ParanetOnline
The Dresden Files => DFRPG => Topic started by: ways and means on December 11, 2011, 05:46:40 AM
-
I was wondering what do people would think would happen to a Black Court Vampire pushed into the path of a Tube Train which runs at about 50mph, as the result of party effort involving a deceleration, a maneuver, a block and a cheesy pun reminding the vampire to mind the gap. If it was a human I would just say dead but because he is a Black Court Vampire I wonder if he could take it and whether I should just give him a moderate - extreme consequence?
-
This is either a concession (probably death), a taken out result (even more probably death), or an attack somewhere in the range of weapon 5-7 (probably death unless affecting an otherwise-largely-unharmed plot-critical character).
-
I'd base it on how thorough they were in making sure he was dead. If they bothered to make sure the guy was down or if the vampire literally just kersplatted against the train and was carried away. That followed by how important the guy was in the story. Big villain, well, black courts are supposed to be juggernauts of dark energy anyway. I'd probably bring him back out of pure spite for them not being thorough enough.
Screaming for blood, seconds after taking a love tap from a train...maybe not. But definitely down the line a bit. There's something particularly effective with the thought that someone you were so positively sure was dead and out of your life is still kicking and nursing a big grudge.
-
Could it use its Gaseous Form before being struck?
As to how much stress, I think that's up the table to decide. I'd say "death" but I'd also say that if there was a PC involved. It sounds like a classic "Harry killed this way" thing to do.
One thing to remember is the ridiculous amount of stress a BCV can take. An average one can take 9 (NINE!) levels of physical stress without needing to take consequences (assuming that it wasn't a Holy Train). That means there's an out if the table thinks that it should live... Say with limping after them with consequences reflecting the damage it took before it switched forms.
Richard
-
In the short story, It's My Birthday, Too, Harry uses a gravity-manipulating earth spell to drop a substantial chunk of a mall on top of a newly-made BCV. Shortly thereafter, the hand sticking out of the rubble grabs the leg of a girl running past it, and it takes some effort to break the superhuman strength of the BCV's grip.
They may look all beat-up and gross, but BCVs are seriously tough supernatural creatures until one of their catches comes into play.
Now, if it got run over by the Soul Train....
-
I might treat it as a hazard of "X" stress. Similar to falling off of a skyscraper or something. Likely with a death result, but not necessarily.
I think it might be good to decide what sort of stress high damage hazards do.
I might start a thread about hazards and traps. It might be good to compile them. Terminal velocity (or usually terminal velocity): ?
The log trap from Return of the Jedi:? Magnesium flares?
Thermite charges?
Claymore mines?
etc.
-
First of all, story comes first. If you (the GM) need a recurring villain, the Blamp could easily have survived that in many methods. Possible outcomes regardless:
*Gaeous Form, no significant damage
*moderate consequence (assuming no combat preceding)
*severre consequence (some combat preceding)
*Taken out (badly broken)- after long battle
*Taken out (ker-splat)
It if it was a novice, I'd assume one of the latter 2 outcomes almost regardless of consequence. A more experienced Blampire could have any of these, the first if they were smart or lucky. A Master Blampire (like Mavra or anyone somewhat closer to her power level) would likely pull a Gaeous Form methinks.
-
To be honest I think that's the wrong question. It's an inanimate object with no initial story importance. It deals no stress. Now if a player wields it (gives it story importance, likely via declarations, maneuvers and attacks) then it deals the amount of stress that the player makes it deal via his rolls. If a GM wields it, then it deals the amount of stress that is necessary for the desired outcome. The train itself has no bearing on the situation at all.
-
good call, sinker- GM determines desired outcome, picks a number that will cause that outcome, then storytells it to fit (ie, if the number is low, say the conductor was slamming the brakes on, etc) -but a baseline still makes sense for the more type-A GMs among us.
Typically, I'd do something like figure out how much damage a fall at the subway's speed was, and use that as a benchmark for comparison, but last time I tried that, I discovered that fall damage in Dresden is a bit... overdone.
Ballpark- enough direct stress to take out anything mortal in one hit, but to also be survivable by a mortal with 'hero' status (ie, consequences, if he's willing to blow an extreme or more on it)... 7-9 sounds fair, as suggested above.
