ParanetOnline
The Dresden Files => DFRPG => Topic started by: Janus Node on July 02, 2010, 09:08:45 AM
-
OK, so I'm starting up a new RPG group on Dresden Files RPG pretty soon, and I was reviewing the rules as GM. As I work on my cheat sheet notes, I found that I was having trouble finding guidelines on how exactly negative refresh affected NPCs. Yes, I understand that it keeps the characters from gaining Fate points without taking compels, but how is 0 Refresh of someone that's just gone over the edge different than the -30 Refresh of an Outsider Assassin? Is it just a matter of roleplay, or is there a mechanics note I'm missing?
Now, if I'm not just missing something (which I admit is quite possible), I'm trying to think of some mechanics to help me as a GM keep things level. Here's my ideas so far:
- Extra Trouble Slots - With the sacrifice of mortal will you get more and more trouble the crops up in your existence. 0 is just a being that has just lost free will, -1 to -5 is your first extra trouble, -6 to -15 could be the next slot, and so on. These represent not only the extra opportunities for compels, but the need for the being to be driven by things other than choices the make for themselves. (examples: Loathing of own Mortality, Always Second Best, and Need for Affirmation)
- Refresh Repayment - This is a bit more of a book-keeping issue; instead of starting with refresh points you can spend, you have debt points that have to be worked off with compels. It could be on a 1-for-1 basis or some other increment (I could see as going as high as 1 debt for every -5).
- Skill Blindspots - When you give up on living life as a journey and instead devote yourself to power so much that you lose sight of what makes you a person, you also lose sight of the importance for certain life skills. Pay off negative refresh with negative skill ranks; you can have as many skills as you want at -1 (Poor), but they have to be equal or greater than the skills you have at -2 (Terrible), which have to be equal or greater than the skills you have at -3 (Abysmal). -3 would be the limit of the negative range.
- Or any combination of those three!
Please keep in mind, this is just me brainstorming as I work and would very much like to hear thoughts or corrections from others. If there's something I've missed in the book, please let me know the page number. If there's another topic that covers this, I'd love to read it. And if you think these ideas have merit or could use some additions/alterations/corrections, then I'd love to hear that also!
-
It's simple, really. A negative refresh being has no Fate points. At all. They can't even get new Fate points from compels. And because of that, they can't invoke their aspects for benefits and can't exercise free will by bying off compels or taking advantage of other aspects.
-
It's simple, really. A negative refresh being has no Fate points. At all. They can't even get new Fate points from compels. And because of that, they can't invoke their aspects for benefits and can't exercise free will by bying off compels or taking advantage of other aspects.
I have to disagree on that. In my opinion even a negative refresh being will have fate points that it can spend. They totally can get them out of compels and they totally can spend them on invokes. Otherwise it wouldn't make sense at all mechanic wise to stat NPC with aspects (or even stunts that use fate) as they only would give them further weak points with no benefits.
All what spend refresh on a NPC does is, that it provides you with an indicator on how powerful it is in comparison to other NPC and the PC. Remember that spend refresh is not equal to base refresh or adjusted refresh. What you do as a GM is think about what amount of base refresh would be appropriate for the NPC at the given moment. Take the refresh the PC have into account and keep track of the compels you make towards an important NPC during your scenario.
Again: Power levels simply doesn't apply to NPC. Not giving fate points to NPC can lead to really really imbalance situations where the PC will own the NPC just because of fate points.
-
all those options look useful, but I usually just treat it as the character has no ability to get fate points unless he gets a lot of compels from the PC's, and he has to accept all compels other characters use against one of his aspects. One thing to keep in mind is that the refresh available for NPC's is different from the refresh available to the PC's. The Senior Council of the White Council, for instance, can easily be statted up with 30 points in powers and still be considered to be in the positives for refresh.
-
I was talking about the nonhuman NPCs. The human NPCs (including wizards) have a refresh slightly higher than their cost total. That's usually 1-2 points for wizards and 4-5 points for mortals. And then they'd follow the same rules as PCs.
-
I was talking about the nonhuman NPCs. The human NPCs (including wizards) have a refresh slightly higher than their cost total. That's usually 1-2 points for wizards and 4-5 points for mortals. And then they'd follow the same rules as PCs.
So just to clarify: In your opinion something like a BCV or any kind of vamp for that matter don't get fate points? Low level Fey don't get fate points? Mythical creatures don't get fate points?
