'm curious anyway.
My own personal opinions:
Counterspells I personally would flatly allow.
'Spell-prolonging spells' I would allow with the caveat that they would be specific to the prolongation of a single specific spell (though I would not necessarily define that spell to rote requirements).

3) Can sponsored Thaumaturgy spells (with Evocation's methods and speed) be rote spells?
This depends heavily on your group's definition of "evocation's methods".  Such issues have previously been the topic of heated debate on these boards, from which a consensus was not achieved.

4) Do you consider acceptable making a stunt that gives a skill trapping a +3 while restricting its use? Example: would you allow  a stunt that reads "you get a +3 to Craftsmanship when building weapons (or possibly even just melee weapons)"?
More restricted stunts yield greater bonuses.
Whether a particular circumstance is sufficiently restricting to warrant a particular bonus is often a matter of personal judgement.
For the example in question, I would allow the parenthetical version.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on September 21, 2014, 06:47:58 PM
Quote
I'm not sure what you mean here, but I don't see a reason why they can't.

Counterspells work by basically guessing the amount of power in an ongoing spell and then putting that much power or greater into your spell to stop it. If you have a rote counterspell with 4 power you could then use it successfully against any multiple round spell with 4 or less power behind it. You just wouldn't be able to scale the power if it's greater or lesser than 4. Counterspells aren't really that useful though because blocks do basically the same thing without the requirement of having to guess how much power is in a spell.

By spell-prolonging spells do you mean ones that have had power put into duration? If yes then that's perfectly fine for a rote as long as you always cast it with the exact same amount of power in the main effect and the duration.

Counterspells are great against extended blocks or maneuvers which require magic to sustain.

So a magical zone border with duration would be a perfect target of a counterspell
A wizard that puts up magical armour(which doesn't go away after a successful hit) are a great target for count-spells.

I'd allow a rote counter-spell, but I don't think you'd get much mileage out of it, honestly.  Most magic is instantaneous (like an evocation attack) or a maneuver (which can be countered by any justifiable counter-maneuver).

I allow targeting enchanted items for counter-spelling though.  So if your GM is o.k with that, it can be VERY useful.  Each successful counter-spell allows you to use up one charge of an enchanted item.  Of course, you'd have to know what the item in question is to target it.  The Sight would do that, although, that comes with its own problems.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Saracen on September 21, 2014, 07:07:25 PM
I would not, however, allow a rote that lets you prolong any spell.

What about any spell of the same element, or maybe any specific kind of spell (for example blocks)? This goes for Tedronai as well.

Sure, if the limitation is narrow enough, you can increase the benefit. If it is or is not usually depends on the table and the campaign. Your example is something I don't really see played out, so I'm not really sure how it would apply in a game. People usually have the weapons they need, and if it is supposed to be a special one, it's usually enough to wrap a whole story around.

Yeah, the example was from a character in a post-apocaliptic world where you can't really go out and buy (most) stuff (also, it was actually molotovs/nail bombs instead of melee weapons, so kind of one-use only).

Nope, it's pretty explicit in the stunt creation rules that you get +1 to a trapping, +2 to a specific use of a trapping and +3 only if it's otherwise very weak or you spend a fate point to activate it.

Actually Your Story reads like this (page 148):

Quote
Give a +2 to a specific application of a nonattack trapping (note that a maneuver, page 207, is not an attack, as it doesn’t inflict stress). This may be reduced to +1 for a broader application, or increased to +3 or even +4 for very, very narrowly defined situations.

Anyway, thanks a lot guys.  :)
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Haru on September 21, 2014, 07:15:02 PM
What about any spell of the same element, or maybe any specific kind of spell (for example blocks)? This goes for Tedronai as well.
Nope. Even spells of the same element can be vastly different in terms of what they do. The same goes for blocks. Fate is very abstract, so putting something like that under one catch all rote doesn't fit very well.

For example, I could create a fire block by actually putting up a wall of flames. But I could just as well set up a block that emits a mental trigger for the fear of fire in every living being. It would both be fire, but vastly different approaches.

Quote
Yeah, the example was from a character in a post-apocaliptic world where you can't really go out and buy (most) stuff (also, it was actually molotovs/nail bombs instead of melee weapons, so kind of one-use only).
Still. I would be pretty bored after a while, if I had to constantly roll to have some weapons. If molotovs and nail bombs are a characters standard weapons, I would simply let him have them. There might be times when I compel him on that, saying he's out, and we make a quick sidequest to get him resupplied, but I wouldn't have him roll craftsmanship over and over to get them.

A stunt that allows him to use craftsmanship for ranged attacks would probably make more sense. He could put crafstmanship as his apex skill and use it to build and attack alike.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Tedronai on September 21, 2014, 08:50:07 PM
What about any spell of the same element, or maybe any specific kind of spell (for example blocks)? This goes for Tedronai as well.

Just about the most lenient I would consider being would be to allow a rote spell that adds duration to a single spell of specific fluff description.
For instance, a spell that erects a convex wall of force.  This could be used as a personal defensive block, or could be extended to protect a group, be put to use as a zone border, or even be represented as a maneuver.  For the purpose of rotes, each of those is a distinct spell.
But it would not extend even to another spell of the same element put to the same purpose, if that spell has a different narrative description (say, a cascade of dazzling lights).

Even this I would only implement on a 'trial basis', and would periodically review with the players, and be prepared to retract or alter.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Saracen on September 21, 2014, 09:33:31 PM
Fair points, guys. Thanks again.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Saracen on September 24, 2014, 02:46:23 PM
Sorry for the double post, but I have a couple other questions:

- Can you spend a fate point at any point in the process of making an action and resolving it, or do you have to declare it after your own roll at the latest? Example 1: I attack and my target defends successfully. Can I then decide to spend a fate point to make that defense a failure? Example 2 (regarding rolls with various degrees of success, and kind of tied to the next question): I use Scholarship for the Answers trapping, and the GM tells me what my character knows on a particular subject depending on my roll and the difficulty set. Can I then spend a fate point if I decide it's too little and I want a better result to remember something else?

- How much is the GM transparent regarding difficulties and the NPCs rolls? My only experiences with Tabletop RPGs are related to D&D, so I'm used to DMs rolling behind screens and only in some cases telling the players what difficulty they need to meet or beat. In the DFRPG, there are mentions of trying to guess the difficulty (best to err on the side of caution, there) or of making assessment actions to discover them... Is that it?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Haru on September 24, 2014, 03:00:04 PM
Sorry for the double post, but I have a couple other questions:
After three days, I think it's no longer a double post. ;)

Quote
- Can you spend a fate point at any point in the process of making an action and resolving it, or do you have to declare it after your own roll at the latest? Example 1: I attack and my target defends successfully. Can I then decide to spend a fate point to make that defense a failure? Example 2 (regarding rolls with various degrees of success, and kind of tied to the next question): I use Scholarship for the Answers trapping, and the GM tells me what my character knows on a particular subject depending on my roll and the difficulty set. Can I then spend a fate point if I decide it's too little and I want a better result to remember something else?
All your examples are ok. You basically roll the dice to get a preliminary result, and then the bidding war begins. Everyone can pile on as many invokes on aspects as they can pay for and make sense. Only after nobody wants to contribute anything more to the roll, it gets resolved. So in your first example, you can spend a Fate point for a +2 and still get the hit in. But your opponent decides that he really doesn't want to be hit, so he spends a Fate point himself. One of your allies has created an aspect before your attack, and now that he sees you need it, he offers the free tag to you, so you can take the guy out. And so on, until nobody wants to or can do anything anymore.

A Fate point isn't spend in a vacuum though. So in your scholarship example, you could easily spend a Fate point to invoke "I breath library dust", in order to improve your roll, but "dirt bike enthusiast" doesn't really fit and shouldn't be allowed to invoke, unless you can give a good justification as to why it might still fit.

Quote
- How much is the GM transparent regarding difficulties and the NPCs rolls? My only experiences with Tabletop RPGs are related to D&D, so I'm used to DMs rolling behind screens and only in some cases telling the players what difficulty they need to meet or beat. In the DFRPG, there are mentions of trying to guess the difficulty (best to err on the side of caution, there) or of making assessment actions to discover them... Is that it?
It really depends on your group. I myself prefer to play with the numbers on the table. Mainly because it lets the players know where to aim, and if spending a Fate point might be worth it or not. Giving them the skill levels etc. of the opposition will also give them a better idea of what they are dealing with, and they can form a better plan.

Guessing the difficulty is part of the counterspell mechanic, and I think the only place it comes up, and I don't think I ever used the mechanic.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on September 24, 2014, 03:06:11 PM
FATE is way more transparent.

This may vary depending on the GM but:

1.  I allow FP's to be spent at any point.  So, if you find out you failed to hit, you can spend the FP after the fact to hit.  This might cause a FP war, though.  If the person has FP's too, they might counter.  So, in that case, I'd tell the player first.  "this guy really wants to dodge.  He'll spend a FP to do so, so if you want to hit, you need to spend 2 FP's.  Do you still want to do it?"

That way the player knows the cost in advance and there's no frustration.