Are we thinking about this right though? It's not really a weapon being used by someone- it's a basic attack enhanced by environmental factors.
Normally that would be the purview of tapping an aspect (like <High-traffic Subway line>) to improve damage, but some environmental stuff goes way beyond an extra 2 damage...
Like... grappling someone does 1 or 2 (depending on stunts)... throwing them into a wall does 3 or 4, maybe 5 (depending on stunts, fists, and defense roll)... throwing them into <Nearby Pool of Lava> probably ought to do more than throwing them into a <Nearby Stack of Crates>.
Most other games I play have some sort of combined team effect that's far greater than the sum of it's parts... dresden... sorta does, but not to the level I'm used to.
As a GM, I'd say... have a player roll an attack, tap the declared and maneuvered aspect, then gain a further +2 for the pun (minimum)... you're looking at base damage +6 already there.
If, like me, you think some aspects should be more significant, let those aspects stack (throwing someone into Lava is tapping 3 aspects, not 1... ie, <Nearby Pool of Lava> <Lava is Hot> and <No, really. Ask a Geologist. Hot.>).
-
You know, in that case it might be easier to assign a weapon value instead of multiple aspects. Think of it like this: the player is invoking the aspect for effect to gain a weapon, that he uses on this attack. That does however, bring the initial question to bear, and I have no good answer to that, other than the book compares weapon:4 to a speeding semi.
-
Getting hit by a train, as has been mentioned above, isn't necessarily a stress-dealing attack.
I usually figure that normal attacks and the like don't do things like that. You can stab and shoot and bash and lots of other things, but you don't get to deal huge piles of stress just because there's a thing in sight that would splat someone.
Instead, the train is the result of an attack. That's right, stabbing a vampire made a train come into the station. Enough stress happened for either a Concession or Taken Out result, and someone said, "Hey, maybe the vampire gets hit by a train!"
Is it dead? Maybe. It really depends. If the GM's player (the GM, in other words) Conceded, probably not; it's probably just out of the fight for the remainder of the scene or even the rest of the night (depending on the specifics offered in the Concession). If it's Taken Out, it could very well be dead.
Now, is the Taken Out result death, or not? There're sensible arguments both ways.
The game world argument -- Subway trains that hit people more or less knock them literally to pieces. It's very believable that this would cause the necessary sort of injury -- decapitation, perhaps -- to end a vampire.
The game system argument -- The train is 100% narrative spray paint on the fact that the vampire was Taken Out with an attack. It took sufficient damage to remove it from the conflict, and the player thought it'd be cool to stuff it under a moving train. The only thing that matters is the actual attack.
Both arguments are valid, and it totally depends on your group to determine which one is more important to you.
Now, a train could possibly be part of an attack roll, in the same way that a truck could be. In this case, the train gets a weapon rating. And you have to remember that, "Getting hit," and, "Getting nailed dead on and sucked underneath," are two different things. The latter would be the result of a particularly damaging hit. You can get hit in the arm with a fast moving train, in the same way that you can get shot in the hand or the foot with a high powered rifle.
In typical Fate fashion, there are lots of ways to do one thing. The right answer is very situational, so use your judgment.
-
The train was the result of a compel for effect of the tube station, speeding train, pushed on the tracks and blocked escape aspects, so I was wondering if I should treat it as a compel to a consession with apropriate concequences or if I should stat out the train as an effect.
-
If it's just a terminology mix up and I'm totally overreacting tell me, but technically that's not how compels work. Firstly a compel may not dictate a course of action. They may narrow options, or make things more difficult, but they do not say "This is the result". Death is an attempt to dictate the action.
Furthermore it's a really weak compel. "I compel you to die" is just terrible.
Lastly you don't really "Compel for effect" because that's all a compel ever does.
-
Cars get a weapon effect by the rules, so giving a similar one to a train can make some sense. But a GM could rule that the weapon impact of a car is predicated upon the driver attempting to use it as a weapon (running down an opponent) rather than as an environmental hazard (getting thrown into traffic). However, the train-as-hazard thing seems like another flavor of using the environment to gain a vastly superior numerical effect (like the falling rules).