The only thing i'd might be convinced to agree on would be basic animals, as it isn't even that important if they have fate points to spend or not. In my opinion the points are such a fundamental mechanic in this system that it is highly problematic to cut anything out of having some.
-
Right, OK, so from the way I'm reading it most people are just using the negative refresh as an RP guideline and not as a hard mechanic. And that's fine and makes sense to me; I'm just interested to see how folks are handling it and working things in their games.
As for mortals with negative refresh, I was given to understand from the book that it was very possible and likely that wizards and even vanilla mortals could "Go Negative". Like the obsessed wizard that sells themselves to the pursuit of Ultimate Power (very Doctor Doom), or the mortal businessman that becomes a financial juggernaut that is dead inside (almost a bit Citizen Kane). Am I wrong?
-
As for mortals with negative refresh, I was given to understand from the book that it was very possible and likely that wizards and even vanilla mortals could "Go Negative". Like the obsessed wizard that sells themselves to the pursuit of Ultimate Power (very Doctor Doom), or the mortal businessman that becomes a financial juggernaut that is dead inside (almost a bit Citizen Kane). Am I wrong?
You are quite right. If a PC goes below 1 adjusted refresh he automatically becomes a NPC and the player has to hand in his sheet. Of cause this will very really happen, as it is (or should be?) almost impossible for a player to go below 1, if he doesn't decide to.
-
Right, indeed that it should be a deal breaker if a PC does it. I just am thinking things out from an NPC creation standpoint as a GM. I'm seeing it in my minds eye like an Essence System from Shadowrun, but with powers and abilities instead of cyberware. You exceed your "allowance" and it's like you've taken a shortcut that you never should have gone for.
-
As for mortals with negative refresh, I was given to understand from the book that it was very possible and likely that wizards and even vanilla mortals could "Go Negative". Like the obsessed wizard that sells themselves to the pursuit of Ultimate Power (very Doctor Doom), or the mortal businessman that becomes a financial juggernaut that is dead inside (almost a bit Citizen Kane). Am I wrong?
Yes, pure mortals can go negative refresh, but when you are dealing with NPC mortals, what negative refresh means is different in every circumstance. The base refresh level of every pure mortal outside of the PC's is likely to be different, so grunts will have a base refresh of 3 or so, and some really powerful humans can have a base refresh in 20's or even 30's (in the case of very long lived wizards, for instance) without losing themselves in their nature.
So just to clarify: In your opinion something like a BCV or any kind of vamp for that matter don't get fate points? Low level Fey don't get fate points? Mythical creatures don't get fate points?
Yes. Monsters are so tightly bound to their natures that it doesn't make sense for the free will mechanic to work in their favor.
-
Yes. Monsters are so tightly bound to their natures that it doesn't make sense for the free will mechanic to work in their favor.
Ok. If this is the case, why stat them monsters with aspects? The reason you give supports that they are always compelled to act upon their monstrous nature...
I guess it again comes down on how you interpret the rules. To me, anything even remotely resembling a sentient being should have access to fate points. At least this is how I'm handling it in our game, as I see no real reason for them not having the points. It just would be such a huge imbalance if the players have them and the monsters don't. Perhaps I'm understanding you all wrong though, as I have a huge headake at the moment ;D
-
I believe NPCs with negative refresh can have fate points, they just dont start with any.
So at the beginning of a scenario the guy with a -10 adjusted refresh doesn't gain any fate points (unlike the PCs, who have a positive refresh, and gain fate points equal to their adjusted refresh). This doesn't mean that they cant ever get them through compels.
-
heh, sorry for causing the headaches, as that wasn't my intent. But here's where I'm reading things so far:
Monsters (non-sentient): Minimal or no Fate Points, perhaps something that shows the limited nature of a creature vs. a sentient (even if they are without free will) being.
Sentient NPC with Negative Refresh: A sentient being that is driven by basic nature instead of choices that make variation. Could be a low powered person that has reached too far without proper self-awareness, or a high powered person that has sold their soul for cosmic power.
Sentient NPC with Positive Refresh (or a PC): A person that has the ability to go beyond basic nature and more easily affect their world, at the cost of taking the slow route in developing their strengths. Can be a normal mortal person or a powerful being that has chosen to maintain balance in what they can do and who they are.
Sound about right?
And I agree on the not getting any Fate at the start, I'm just wondering if there's any functional difference then between 0 and -20. Both would get no refresh at the start, but there doesn't seem to be any other penalty the further down you go.