2. Scholarship.
The GM should set the Difficulty and tell the player so that they know what the target is.
For the research trapping, as a GM, if it'll create suspense, I might hide it.  Here's why:

You can spend extra time to succeed.  If there's something urgent and you fail, you can choose to spend extra time but you may not know how much time you need.

In that case, I'd hide the difficulty, but I'd be transparent about the trade-off.
"If you succeed on time 'x' will happen;  If you take too long, 'y' will happen.

Then they'll know what the stakes are.  In any case, I'd tell them whether spending a FP will make the difference between success and failure.  You don't want them spending FP's for nothing.

NPC's rolls.
I don't see any point of hiding stuff.  You may want to hide their actual skill, but difficulties should be transparent and with the ability to use FP's to re-roll, there's no need to cheat on a roll.  I never fluffed rolls when GMing, so I never needed a DM screen except to hide my notes.

I've also always been against hiding the DC's for rolls in D&D.  I'm a rock climber.  I have a fairly good idea how hard a climb will be just by looking at the rock.  I think the same applies for most tasks.  You'll have a fairly good idea of how difficult something is before you do it, if you have any experience at all.  So why hide the difficulty.

For social rolls like sense motive and bluff, it makes sense to hide rolls but in DFRPG, social combat works the same as physical.  So you don't need to hide the rolls.  The player knows the opposition is lying, the character doesn't.  Mechanically, the opposition has an aspect to tag or invoke to represent the lie, so mechanically, they still have an advantage even though the player knows about the lie. (does that make sense?)
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: PirateJack on September 24, 2014, 03:14:45 PM
- Can you spend a fate point at any point in the process of making an action and resolving it, or do you have to declare it after your own roll at the latest? Example 1: I attack and my target defends successfully. Can I then decide to spend a fate point to make that defense a failure? Example 2 (regarding rolls with various degrees of success, and kind of tied to the next question): I use Scholarship for the Answers trapping, and the GM tells me what my character knows on a particular subject depending on my roll and the difficulty set. Can I then spend a fate point if I decide it's too little and I want a better result to remember something else?

My background is with DnD type games, so I had a lot of trouble with this when I first started GMing. My instinct is to say 'tough luck, better dice next time', but that's not how FATE works. The balance of power between player and GM is much closer to even in this system, which means spending Fate Points at any point during your turn (including after information has been given).

That said, I do require my players to have a good explanation for why their invocation of an aspect is giving them an extra advantage.

Say, for example, Ben the player has his character Andrew the White Court Professor roll Lore to work out the weakness of the gribbly monster that has charged into his lecture. The GM sets the difficulty at +5. Andrew is rushed, this creature is fast and the room is full of screaming students. Not exactly ideal conditions for concentration.

Ben is confident that he can make this roll; Andrew has a Lore of +4. Disaster strikes! Ben has rolled a 0, giving him a total of +4, one short of his target! Ben knows that he needs to know this thing's weakness. He can't expose his true nature in front of all of his students, even if the fear they are giving off is delicious. He needs to hit this thing hard where it will hurt and hopefully drive it off. So Ben invokes Andrew's Occult Historian aspect, thinking that Andrew has spent decades studying the supernatural and is bound to have come across this thing somewhere.

That puts Ben's total over the difficulty rating, meaning he now passes the test and remembers that this thing is in fact a Chepi, a Native American spirit that gifts medicine men with healing knowledge and can be called upon to act as an avenging entity. He also knows that it shares a weakness with the Fae; cold iron is a bane to it on a physical and spiritual level, so on Andrew's next turn he picks up the steel ruler from his desk and throws it at the Chepi, scoring a direct hit and sending it fleeing in fear.

Ahhhh, delicious.

Quote
- How much is the GM transparent regarding difficulties and the NPCs rolls? My only experiences with Tabletop RPGs are related to D&D, so I'm used to DMs rolling behind screens and only in some cases telling the players what difficulty they need to meet or beat. In the DFRPG, there are mentions of trying to guess the difficulty (best to err on the side of caution, there) or of making assessment actions to discover them... Is that it?

In my experience it very much depends on the circumstances. If they're trying to scale a fence while being chased by dogs, tell them the difficulty outright. If they're searching through a spiritual reflection of the Library of Alexandria for a tome on Greek Fire (the only substance known to be able to hurt the escaped Titans), maybe keep the difficulty secret but have alternate (easier) options for interesting tidbits.

As a rule of thumb, if they're on a time limit I'd say give them the difficulty because it keeps the sense of urgency. If they're not that rushed for time or it's something they wouldn't be able to guess the difficulty of beforehand, I'd say keep it secret. Sometimes a little mystery is good for a group.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Saracen on September 24, 2014, 03:47:20 PM
Thanks, everyone. That was very helpful.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: GamingInSeattle on September 25, 2014, 05:21:04 PM
I'd like to add a question to the thread, as I'm a new to GMing DFRPG and we had our first home made character session last night.

We had our Russian Wizard Russlan want to do a ritual to provide our Acquisition Expert Jack with an aspect that would help her go unnoticed.

In an alley, after making a circle and invoking a symbolic link, the question came up of how does Russlan roll for this.  Most ritual spells I've seen in the book usually involves a contest of some kind.  Raising enough energy/shifts to guarantee a success vs the targets defensive roll.

Here, however, we have a willing target.  I just applied the 3 shift cost evocation cost for creating a maneuver plus one shift for making the maneuver sticky for one scene starting when the aspect is tagged or invoked.

Thoughts?

One question I did have was that on YS 264, it says under Simple Actions "whenever you use magic on someone, you inevitably contest with their will".  Does this mean there are no willing targets in game and that you must always overcome their base resist skill? (Discipline, Lore, etc depending on the Maneuver you wish to place)

Thanks!

~ GIS
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: PirateJack on September 25, 2014, 05:34:15 PM
I'd probably go with making it a simple action for willing participants. The Wizard sets a target for how much power he wants to put into it (including for duration) and then rolls Discipline until he's controlled the power.

Also, most players will opt to go for controlling one point of power at a time if there's no rush, since why risk it going up in your face or having to use Fate Points? In that case I'd just say they auto-succeed and place the aspect on your Acquisition Expert. That's only if there's no pressure, however. If there is, roll Discipline to control and have NPCs interrupt to try and make him fail. You've also got to be wary of people trying to abuse this mechanic, since layering everyone in sticky aspects before a fight can make for a very one-sided (read: boring) fight scene.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on September 25, 2014, 05:58:39 PM
Yeah.  No resistance for the person getting the spell.  They let the magic take effect.

You could do a skill replacement instead of a maneuver, if the wizards lore would be better than the other person's stealth.  You get it for one roll, essentially, and it would guarantee a set number.

And like PirateJack said, watch out for this.  Stacking aspects could become a problem.  Rituals - even simple ones - take a bit of time and aren't usually too subtle.  If they started buffing everyone in the party while standing in the alley-way, I'd start rolling alertness checks or have someone show up unexpectedly.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: GamingInSeattle on October 03, 2014, 05:27:32 PM
So I have learned quite a bit about Invoking Aspects, Invoking for Effect & Compels this week, partly by reading a thread where Fred explained that Tags can be used to Invoke for Effect.

My question is this, can you Invoke for Effect after you perform an action but before your turn ends?

For example:

Mack the Monster Hunter uses his Shotgun and Weapons roll to place the aspect "Shaken Badly" on a BadGuy.  Can the player then immediately Tag "Shaken Badly" to Invoke for Effect and suggest that the BadGuy is now out of the fight, cowering on the floor? 

Or, does Mack have to wait until his next turn to do so or to pass the Tag to another PC who can then Invoke for Effect to suggest removing BadGuy from the fight in the same way?

Thanks all!  Slowly getting this system down.

~ GiS
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: PirateJack on October 03, 2014, 05:40:52 PM
That's more of a Take Out effect than an Invoke for Effect, in my mind. That said, it's entirely down to your group whether you allow invokes for effect that much leeway. Theoretically you could ignore every other mechanic in the game and just run it through invokes for effect, so it's up to you how far you want to go with them.

Personally, I'd say that kind of effect would at least require a consequence rather than a manoeuvre. Of course if you just want to force him to pass a discipline test to fight or be out of the fight for a round or two, that would be more in the scope of an IFE. In my opinion.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Haru on October 03, 2014, 06:08:27 PM
Well, a tag for effect is basically a compel, and as such, it can easily be "you lose the fight", so that's well within how things are intended to work.

A tag for effect is not an action, and as such can be done any time. Of course there's always the caveat of "it should make sense to the group".
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Mr. Death on October 03, 2014, 06:17:18 PM
"You lose the fight," is being taken out. As a GM, I'd allow the compel to be that the guy can't take effective action for a couple rounds, but invoking for effect to take someone out is kind of cheating the rules.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on October 04, 2014, 01:15:41 AM
So I have learned quite a bit about Invoking Aspects, Invoking for Effect & Compels this week, partly by reading a thread where Fred explained that Tags can be used to Invoke for Effect.

My question is this, can you Invoke for Effect after you perform an action but before your turn ends?