As the RAW state, a GM is discouraged from allowing players to take advantage of things like cliffs, rooftops, etc. in order to add falling damage to an attack. Your attack is the amount of stress *you* deal, and if falling happens during the attack, it can be added into the narrative outcome, but the stress you deal with your attack is not bolstered any more than the +2 you get for tagging an Aspect. Stress which, as many have noted, may not even result in Consequences reflecting actual damage.
So, I'd flavor the train carrying the Blampire away as a narrative exposition about the Concession or Taken Out result the players have accomplished through their rolls, Declarations, Maneuvers, etc.
But if it is more fun to call a train Weapon:7-10, then feel free to do so!
You might consider opting to make it a separate transaction from any player attacks, though I would perhaps allow certain of the players' Declarations/Maneuvers/etc. to be tagged for a bonus to the train's "attack roll."
-
You can use your tag of an aspect you created to create an effect and when that effect has significant negative results on an opponent compel mechanics come in. So my players tagged the four appropriate aspect to create the effect BCV hit by train, now as a GM I could either stat said train as an environmental attack and roll it or I could consider being hit by a train to mean an concession which takes said BCV out of the fight with certain consequences which as the GM I would be inspired to compel because of the train effect.
The raw does discourage players using environmental features such as height to their advantage but it doesn't prohibit it, it mentions giving said target plenty of opportunities to avoid said situation when it happens. Personally I like interesting use of environments and tags for effect so I am pretty lenient on the issue, I will let people maneuver Villains of cliffs because if they matter they will be able to grab onto something before falling damage happens.
-
Any solution that gets in the way of the game isn't one... that includes flow. If you're doing PbP where you have the time to debate this- go for it... but at a table, I'd say that concession would be your go-to... it's quick, easy, and if anyone doesn't like it, it's negotiable.
-
But you're still dictating a specific outcome. What you could do is invoke for effect to have a train roll by and have it be a potential complication for the BCV. However a compel can't dictate that the BCV gets hit by the train. That's up to the BCV to decide. In this case I suppose it doesn't matter, as the person compelling, and the person making the decision are the same person (the GM), but you probably ought to be careful with that or the players wind up with an edge that you can't use against them.
-
You can use your tag of an aspect you created to create an effect and when that effect has significant negative results on an opponent compel mechanics come in. So my players tagged the four appropriate aspect to create the effect BCV hit by train, now as a GM I could either stat said train as an environmental attack and roll it or I could consider being hit by a train to mean an concession which takes said BCV out of the fight with certain consequences which as the GM I would be inspired to compel because of the train effect.
(Writing this, assuming you use the train as a Weapons Roll).
Yes, it can cause an effect but it can't cause the decision that the BCV can't get off the tracks. DFRPG is all about choices, so in essence even the BCV can't be robbed of that. Removing the PHYSICAL OPTION to move is different, and those 4 aspects could be used as a bonus on the "train-weapon roll". I don't think the tag for effect cause taking out itself- only stress (in this case physical) does that. So I'd favor the "weapon" roll, boosted by the tagged aspects (you could even further tag the BCV's other consequences)- the intended result by the GM (BCV destroyed or nearly destroyed) is still nearly guaranteed, as the train would have if you merely went the story route. As the GM, you could choose whether or not the concession is taken (in the persona of the BCV).
And again, if you want the villain to survive, there's easily story elements that allow for that- ie BCV (especially older ones, don't know what kind you were using) are incredibly durable, and have Gaeous Form.
-
I still think "Okay, it's dead" is a good call to make. Maybe it doesn't fit the exact wording of the rules but this isn't D&D or another "rules lawyer" friendly game. If it fits with the spirit of play AND the table is okay with then it's a good call - and who except the table would know if it fits the spirit of play for that group?
And there are similar things in the novels, where Harry had used the environment to kill an unstopable monster.
That said, I'm leery of things like this; pushing someone in front of a train is a "spit second timing" sort of thing - especially if your target is moving at faster than normal speed (like in this case). Too late and you bounce off the train or might get pulled under. Too soon and the target has a second or two to scramble to safety.
But there are situations where it makes sense to say "He's dead Jim" - and that goes along with the table judging the reasonableness of an outcome.
Richard
-
OK, the BCV is dead after being hit by a train. As soon as the combat is over and stress goes away, it uses its "death is a nuisance" ability to shrug off death like the inconvenience it is, turns gaseous and reforms before the PCs unharmed. :o
Seriously people, full BCVs (not total newbies) are nightmares. You need to run one over with a car over a half-dozen times merely to put them down. To permanently kill them you need to incinerate or stake them, or use holy/garlic attacks. At the same time, they are strong enough to flip said car one-handed.
-
OK, the BCV is dead after being hit by a train. As soon as the combat is over and stress goes away, it uses its "death is a nuisance" ability to shrug off death like the inconvenience it is, turns gaseous and reforms before the PCs unharmed.
That does sound like a good outcome - reoccurring villain and the PCs realise that they should have read Dracula, not just watched a movie.
Richard
PS - bonus points for those who remember how Dracula was killed in the book. For those of you who missed it - it's recounted in Fred Saberhagen's "The Dracula Tapes".
-
PS - bonus points for those who remember how Dracula was killed in the book. For those of you who missed it - it's recounted in Fred Saberhagen's "The Dracula Tapes".
Well, according to Saberhagen, he wasn't killed. It's been a few years since I last read that series (and much longer since I read Stoker's book), but I think the answer you're looking for is "decapitated," and I believe it was a sword or large knife. In Saberhagen's version, Vlad makes a comment about the stupidity of Van Helsing and friends, thinking he could be seriously injured with a metal weapon.
I have to say, The Dracula Tapes was an awesome book, and the rest of the series is quite good, too. The series had been out of print for a decade or two, I believe, but it looks like Amazon is selling the Kindle versions now.
-
In Saberhagen's version, Vlad makes a comment about the stupidity of Van Helsing and friends, thinking he could be seriously injured with a metal weapon.
The idea was that since the bowie knife was a 'pure' metal it would effect him the way pure things did - and later Dracula commented on how idiotic that sounded even to his ears.
Then again, it was during the daylight hours so maybe...
Richard
-
There's no way the BCV is dead from that. Taken out, yes, at the very least the BCV is far enough away now that it would take a new scene for it to show up. The only question is how many people need to be drained of their blood for it to come back with no physical consequences.
-
And whether it's capable of draining that blood without assistance. Which, if it's not, and doesn't have someone/something to provide that assistance, is as good as dead.
-
Does it need to feed to power:
Death is a Nuisance: Unless wholly destroyed or killed by special means, you’re already dead, and that doesn’t seem to have fazed you much. No “death” result is ever permanent unless special means are used (usually as determined by your creature type).
?
Richard
-
First off, as Belial pointed out, the Living Dead can't die except via a means exploiting a specific weakness. So the worst case scenario for the BCV is that he's taken out and -- assuming measures aren't taken to prevent it -- recovers eventually.
That said, I agree with others that the train should be treated as more or less a weapon for purposes of the mechanics. So maybe the character uses Athletics to attack with the weapon:5 train (to time the throw properly). If the BCV is 'taken out', then he is 'dead' ... until he gets better. If not, then pick your resolution: perhaps he leaps back up to the platform jst before the train arrives, suffering no more than a glancing blow (or not so glancing, depending on the attack's results). Or he leaps up at the last moment and clings to the ceiling of the tunnel, taking the glancing blow, then leaps down after the train passes. Or similarly, he ducks down between the tracks, using his strength to avoid getting sucked into the train's undercarriage. Or he smashes through the front windshield of the train, surprising the driver (and draining him dry to heal some damage via Blood Drinker). Or he 'sticks' to the front of the train, letting it carry him to safety. Etc.
I think I was running the scene, I'd probably opt to play the scene out as a concession. The vampire gets to narrate the result, which would be the "breaking through the cab and eating the driver" option because it appeals to me. The players make no attack roll (beyond the maneuver they used to get the vamp there in the first place) because it's a concession, but I'd mix in some environmental damage reduced by an appropriate roll (in this case, probably the Athletics limited by Might or vice versa dodge the train through its window). This resulting damage might well be mitigated entirely by Toughness combined by a refreshing snack. In the aftermath, of course, the runaway train might be brought to a stop in time by the passengers ... or it might result in a spectacular crash with the size effect of concealing the fate of the BCV. Well, until a later scene in which it returns for vengeance, of course.
But your mileage might vary.