For example:

Mack the Monster Hunter uses his Shotgun and Weapons roll to place the aspect "Shaken Badly" on a BadGuy.  Can the player then immediately Tag "Shaken Badly" to Invoke for Effect and suggest that the BadGuy is now out of the fight, cowering on the floor? 

Or, does Mack have to wait until his next turn to do so or to pass the Tag to another PC who can then Invoke for Effect to suggest removing BadGuy from the fight in the same way?

Thanks all!  Slowly getting this system down.

~ GiS

You can invoke for effect anytime. For example, if after you hit them for a consequence, on their turn, if they try to flee, you can invoke 'shaken badly' to say they only move one zone because they are too shaken to act decisively.

Sometimes, if I know a enemy has recovery, if I inflict a minor consequence, I'll immediacy invoke it(knowing they'll heal it before I have a chance to tag it). So I might say the attack shoots them across the room making them 'prone',  or maybe they fly over the bar*. breaking liquer bottles and are covered with spirits making them 'flammable'. At least then, I might still have an aspect to tag even after they heal.

*every fight scene should have a bar. Mandatory.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Tedronai on October 04, 2014, 09:41:53 AM
Compels are negotiated, and not merely to the extent that they can be refused.  They are also subject to a test of 'reasonableness' to be judged by the table.
Personally, and with the groups I have gamed alongside, 'you lose the fight' is very rarely a 'reasonable' compel.
Something to the effect 'you need to offer a Concession' might very well be acceptable, though.  For instance, an aspect might be invoked representing a dire and urgent need to address matters elsewhere, forcing an opponent to flee, or an aspect representing a fiery temper might be invoked to force a concession in a duel of words (possibly resulting in the beginning of a new physical conflict scene to replace the now-ended social conflict).
This, though, is typically the extreme end of the power of compels.  Handle with care, and remember to negotiate, negotiate, negotiate.  Everyone should come out the other side happy with the results.  If they don't, then something has gone wrong.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Saracen on October 05, 2014, 10:13:37 PM
I have a couple of questions about Ambush and Surprise. Page 142 of Your Story reads: "If the victim’s roll fails, he can only defend at an
effective skill level of Mediocre." Does that mean he doesn't even roll his Mediocre defense? Also, what about eventual boosts from powers or stunts? And finally, can you make Surprise the Catch of a Recovery/Toughness power?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Haru on October 05, 2014, 10:19:54 PM
I have a couple of questions about Ambush and Surprise. Page 142 of Your Story reads: "If the victim’s roll fails, he can only defend at an
effective skill level of Mediocre." Does that mean he doesn't even roll his Mediocre defense? Also, what about eventual boosts from powers or stunts? And finally, can you make Surprise the Catch of a Recovery/Toughness power?
They roll, but their skill, including all benefits from powers and stunts, is considered 0 for this roll.

Since virtually anything can be a catch, surprise could probably count as well. Though it would be a fairly limited range where it would make sense. I could see something like a force field that has to be activated with a catch of being surprised. The force field is, in the systems mechanic, not done with evocation, but with the toughness power, and since it is pretty tasking to constantly keep it up, the character can only do so for a limited time, usually once he's in a fight. Being caught off guard would get around that. Though it wouldn't fit a recovery power.

Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Saracen on October 05, 2014, 10:32:37 PM
Yeah... I was playing around with statting various characters from movies/TV-shows/comics etc. with the DFRPG system and I was somewhat stuck on Kitty Pryde from the X-Men. I gave her Physical Immunity and "being taken by surprise" as its (+4 maybe?) catch, since her phasing power isn't active all the time and she has to make a conscious (but instantaneous) effort to activate it.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: dragoonbuster on October 05, 2014, 10:36:34 PM
They roll, but their skill, including all benefits from powers and stunts, is considered 0 for this roll.

Since virtually anything can be a catch, surprise could probably count as well. Though it would be a fairly limited range where it would make sense. I could see something like a force field that has to be activated with a catch of being surprised. The force field is, in the systems mechanic, not done with evocation, but with the toughness power, and since it is pretty tasking to constantly keep it up, the character can only do so for a limited time, usually once he's in a fight. Being caught off guard would get around that. Though it wouldn't fit a recovery power.

My interpretation is that powers do add to the mediocre. I'd think something with inhuman (and beyond) reflexes/speed would have a one-up on pure mortal speed, even when completely caught off guard.

As far as the Catch, I agree, and I like the force-field example. I could also see it flavored along the lines of "I'm tough when I'm focusing my energy on it"--drawing from DBZ, where the characters can focus their ki to make themselves tougher, stronger, faster, etc (which is why Goku was able to catch Trunks' sword on his fingertip and not care, for instance). Caught off guard, they are drastically weaker. It's not an exact carryover, but it's close enough. Narratively, it works for me. The Kitty example works too.

Now, the rebate...probably just +1 (since presumably more than just one or two people can sneak up on the PC, but not everyone and their mother), maybe +2 since it could be figured out after coming across them once or twice. If sneak attacks are going to come up in the game a lot you might give it another +1 for a total +3.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Saracen on October 05, 2014, 10:43:55 PM
I think that if you allow one of the PCs to buy the Physical Immunity power, you kind of have to make sneak attacks come up a lot, although I'd consider having the player take another catch (maybe lasers or sound blasts in Kitty's case) beside surprise.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: dragoonbuster on October 05, 2014, 10:54:29 PM
I think that if you allow one of the PCs to buy the Physical Immunity power, you kind of have to make sneak attacks come up a lot, although I'd consider having the player take another catch (maybe lasers or sound blasts in Kitty's case) beside surprise.

Yeah, I probably wouldn't allow full Immunity with that kind of Catch without additional Catches. Sound/lasers as a secondary for Kitty is a good one.

In general I prefer "Immunity from X" over "Immunity to everything except X" in any case.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Haru on October 05, 2014, 10:57:35 PM
I think that if you allow one of the PCs to buy the Physical Immunity power, you kind of have to make sneak attacks come up a lot.
I'd be careful with immunity for player characters in general. They will either roflstomp everything, or you have to give every mook the catch, which will get ridiculous. To me, invulnerability is a plot device, as it makes it necessary for the players to figure out the catch. That puts it squarely in NPC only territory.

Kitty Pryde is an odd one, because while she can become completely immune, she can't interact with anything herself. In effect, once she goes into invulnerability mode, you can either stall the fight until she goes back out, or you can end the fight by either of the sides walking away.

If she can attack from her invulnerability by switching back and forth quickly, nobody can take her out, and she can just play out the death of a thousand tiny cuts. Not really fun for either side.

Maybe the custom power "limitations" can work to accurately portrait her, but I'm no expert in those.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: solbergb on October 06, 2014, 12:35:26 AM
My interpretation is that powers do add to the mediocre. I'd think something with inhuman (and beyond) reflexes/speed would have a one-up on pure mortal speed, even when completely caught off guard.


The way to simulate that without invoking an aspect is with a stunt.  They can't normally engage their speed if they don't know anything is happening after all.   The Dresden books have plenty of examples where this is the case.  Remember that somebody really fast will likely have supporting aspects and can always spend a fate point to invoke "Son of Hermes" to react anyway during an ambush, invoking the aspect.  If you lack such an aspect, well, sure you're a Red Court Infected but your inhuman speed isn't at the same level as your fellow Red Court Infected who took the aspect "Faster than you Think".   You let yourself be ambushed or try to find a different aspect to invoke that will help.

If you want it reliable, you want a stunt -

Stunt: "Plenty of Time to React" - use Athletics instead of Alertness for the "Avoiding Surprise" trapping.  (super-speed adds to athletics for all purposes, so it'd improve this stunt, and the one best at avoiding surprise would be an individual with lots of refresh spent in super speed AND high athletics)

Likewise simulating surprise caused by a speedster zipping in from behind full cover and doing something awful before your neurons could fire can also be handled via a stunt

Stunt: "No time to react" - use Athletics instead of Stealth for the "Ambush" trapping (the enemy still has to start out unaware of you, but that's a lot easier when you start the exchange two zones away, still and behind full cover, etc.   Possibly with a fate point you could invoke this (or some other supporting speedster aspect) even when they are aware of you...they know you're there but are as helpless in the first exchange as if they didn't because you move so fast.)

Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: solbergb on October 06, 2014, 12:47:42 AM
Kitty Pryde is an odd one, because while she can become completely immune,

Her catch is actually electricity.  She can affect and be affected by electronics.  Magneto took her out in an early appearance when she tried to raid his lair and fry his computers.  I *think* that was after she tried using roller skates on a very unfortunate super hero costume.  Early Kitty Pryde was kind of a goof.

I would buy her power as a variant of Mistform.   Mistform gives you flight, physical immunity and an extra catch based on your special effect (in her case electricity instead of high winds).  Pretty much covers all she does, lets you do maneuvers (like popping up and scaring people, or disrupting electronics) but not attacks.  Pay an extra refresh to shift in/out as a supplemental action, 4 points, call it done.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Haru on October 06, 2014, 01:24:07 AM
Her catch is actually electricity.  She can affect and be affected by electronics.  Magneto took her out in an early appearance when she tried to raid his lair and fry his computers.  I *think* that was after she tried using roller skates on a very unfortunate super hero costume.  Early Kitty Pryde was kind of a goof.
Ah, ok. Didn't know the electricity thing.

Quote
I would buy her power as a variant of Mistform.   Mistform gives you flight, physical immunity and an extra catch based on your special effect (in her case electricity instead of high winds).  Pretty much covers all she does, lets you do maneuvers (like popping up and scaring people, or disrupting electronics) but not attacks.  Pay an extra refresh to shift in/out as a supplemental action, 4 points, call it done.
Sounds good.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Sanctaphrax on October 06, 2014, 03:12:29 AM
I would buy her power as a variant of Mistform.   Mistform gives you flight, physical immunity and an extra catch based on your special effect (in her case electricity instead of high winds).  Pretty much covers all she does, lets you do maneuvers (like popping up and scaring people, or disrupting electronics) but not attacks.  Pay an extra refresh to shift in/out as a supplemental action, 4 points, call it done.

Do you mean Gaseous Form?

If so, it could work. Though you'd have to hack it a bit.

You're a little off-base about how it works as written; there's no option to swap the extra weakness. And I don't think it lets you move through solid objects...the writeup contradicts itself on that point, but I think it makes sense to go with the bit at the end.

I think adding the ability to move through solid objects and swapping the gaseous weaknesses for electricity would be worth a Refresh. I'm not sure how fair adding the ability to shift supplementally for another Refresh is. If you materialize, attack, and dematerialize in a single turn, you're basically attacking with impunity. An opponent with better initiative might be able to interrupt depending on how you interpret those rules, but it still seems like a bit much.

PS: By coincidence, I wrote up a similarly-powered character recently (http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,37922.msg2084450.html#msg2084450). (Worm spoiler warning.) Didn't use the Gaseous Form approach, though. Attacking while immaterial is pretty key to that character.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: dragoonbuster on October 06, 2014, 04:00:59 AM
If we're only talking about Kitty, her powers seem to be "always tangible except when concentrating." IIRC, and admittedly my knowledge of her is relatively limited, it's not something she just shifts over to back and forth for indeterminate amounts of time, it's something she has to be actively focusing on. She stands in front of a wall, furrows her brow, and walks through it. She sees an attack coming, she grits her teeth and closes her eyes, and the attack moves through her. She also is a bit harder to see and likes to just poke part of her body out of a wall to spy on people, but isn't really invisible.

Mechanically, this seems to break down to a simple custom power:
-Can use Discipline to defend against non Catch-covering attacks (ranged or melee). Perhaps build a specific weakness into the power, electricity/lasers and possibly intense sound waves.
-Can use Discipline instead of Athletics or Burglary to overcome zone borders, including traversing so-called "impossible boundaries" or ones that would require picking a lock, etc
-Discipline modifies Stealth when hiding part of herself in an object's mass, or perhaps always complements it.

Call it Intangibility, seems worth -2 refresh to me. Require a HC or aspect related to it, probably. If you want her to be able to make physical attacks by materializing part of herself inside them, I'd make that cost another refresh and give it Weapon: 2. Use compels or the Catch to keep her from getting into places she shouldn't.

Thoughts? Did I miss anything?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: kgy121 on October 06, 2014, 04:07:18 AM
That seems a bit complex. I'd just attach the Human Form [+1] to Spirit Form [-3] and be done with it.

Back on the subject of Physical Immunity, if someone has a Magical Immunity and is targeted by something like an entropy curse with cars of bees out of nowhere, what's the sequence of events there? Does the targeting get pulled off by the magical immunity and the bees never show up? Or do the bees just count as magic and not affect them? Would Thaumaturgy just be able to get around it somehow?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: dragoonbuster on October 06, 2014, 04:21:03 AM
Back on the subject of Physical Immunity, if someone has a Magical Immunity and is targeted by something like an entropy curse with cars of bees out of nowhere, what's the sequence of events there? Does the targeting get pulled off by the magical immunity and the bees never show up? Or do the bees just count as magic and not affect them? Would Thaumaturgy just be able to get around it somehow?

Depends. You could go either way. For a PC, I would say they need to run from the bees. For an NPC, I would argue that any magic not cast at insane levels of power slides off without issue.
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Saracen on October 06, 2014, 05:15:11 AM
Her catch is actually electricity.  She can affect and be affected by electronics.  Magneto took her out in an early appearance when she tried to raid his lair and fry his computers.  I *think* that was after she tried using roller skates on a very unfortunate super hero costume.  Early Kitty Pryde was kind of a goof.

Her character (and the X-Men comics in general) is so inconsistent that this is true in one issue and disproven in the next. We've seen her phase through raw electricity multiple times during the years.

As for attacking while phased, she does that too, since she can phase single parts of her body (for example, she can stand mostly inside a wall but use her hands to yank someone in there with her). She can extend her phasing to anything she touches (so making others immune to physical attacks and phasing others into solids is right up her alley).

In short, she's not just broken. She's borken.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Quantus on October 06, 2014, 02:29:24 PM
Depends. You could go either way. For a PC, I would say they need to run from the bees. For an NPC, I would argue that any magic not cast at insane levels of power slides off without issue.
(click to show/hide)
In general I dislike too many rules that work differently for PC's vs NPC's, especially when it's not a "PC's get this because they are supposed to be extra awesome" sort of rule purely for increased fun.  In this instance Id want to make it a blanket ruling one way or the other: either all effects are considered magic regardless of source if they are being manipulated by Magic, or else Magic that manipulates a physical object counts as a physical attack.  So an entropy curse that targets you with a turkey that just happened to fall from a 747 would be in all ways a physical attack (other than the targeting), as would an earth Magic spell that tosses a really real rock at you.  However a Spell that tosses energy (like Fire) or that materializes something whole with ectoplasm (like a zombie or spectar) would be magic.  If the bees existed before then the PC would have to run, if they materialized inside the car from scratch then they would not because they are not "real".  So the Mantra Question Id ask is " Can the frog Poop in your hand?"    8)
 
The Nature of Lord Wraith's protections are a bit of a mystery anyway, but iirc somebody (Bob or McCoy)  theorized that it would take some active protection of a ridiculous powerful being to accomplish, so outsider Sponsored Magic makes the most sense to me. 



Her character (and the X-Men comics in general) is so inconsistent that this is true in one issue and disproven in the next. We've seen her phase through raw electricity multiple times during the years.

As for attacking while phased, she does that too, since she can phase single parts of her body (for example, she can stand mostly inside a wall but use her hands to yank someone in there with her). She can extend her phasing to anything she touches (so making others immune to physical attacks and phasing others into solids is right up her alley).

In short, she's not just broken. She's borken.
True enough, Marvel is bad about that in general (Im looking at you Wolverine Healing Factor), but I think we could impose some basic balance and still fit her power set, ignoring any random Secondary Mutations for time travel or Movie Plot.  Ghost style intangibility covers most of it pretty well, as others have outlined.  In the Comics her catch was typically strong electricity, but the explanationw as just that it bridged the gap to where-ever she was phased to, so if it was a computer she woudl short it out by phasing through it, but a large jolt would still reacha nd hurt her.  In magical terms you could concievably expand that to any energy (making phasing through fire out of the question).  Id say that she can only "touch" another person by either un-phasing herself completely or else drawing them into the phase with her making them intangible as well.  She can phase multiple people and/or large objects with added difficulty, I think phasing the Blackbird+passengers is more or less the upper limit.  She can move freely in three-dimensions only when the material is solid enough to support her weight (ie solid rock Yes, water or air or a card castle No).  The only other bit would be unphasing inside somebody as an attack, and that's one Im not sure about.  Ive never seen it get as...messy as it should, but then Ive mostly seen it in animated versions with young audiences.  You could say she doesnt phase back all teh way but instead just solidifies enough to through the body pressures out of what and cause unconsciousness, you could make it a full lethal attack, or something in between and dependandt on actual medical knowledge, or at the other end you could make it blanket impossible.  Given that affecting the inside of a person is supposed to be explonentially more difficult with any magic in the DV, Id say Impossible but let them Stunt it if they had a thaumaturgucal link that would reasonably let them bypass those sort of basic Mortal protections. 
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Sanctaphrax on October 06, 2014, 07:38:24 PM
Mechanically, this seems to break down to a simple custom power:
-Can use Discipline to defend against non Catch-covering attacks (ranged or melee). Perhaps build a specific weakness into the power, electricity/lasers and possibly intense sound waves.
-Can use Discipline instead of Athletics or Burglary to overcome zone borders, including traversing so-called "impossible boundaries" or ones that would require picking a lock, etc
-Discipline modifies Stealth when hiding part of herself in an object's mass, or perhaps always complements it.

Call it Intangibility, seems worth -2 refresh to me.

Sounds mostly reasonable. But it seems kind of odd that someone with Intangibility can't go through an indoor wall, since neither Athletics or Burglary allows that.

That seems a bit complex. I'd just attach the Human Form [+1] to Spirit Form [-3] and be done with it.

I don't think that'd be appropriate. Partly because Human Form makes Spirit Form better and therefore shouldn't give a rebate, partly because Spirit Form has a lot of baggage.

Back on the subject of Physical Immunity, if someone has a Magical Immunity and is targeted by something like an entropy curse with cars of bees out of nowhere, what's the sequence of events there? Does the targeting get pulled off by the magical immunity and the bees never show up? Or do the bees just count as magic and not affect them? Would Thaumaturgy just be able to get around it somehow?

Depends. There's no such thing as standard magical immunity.

As for attacking while phased, she does that too, since she can phase single parts of her body (for example, she can stand mostly inside a wall but use her hands to yank someone in there with her). She can extend her phasing to anything she touches (so making others immune to physical attacks and phasing others into solids is right up her alley).

In short, she's not just broken. She's borken.

That doesn't sound broken to me.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: dragoonbuster on October 06, 2014, 08:00:44 PM
Sounds mostly reasonable. But it seems kind of odd that someone with Intangibility can't go through an indoor wall, since neither Athletics or Burglary allows that.

My second line was intended to imply that, especially the part about "impossible boundaries," but rereading it obviously wasn't clear. To me any wall anywhere would become a zone border to a character with Intangibility, probably usually set @ -2 difficulty and not needing a real roll to traverse (possibly allowing supplemental movements through simple, easy walls) until things started getting serious (thick concrete, etc), though that might get more complicated than other GMs want to deal with.

Quote from: Dragoonbuster
-Can use Discipline instead of Athletics or Burglary to overcome zone borders, including traversing so-called "impossible boundaries" or ones that would require picking a lock, etc

A full write-up of the power would be clearer, but I was just spit-balling.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Saracen on October 07, 2014, 07:52:16 AM
Well, as I see it, you have to give her (and anyone/anything she touches) the ability to be unaffected by physical attacks and the ability to move through borders (except rifts, pits and the like) as if they're not there, and I don't think it makes sense to say she uses Discipline to do it - the only conscious "effort" she makes to use her power is switching it on, then she walks (Athletics) through borders and ignores physical attacks (no roll). Beside that, you have to give her bonuses to all Stealth trappings and to Infiltration, also to blocks, maneuvers and possibly to attacks from inside a solid/with objects (maybe you want that to work as "forcing" the target to use a specific skill when defending - read Might/Athletics - or maybe as attacks bypassing armor).

Also, if you go the movies route, you have a form of Time Travel on your hands. If you go the comics route, you have teleportation, flight, Fists, Weapons and Scholarship stunts, and a pet dragon. Something like a touch-based Mana Static and some kind of defense/resistance to supernatural mental attacks, too. But really, this just means she would have a high refresh level, and in the X-Men universe, that wouldn't be out of place. It's just the Phasing that's broken, in my opinion. She can walk up to someone with a pencil, stick it into them while completely phased, let it go and have it return to its normal solid form now inside their body. She can do the same but with her allies attacks, and actually, now that I think about it, she can also make her enemies' attacks pass through her body and her allies' by simply touching them (and still remain phased herself). She can go anywhere in a building, easily out of reach of anyone with access to her catch for example, or to spy, prepare ambushes, steal stuff, etc.

I honestly think it's broken anywhere, but it is especially so in what amounts as a turn-based system, unless you give it limitations that, canonically, it doesn't have.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Sanctaphrax on October 07, 2014, 02:34:20 PM
None of that sounds all that impressive to me. Take Teleportation, a Stealth stunt or two, Immunity, and Incite Effect and you're basically done. Phasing things into people is just an attack, phasing allies through attacks is just a block (though you could also represent it with the Tank custom Power if you wanted it to be infallible), making the attacks of your allies phase is just a maneuver.

Would be tricky to do at Submerged, but phasing nowhere near as powerful as some of the things I've written up in this system.

Time travel, now that's unfair.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Quantus on October 07, 2014, 05:26:32 PM
Time travel, now that's unfair.
Truer words have never been spoken  ;D
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Saracen on October 08, 2014, 05:44:49 AM
None of that sounds all that impressive to me. Take Teleportation, a Stealth stunt or two, Immunity, and Incite Effect and you're basically done. Phasing things into people is just an attack, phasing allies through attacks is just a block (though you could also represent it with the Tank custom Power if you wanted it to be infallible), making the attacks of your allies phase is just a maneuver.

This power?

(click to show/hide)

Looks cool. Out of curiosity - though I doubt it - does Toughness Surcharge count the Catch as part of the refresh of Toughness powers? Anyway, I really think this is broken... how would you go about defeating Kitty and her group in a physical conflict if you don't have access to her catch?

Also, one more question: can you guys explain to me the reasoning and balancing behind the non-canonical power levels found here (http://dfrpg-resources.wikispaces.com/Characters)?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Sanctaphrax on October 08, 2014, 06:54:43 PM
Out of curiosity - though I doubt it - does Toughness Surcharge count the Catch as part of the refresh of Toughness powers?

It's ambiguous, but I think it's supposed to count.

Anyway, I really think this is broken... how would you go about defeating Kitty and her group in a physical conflict if you don't have access to her catch?

Hit them with mental attacks.

Failing that, you're mostly screwed. Physical Immunity is a pretty scary Power. But it's a standard ability in this game. It's not even homebrew.

Also, one more question: can you guys explain to me the reasoning and balancing behind the non-canonical power levels found here (http://dfrpg-resources.wikispaces.com/Characters)?

I was making NPCs, and some of the people I wanted to write up were too strong for Submerged. So I made up some levels.

There wasn't really much reasoning or balancing to be done.

Though you'll notice that Refresh increases pretty quickly compared to skills. That's intentional. High-end supernatural beings often have downright silly amounts of Refresh, but they usually don't have blatantly superhuman skills.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Saracen on October 08, 2014, 07:13:03 PM
I was making NPCs, and some of the people I wanted to write up were too strong for Submerged. So I made up some levels.

There wasn't really much reasoning or balancing to be done.

Though you'll notice that Refresh increases pretty quickly compared to skills. That's intentional. High-end supernatural beings often have downright silly amounts of Refresh, but they usually don't have blatantly superhuman skills.

Isn't that because more often than not they don't care about descending into negative refresh territory? And aren't blatantly superhuman skills connected to a raise in the skill cap as opposed to more skill points? Or maybe that was your point and I misinterpreted. I just find it weird that you gain refresh basically at the same rate as you gain skill points, even faster at the very high end of the custom power levels.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Sanctaphrax on October 08, 2014, 07:38:45 PM
Yeah, blatantly superhuman skills have a lot to do with the skill cap. That's why I made sure to increase the skill cap slowly.

The number of points is honestly not as important as the cap, but I found that the totals I chose were pretty suitable for the characters I was writing up when I made those levels.

Of course, many of those characters were negative Refresh anyway. But where it counted, with the Wizards and such, I found that the numbers worked pretty well.

The fact that Refresh increases faster than skill points during the last jump is weird, I admit. But 65 is already a huge number of skill points. It's enough to make pyramid-building a real hassle.

If the disparity bugs you, I recommend raising the base skill. In a way, starting skills at Average is like adding 25 skill points.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Saracen on October 08, 2014, 07:48:08 PM
Yeah, blatantly superhuman skills have a lot to do with the skill cap. That's why I made sure to increase the skill cap slowly.

The number of points is honestly not as important as the cap, but I found that the totals I chose were pretty suitable for the characters I was writing up when I made those levels.

Of course, many of those characters were negative Refresh anyway. But where it counted, with the Wizards and such, I found that the numbers worked pretty well.

The fact that Refresh increases faster than skill points during the last jump is weird, I admit. But 65 is already a huge number of skill points. It's enough to make pyramid-building a real hassle.

If the disparity bugs you, I recommend raising the base skill. In a way, starting skills at Average is like adding 25 skill points.

That's a very nice idea. I'm going to play around with it for a while, I think. Thank you.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: GamingInSeattle on October 09, 2014, 09:01:06 PM
Question about the Sight:

So, had a great game with my players last night and had two PC's who both used the Sight to great effect.

However, I have a question about what the Sight might reveal.

Scenario:  A Red Court Vampire (RCV) uses their Addictive Saliva on a NPC.  A PC uses the Sight on this NPC, would they notice anything unusual due to the Saliva Addiction?

Now certainly Soul Gaze would reveal something about this, but what about the Sight?  If it's strictly a biological effect, it might make the NPC's Aura seem off or drained.  If it was a Curse then I could see how it might show up under the Sight.  Even if Saliva Addiction has given the NPC to have a trouble aspect of "Under the sway of the Red Court", I'm leaning towards the Sight not revealing that much info.

Thoughts?

GiS
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Cadd on October 09, 2014, 09:16:28 PM
I'd probably let it show under the Sight, but in a rather obscure way.
Assuming the vampire not having fed on the NPC, I'd describe strings attached like on a puppet, or some kind of viscous fluid covering the persons eyes (representing the way the addiction colours how the NPC sees the world)
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Quantus on October 09, 2014, 09:20:13 PM
The Sight can show s decent bit about the person, independent of specific magical effects at play.  While it might not show the current presence of the saliva on its own, Id expect it to show some signs for nearly any significant and/or lasting addiction. 

Use Proven Guilty as an example.  Harry's sight showed the Addiction of Molly's friend as a bunch on hungry mouths, while the magical damage that Molly inflicted was shows as laser holes burned into her temples.  So when Harry got dosed during the Ball in GP it wouldnt have shown because he was being affected in that moment, but had not been addicted which would cause deeper marks. 

I should also say in the case of Wampires, whose powers are less biological and more spiritual, Id expect their similar thralling effects to show regardless.  I seem to recall Harry being shocked that Thomas could affect a spirit while it was possessing a living person. 
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on October 10, 2014, 02:24:20 AM
Didn't harry do a soul-gaze on some guy to find out he was being manipulated by a WCV?  Soul gaze is a bit more personal than the Sight, though.

The Sight shows a person's aura (or that's how I see it).  Many things can affect a person's aura:  magic, illusions, emotions, addiction, affliction etc...

All the swirling colours and images are there and they represent all those things.  Some of them are very subtle and some of them are obvious.

It might be hard to tell someone is a bit depressed  because their cat died last month but much easier to tell they have a huge, powerful curse on them.

On the same token, It might be hard to noticed faint magic but easy to see that someone is so depressed they are suicidal.

That's what the Lore check is for.  It gives aspects and information.  The more shifts they get, the more information they should receive.

Beware that they don't use the Sight all the time.  I think the base difficulty recommended in the book for trying to close the Sight (and interpret it is 4 or 5).  Otherwise, it becomes 'detect magic/True Seeing' for DFRPG.

I don't think Harry likes opening the Sight.  Because it's freaky and dangerous.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Cadd on October 10, 2014, 07:51:55 AM
To drive home the price of the Sight, I make notes of particularly jarring/gruesome/fascinating/beutiful things (basically the high intensity stuff) they see and very occasionally compel their High Concept for a distraction when something might remind them. ;)
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Quantus on October 10, 2014, 12:42:14 PM
Agreed. the horrid indelible memories are the primary downside, so it needs to be at least as prominent as the players make Sight usage.  For that matter Id expect the sight to deal some pretty rough mental consequences if you look at the wrong thing, like a Naagloshii for example. 
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on October 10, 2014, 02:54:55 PM
To drive home the price of the Sight, I make notes of particularly jarring/gruesome/fascinating/beutiful things (basically the high intensity stuff) they see and very occasionally compel their High Concept for a distraction when something might remind them. ;)

This is great.  I never thought of doing that.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: dapperatchik on October 10, 2014, 03:34:34 PM
To drive home the price of the Sight, I make notes of particularly jarring/gruesome/fascinating/beutiful things (basically the high intensity stuff) they see and very occasionally compel their High Concept for a distraction when something might remind them. ;)

Why is there no Really Brilliant Ideas Master List Mk IV to put this on?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Saracen on October 15, 2014, 02:06:38 PM
A couple of questions about weapon ratings:

1) Does the weapon rating only count for attacks that cause stress or also for maneuvers? If it's the latter, how is the bonus applied?

2) On spray attacks, weapon ratings are applied fully in case of mundane weapons and are instead divided (similarly to the targeting roll) in case of magical attacks. Do enchanted items count as the former, the latter, or does it depend on the type of effect?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Quantus on October 15, 2014, 02:49:03 PM
1) not sure offhand

2)Id say it all depends on the type of item and type of effect.  If the effect is basically a mundane attack that just happens to be magically augmented, say a kinetomantic gun that does extra damage by increasing the effective mass of the slug, then treat it as it's mundane counterpart; if it's a magic effect that just happens to come from an enchanted item that looks like a mundane weapon (say a shotgun that spews magic fire) then treat it as a magical attack. 

Or house-rule that particular difference away (Im personally not a fan of it, or at least havent heard a great justification for the difference).
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on October 15, 2014, 03:07:05 PM
A couple of questions about weapon ratings:

1) Does the weapon rating only count for attacks that cause stress or also for maneuvers? If it's the latter, how is the bonus applied?

2) On spray attacks, weapon ratings are applied fully in case of mundane weapons and are instead divided (similarly to the targeting roll) in case of magical attacks. Do enchanted items count as the former, the latter, or does it depend on the type of effect?

1.  Maneuvers don't have weapon ratings.  You could, maybe, do invokes for effect to have people take damage from a maneuver but that's done on a case-by-case basis and involves a compel.  But weapon ratings don't add to a maneuvers effectiveness

(aside)Some weapons allow you to set aside weapon ratings to create a maneuver instead.  Like a stun baton, where the weapon rating becomes the difficulty to resist the maneuver.  Which seems kind of silly since I could roll a maneuver with a higher difficulty than the weapon rating.

2.
a) If you have a weapon capable of doing a spray attack (like a fully auto rifle), you split the accuracy but maintain the weapon value of each hit.

b) Enchanted items:  No matter how you fluff it, it's a stored spell so I think they should be treated as a magical attack and the weapon value should be divided along with accuracy.  I would say that the enchanted item should be crafted specifically for spray attacks.  Like a rote spell.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Tedronai on October 16, 2014, 04:11:49 AM
Maneuvers don't have weapon ratings.

Enchanted weapons being used in an attack may either be treated as a mundane weapon, such as a warden sword being used as a very well made sword that is only coincidentally enchanted, or as an enchanted item that is coincidentally shaped like a weapon.  One cannot take the best of both worlds.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Saracen on October 16, 2014, 09:05:38 AM
Thanks, guys.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Saracen on October 24, 2014, 01:07:23 PM
When do you apply bonuses from Stunts and Powers to a modified (restricted or complemented) skill? In short, what comes first? Example: a character with Great +4 Driving and Good +3 Guns wants to shoot some bad guys while at the wheel and has an appropriate Stunt that grants him a +1 to Guns. Does he get a +2 on the roll because Driving>Guns or just the +1 from his Stunt because that's added before the modifying mechanic? From page 213, I'm guessing the former, but I wanted to make sure...
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on October 24, 2014, 01:32:01 PM
Modifying is based on the base skill.

So if a stunt boosts a skill high enough to compliment, it wouldn't count because the stunt just affects your total bonus to your roll and not your actual skill.

It's a bit of a bad example because drive never compliments guns it only ever restricts. But using that example:

If your drive is 3 and your guns is 4.

Let's say you have a stunt that boosts drive to 4, your drive is still effectively 3 for the purposes of modifying, therefore, you'd still suffer the -1 penalty to guns.

Any stunts you have to guns get tacked on after you've modified the skill.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Saracen on October 24, 2014, 02:21:33 PM
Right. Thanks.  :)
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: violant on October 26, 2014, 12:07:45 AM
Can you still use a supplemental action to move zones when there's a border?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Mr. Death on October 26, 2014, 03:30:12 AM
No. When there's a border, you have to roll to overcome it and that becomes your main action for the turn.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Sanctaphrax on October 26, 2014, 05:18:57 AM
I let people go over borders supplementally if they could do so on a roll of -4. That's rare, but it's not unheard of.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: dragoonbuster on October 26, 2014, 07:02:59 AM
I allow characters with Speed to overcome borders with supplemental actions. That leads to:
-Inhuman Speed means you take a full -1 on the roll to beat a Border: 1 and move into the next zone
-Supernatural Speed lets you move a zone and beat a Border: 1 for free or Border: 2 for a -1 on the roll.
-Mythic Speed lets you move a zone and beat a Border: 2 for free or Border: 3 for a -1 on the roll.


Sanctaphrax's rule is a good one too.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Saracen on November 07, 2014, 09:07:43 AM
Against what do you roll when making a First Impression? Is it the target's Empathy? A set difficulty? Something else?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: GamingInSeattle on November 14, 2014, 12:13:29 AM
Against what do you roll when making a First Impression? Is it the target's Empathy? A set difficulty? Something else?

I think it depends.  If you are making a First Impression against someone who is not anticipating it or at least not hostile to meeting you, I would use the NPCs relevant skill number as base target.  It also depends on what kind of first impression you are making.

Example:

First impression roll vs a powerful politician may be vs her Presence if you are trying to impress her with your character.
First impression roll vs a celebrity may be vs his Resources if you are trying to impress him with your knowledge of fine art or the latest fashion trends.
First impressions roll vs a scientists may be vs her Scholarship to impress her with your appreciation of science.

First impression rolls vs a NPC's Empathy is certainly appropriate in more general settings or where there is no specific area of knowledge the PC is targeting.

Now if the NPC has been given a heads up that either the PC or someone else is going to try to influence her, I would have it be a contested action.  This is due to the NPC being aware that someone is going to try to influence her in some way and thus can be working actively against such influences. 

Make sense?

~ GiS
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: GamingInSeattle on November 14, 2014, 12:32:26 AM
Hey all,

I think this may have come up earlier, but I'm drawing a blank (both in the books and on the forum).

Question: Can you immediately spend a Fate Point received due to Aspects being invoked against you in the same exchange.

Example:

John has no Fate Points and is fighting Alexis who has 10.  Alexis has the higher initiative.
In a previous exchange Alexis had performed a manuever and placed the Aspect: "Tangled Feet" on John.  She later tagged the Aspect for a +2 bonus to her attack.
Now, Alexis spends a Fate Point to invoke the "Tangled Feet" Aspect on John.  She hands a Fate Point to the GM, the GM hands it to John's player.
Alexis rolls Fists to attack John and gets a total of 2.  She adds +2 due to the Fate Point spent.  Her total Fists attack is now 4.
John rolls his Athletics to get out of the way.  He gets a total of 3.
If John has an Aspect to Invoke, such as "Can't hit me", can he spend the Fate Point he just received to get a +2 to his Athletics to a total of 5, thus dodging Alexis Fist attack completely? 
If he can, doesn't that mean the Fate Point he spent goes to the GM then to Alexis and if she can justify Invoking an Aspect of hers, she can add an additional +2 to her roll?
Does this just go back and forth till someone runs out of Aspects to apply in this one exchange?

Thanks,

GiS

Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on November 14, 2014, 01:04:52 AM
From what I remember, you receive the FP at the end of the exchange.  So, no, you can't use it immediately.

I'll see if I can find the page...

YS pg. 106

Quote
Later in the game, Biff is talking to
someone in a bar who’s been spying on him,
and he knows from a previous assessment that
the guy has a Bad Temper aspect. He decides
to invoke the guy’s aspect with his Intimidation
roll to get the guy to lose his cool and slip up.
Because that invocation creates a disadvantage
for the spy, the GM gives that character a fate
point at the end of the scene
, to save for a future
meeting.

End of scene for Out of Combat situations.

Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Sanctaphrax on November 14, 2014, 07:03:04 AM
Of course, that rarely actually happens since most people don't want to give Fate Points to their enemies. It's generally better to invoke scene Aspects or your own Aspects if you can, and you usually can.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Saracen on November 14, 2014, 11:29:48 AM
Make sense?

Yep. Thanks.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: McNulty on January 13, 2015, 08:32:50 AM
In the rulebooks words “faith,” “holy,” are related to some supernatural monsters (and their catches). For example:

Demons: “Lastly, they are vulnerable to exorcism (magical and faith-based), the power of faith, and holy objects.” (OW35)
The Fallen: “almost certainly vulnerable to faith magic.” (OW55)
Ghosts: “Faith magic works best when simply fighting ghosts…” (OW57)
Ghouls: “Affected by holy water.” (OW58)
Vampires: “True faith and holy objects can burn vampires.” (OW84)

But when it comes to rules mechanics, there's not much to go on. I'm specially interested how faith-based exorcism would work (priest with true faith vs. demon inside human body). Other examples of faith-based interactions vs. monsters are also welcome.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Haru on January 13, 2015, 09:37:21 AM
Can you say "Holy pickup truck of St. Green"?
http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,28668.msg1235810.html#msg1235810
The beast wasn't vulnerable to holy stuff, but it was worth the effort.

Basically, a true believer should be able to bless things, giving them the aspect "holy", at least for a while. Usually, those blessed things will be holy water or various symbols of faith, but depending on the believer, the range of objects might encompass all kinds of things. Including a pickup truck.

Depending on your campaign, the blessing might have to be more thorough, not just holy water, but holy water from St. Paul's Cathedral blessed during the Easter Sermon or something along those lines. But your garden variety monster should be vulnerable to your garden variety blessing. If it seems too powerful (like blessing the rain!), you could ask the player to spend a fate point for it.

Then, of course, there are things that will always be holy. The swords, for example. A believer might have imbued an ordinary weapon with the power of his faith, simply by using it a lot, and every attack with that weapon could be seen as satisfying the catch of "holy". Or the character has prepared things. Silver bullets cast from the materials of a blessed cross. A cross or even a bible verse carved into a bullet, doused in holy water and blessed by a priest.

Then there's the "holy" power. A martial arts true believer can be quite dangerous. I've also seen a power somewhere that allows a true believer to extend his holy power to the melee weapon he is carrying.

Exorcism example:
http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,28668.msg1921623.html#msg1921623
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on January 13, 2015, 01:55:56 PM
I think Faith is a lot more broad than Holy. 

Putting a line of salt across the threshold of your bedroom to keep away evil spirits isn't Holy in the traditional, Christian sense but truly believing in  the Lore might imbue that threshold with Power. 

Harry's silver pentacle is another example.

Faith covers all forms of belief.  With enough conviction, you can gain power over a supernatural being that has a weakness to it.

The right aspect and/or conviction maneuver might be all you need to hold an evil creature at bay or injure it or drive it away.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Quantus on January 13, 2015, 02:27:26 PM
"Broader" doesnt feel like the right word.  I think it is more that there is Faith magic that people can do, and you dont have to be particularly "special." Charity and Susan bother were able to use Crosses for that sort of glowing protection.  They always have a focus object to do it, but something tells me it's similar to how harry always uses but doesnt technically need circles: one could simply imagine it whole in their mind, but it would be needlessly difficult. 

Then there is Holy items, which possess the same sort of energy, but it's more innate to the object rather than direct from the caster/faithful.  An example of this is Holy Water, which as far as we've seen requires an ordained priest to bless.  Recall that Harry can use his amulet for a Faith Glow, but he needed to go to Father Forthill when he needed several barrels of Holy Water. 

In terms of Catches they are equivalent, but to me the Holy items have a more permanent attribute. 
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: PirateJack on January 15, 2015, 02:26:26 PM
Mechanics wise, I'd allow items of faith to be used as a defence against creatures that have it as their Catch, for a Fate Point.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: djerf on January 15, 2015, 06:29:49 PM
browsing the site i've found several crafting foci that appear rather large and heavy, such as a lich coffin with +1/+1 or a anvil with the same bonuses, is it the assumption that these foci are used at the time of crafting as opposed to helping one utilize the crafted items? 

I've seen people mention that you can use your crafted items by paying one mental stress, however I haven't been able to find the rules concerning this, neither in any house rules nor YW/OW, could someone please point me in the right direction?

I've got a bunch of other questions but I can't remember them so this will have to do for now, thank you in advance =)
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: dragoonbuster on January 15, 2015, 07:06:48 PM
browsing the site i've found several crafting foci that appear rather large and heavy, such as a lich coffin with +1/+1 or a anvil with the same bonuses, is it the assumption that these foci are used at the time of crafting as opposed to helping one utilize the crafted items? 

Yes - the assumption is they're tools used during the all off-screen crafting process.

I've seen people mention that you can use your crafted items by paying one mental stress, however I haven't been able to find the rules concerning this, neither in any house rules nor YW/OW, could someone please point me in the right direction?

Last sentence of the first paragraph at the top of pg 280 of YS: "If an enchanted item runs out
of uses in a session, if wielded by a practitioner, he may make additional uses anyway by taking one point of mental stress per use."
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: solbergb on January 15, 2015, 10:45:51 PM
Regarding crosses/vampires etc.

This is how I see it.

Their high concept allows Conviction based maneuvers, blocks or even attacks if you've got an implement of your faith (pentacle, cross, star of david, whatever), defended with monster discipline most likely, although perhaps sometimes some other attribute.  You an also just skip the maneuver/block/attack and burn fate to invoke their high concept for immediate effect but that gives them the fate point to hose you with later, so if you're a high conviction fellow like Dresden or Father Fordhill, you'd most likely try the maneuver or block first.

Interpreted this way, the whole "you have to have faith for a cross to work" schtick makes perfect sense - low conviction folks by definition lack the kind of power to block a RCV with a cross the same way low discipline folks are unlikely to avoid being addicted by their venom, and low strength people unable to break their grasp.    But if you burn fate and invoke the high concept, that's saying that in this one moment in time,  you have enough faith to hold them off, even though most of the time a cross is just jewelry to you.   (perhaps for the first time in your life you sincerely pray to a higher power for protection, or whatever, but it doesn't stick with you unless you buy aspects and/or conviction later at milestones)

I agree that some objects seem to "store" faith (holy water being the most obvious example), letting anybody screw with certain high concepts if they have an ally with faith.  If you have a real "True Faith" person in the group, they might, for example, be able to bless the sword of the swashbuckler type, and have it beat holy item based catches, although mechanically it's likely handled by the faith person doing a conviction maneuver with a free tag passed to the swashbuckler, meaning you'll need to burn fate after the first free tag (or tags, depending on how the GM sets up the difficulty for a conviction maneuver of this sort...might work until the scene is over to beat catch, but you can only invoke for +2 or reroll once without fate...)
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: djerf on January 25, 2015, 07:05:40 PM
Thank you    dragoonbuster =)

How do you people handle indirect Lawbreaking, both from a story perspective (do it give Lawbreaker) and from a mechanical viewpoint (how do the Lawbreaker bonus factor in) ?

Examples:
a Summoner ( Ritual summoning -2) Summons a entity with Ritual psycomancy  (or one of the mind control powers), this entity then goes on to break the fourth law.

A artificer ( Ritual crafting -2) creates a weapon that is used  to kill mortals, would it make a difference if he paid to make it useable to another character who then went on to kill mortals?

In my mind it comes down to character concepts, the assassin I'm working on is using Ritual crafting in order to make powerful weaponry and should get lawbreaker first with aspects like " I kill".
On the other hand a holy knight I'm working on took ritual crafting instead a Sword of the Cross in order to be able to use a burning sword and magic shield and stuff, on this guy i don't feel that lawbreaker fits (for comparison I'm sure some KotC, have been forced to kill mortals without having to suffer from a lawbreaker stunt).
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Cadd on January 25, 2015, 07:59:43 PM
Regarding the holy knight: Ignoring the mechanics of the powers for a moment, is the character a practicioner of magic who uses that magic in his holy fight, or is he a devout person using the magic of faith to empower his items?

Because remember, the laws of magic only apply to mortal magic. Faith magic is a whole other ballgame, story-wise. Of course you could give a character the mechanical power of Ritual (Crafting) to represent his faith imbuing items, but then the items all have to conform to that. If so, I wouldn't bring Laws of Magic into it, but I would also restrict what can be done with it along the same lines as how the Knights, Swords and Angels are restricted.

If however the character is a practitioner who is also devoutly faithful, this is mortal magic, and thus subject to the Laws, but also a lot less "externally" restricted.


Overall, these cases of "indirect lawbreaking" is complicated in the source fiction. Binder can apparently skirt the Laws (presumably both the Council's justice and the soul-staining aspect) by having his "lads" to the dirty work, which clearly involves killing. Likewise the Wardens' swords are heavily enchanted (some of it seemingly permanently as opposed to how they work mechanically in the RPG) yet obviously do not run afoul of the laws when used to kill.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: djerf on January 25, 2015, 09:13:17 PM
So, a practitioner/holy knight would after killing a bunch of goons take the lawbreaker stunt and change one aspect from " fighting the good fight" to " slaying evil".
In the next room he finds the dragon that has been terrorizing the countryside and a fight ensues.

"Slippery Slope. Gain a +1 bonus to any spellcasting roll whenever using magic in a way which would break the specified Law of Magic."

Now I have paid a solid refresh for the lawbreaker stunt and during my epic fight with the dragon I want to take advantage of this, would my weapon roll get the +1 if I'm using it to swing my burning sword?
Do any attack with my magic weapons trigger the Lawbreaker stunt or only the killing blow?
Do Lawbreaker only trigger against mortals?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Cadd on January 26, 2015, 12:24:15 AM
Well... Technically it's not spellcasting (unless it is*, but we'll assume not) so by RAW you wouldn't get the bonus. I am however likely to give some kind of bonus. Possibly not to the attack itself, but instead +1 stress on successful hit.

*You can of course narrate an evocation attack as a sword thrust with the right justification, but your example didn't have Channeling/Evocation. You can also have an evocation attack stored in an enchanted item, which would then sort of be a spellcasting roll to activate. In the first case you would definitely get the bonus, and in the second we're back to GM call.

Now, on it triggering only on mortals or more.
By RAW, it would technically only give the bonus when turned against mortals (since you're not breaking the law against others), but I'd probably be generous here. I find the Lawbreaker power an unsatisfying way of handling what it's supposed to do, but don't really have anything better to suggest, so I'd err on the side of giving the bonus. As you said, you have paid a solid refresh for it.

Assuming 1st Law, I would probably add the bonus to any spellcasting-related roll that is directly attempting to kill, and follow up with compels to be more aggressive and reckless than strictly motivated by the situation.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on January 26, 2015, 12:29:35 AM
I go a bit further with Lawbreaker:

If you choose to use the bonus when attacking someone and subsequently Take them Out, you cannot choose how they get taken out.

So, if you're using Lawbreaker 1 bonus, a take out is always death.

But I let them use the bonus against anyone/thing they want.

There may or may not be a compel in there - it depends on the situation but, overall, I leave it up to the player to choose whether or not to use the bonus.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Cadd on January 26, 2015, 01:02:09 AM
Oh absolutely! You use the Lawbreaker bonus, takeout is death, practically no negotiation.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: djerf on January 26, 2015, 01:11:30 AM
Yes, odd things happen when combining crafting and lawbreaker, I obviously don't get better at making magical swords by using one to kill with nor do I get better at sword fighting by killing with a magical sword, but then the only thing I would gain from my 1-2 refresh investment would be the promise of a quick end from the business part of a warden sword. The +1 stress is a good compromise and presents interesting narrative opportunitys.

Anyway, thank you for your opinions on the matter Cadd =)

Taran, your approach towards Lawbreaker feels like it is more in line with the books than the YS way. But I seem to recall that the general attitude is that the player should be able to chose if he kills, unless under special circumstances such as a warning from the GM or compels that he can buy of if he wish to or usage of the Lawbreaker bonus, Right?

I'm sure I've got loads of other questions but I'm drawing blank right now so lets end with, what does RAW stand for ?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Cadd on January 26, 2015, 01:54:11 AM
RAW means Rules As Written.

I'd absolutely give the player a choice. Either use the bonus and takeout is death, or don't use it and have the full freedom of dictating takeout result. I may compel you either way, but if I compel to go for the kill, I'll aim to do it early so you can use the bonus as much as possible.
I'd also probably not compel to go for the kill if you're out of fate points and thus can't refuse.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on January 26, 2015, 12:28:26 PM
Yeah, it's not RAW.  It's just how I deal with it.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: McNulty on April 03, 2015, 05:18:49 PM
Do red court vampires sleep during the day? Or at all?
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: PirateJack on April 03, 2015, 05:29:48 PM
They're probably nocturnal because that's when they're most active, if they do sleep. As they're living beings I'd lean towards them needing to sleep, but I don't think there's anything in the series that says one way or the other.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on April 03, 2015, 05:33:37 PM
It also depends on their level of Recovery.  Higher levels of recovery let you stay up longer...but then they'd have to tap into those powers and that makes them Hungry...
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: dragoonbuster on April 04, 2015, 01:16:14 PM
IIRC, it is implied a couple times that the Red Court do generally sleep during the day, but can be active if they need to be (such as the Tennis Twins in Grave Peril).
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: MadAlchemist on April 04, 2015, 07:40:48 PM
I'd assume just about any RCV would be awake during the day if they are well connected or on guard. They are seriously limited due to the sun-burn problem, so assume resting if they don't have any reason not to.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Saracen on June 10, 2015, 08:15:06 PM
Can anyone clarify the Cat and Mouse trapping under Deceit to me? Does it simply work like the Riposte example-stunt under Weapons (as in you defend with it and, if successful, you use the overflow shifts as an attack)?



Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on June 11, 2015, 02:29:27 AM
Can anyone clarify the Cat and Mouse trapping under Deceit to me? Does it simply work like the Riposte example-stunt under Weapons (as in you defend with it and, if successful, you use the overflow shifts as an attack)?

I think they're using the word 'riposte' as description/adjective - not as a comparison to the stunt.

They are basically saying that you can use deceit as an attack skill for social conflict.  (like using weapons for a physical conflict)

The draw-back to using deceit instead of a skill like rapport is, if you fail to win, you will get caught in the lie.  Which can turn out worse for you if you simply failed to persuade them with the truth.

Deceit works better as a defensive skill (false face forward)because you can apply aspects on your opponent  as your defense - if  you're willing to lie.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Saracen on June 11, 2015, 09:29:48 AM
I think they're using the word 'riposte' as description/adjective - not as a comparison to the stunt.

They are basically saying that you can use deceit as an attack skill for social conflict.  (like using weapons for a physical conflict)

The draw-back to using deceit instead of a skill like rapport is, if you fail to win, you will get caught in the lie.  Which can turn out worse for you if you simply failed to persuade them with the truth.

Deceit works better as a defensive skill (false face forward)because you can apply aspects on your opponent  as your defense - if  you're willing to lie.

My doubt comes from the fact that the description says that you can use Deceit to attack (Cat and Mouse) instead of defending with it (False Face Forward). It also says that this is an option for when someone else initiates the conflict, which means you have already been attacked (presumably). So, as I see it, it's either like the Weapons stunt Riposte (you defend and if successful turn that same defense into an attack), or it means something like... you have to defend with a skill different from Deceit if you want the option to later on attack with Cat and Mouse on your turn. I think the former makes more sense narratively (why wouldn't you be able to both put your false face forward and lie to attack?), but either way, it's not explained very well, imo.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on June 11, 2015, 11:25:44 AM
Honestly, I don't know. False face forward seems to work more like riposte than Cat and Mouse. 

I always just let it be attacks/maneuvers
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Saracen on June 11, 2015, 02:16:32 PM
Honestly, I don't know. False face forward seems to work more like riposte than Cat and Mouse. 

I always just let it be attacks/maneuvers

I don't think you should let False Face Forward inflict consequences, though, only temporary aspects (beside providing false aspects as traps for the opponent, which I don't believe are actual aspects themselves). Anyway, thanks.
Title: Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
Post by: Taran on June 11, 2015, 02:20:29 PM
I never suggested that False Face Forward causes consequences. (although, since riposte can, potentially, cause stress, I suppose I inferred it) In any case, It doesn't even inflict stress.  I suppose it works more like "step into the blow"  where a successful 'parry' allows you to place an aspect on the attacker.