EDIT: (addendum) With all that's been discussed, to people see negative Refresh as any sort of roleplay guideline? Original WoD had a number of "Humanity" scales across their titles, but here Refresh does not seem to be about "Good & Evil" as much as it has to do with "Nature vs. Choice".
-
EDIT: (addendum) With all that's been discussed, to people see negative Refresh as any sort of roleplay guideline? Original WoD had a number of "Humanity" scales across their titles, but here Refresh does not seem to be about "Good & Evil" as much as it has to do with "Nature vs. Choice".
I'd say it definitely can be a roleplay guideline, but only if you want it to be. Personally I'd applaud a low refresh level wizard PC being played as if he has to struggle against the temptation of using his powers for the wrong cause. Yet if the player not decides to set up the character that way I'm fine with that too.
You are right with the last statement. More "Nature vs. Choice" then "Good vs. Evil".
PS: Don't worry about the headake ... was due to dehydration. Is much better now ;).
-
I'm fairly lax when it comes to negative Refresh on NPCs. Obviously those characters are more a slave to their natures than others, but that's a roleplay thing, not a mechanic. I allow NPCs to gain Fate Points based on how important they'll be to the game.
A major villain, clearly acting in accordance with his dark nature, will gain many Fate Points before a final confrontation with the PCs, so as to be an appropriate challenge for the climax.
But I definitely wouldn't rule that NPCs with negative Refresh could never gain Fate Points. It even states in Your Story that powerful villains might start with no Fate Points due to their Refresh level, but that they can gain them as the scenario plays out.
-
Ok. If this is the case, why stat them monsters with aspects?
An item of note, even if they don't happen have any fate points on hand to invoke their own aspects, it's always possible for someone (such as a PC) to tag an aspect on them, once it's been discovered through Assessment.
-
An item of note, even if they don't happen have any fate points on hand to invoke their own aspects, it's always possible for someone (such as a PC) to tag an aspect on them, once it's been discovered through Assessment.
Kind of the point I made before actually. Stating them with aspects witch they can't invoke them selfs is just the same as providing them with more flaws that others can abuse, further adding to the imbalance that comes from not giving them fate points of their own.
-
I think void is trying to point out that a compel on one of their aspects would hand them a fate point. Like I said ealier, they might not start off with fate points, but they can still gain them through compels and complications just like a PC can. Also, since these guys are going to be fairly Bad Assed they probably have a few fate points banked (from past compels).
-
I think void is trying to point out that a compel on one of their aspects would hand them a fate point. Like I said ealier, they might not start off with fate points, but they can still gain them through compels and complications just like a PC can. Also, since these guys are going to be fairly Bad Assed they probably have a few fate points banked (from past compels).
Ok. I misunderstood then. I agree with that.
-
Kind of the point I made before actually. Stating them with aspects witch they can't invoke them selfs is just the same as providing them with more flaws that others can abuse, further adding to the imbalance that comes from not giving them fate points of their own.
Adding to the imbalance? What about the part where they don't have to worry about fate refresh? Remember, even in our source material, the bad guys outweigh our heroes by a Bunch of a Lot on the power scale. Fate points are actually what lets our PCs have a chance against the monsters. That, and manipulating their natures.
Honestly, most of the time I'd be disinclined to let negative refresh bad guys have very many fate points, if any at all; I'd expect anyone who'd be so far gone to be more or less unable to hold onto any gained from compels for long. If they were inclined to restrain themselves against their nature, they wouldn't have gone negative in the first place.
-
Of course NPCs don't have to worry about their Refresh, since Refresh is what determines whether or not a PC becomes an NPC. That's hardly any kind of a balance to not getting any Fate Points.
NPCs should be using Fate Points for things like ensuring that the main villain escapes, or to ensure the final big showdown isn't over in a single round of combat because a PC happens to get lucky on a Weapons roll.
For NPCs, Fate Points should only really reflect the GM's ability to keep the game fun and challenging for the players.
-
I think it's been pretty clearly said, but I'm just tossing this out there to make sure I personally didn't misread something from the rulebooks:
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there a section discussing NPCs and Fate Points, and that there were two methods involving them?
If I remember correctly, the NPCs start off with a number of Fate Points equal to the number of Refresh they have left (which, if you are scaling the NPCs, they have a base Refresh of the party). If they have gone into the Negative Refresh Zone, they do not start of with ANY Fate Points unless they are given them via compels.
The second (this is the one I can't remember offhand, and I'm getting zerg rushed here again): GMs start off with a set number of Fate Points in a pool for their NPCs based upon the number of party members/available refresh among them. This will make badder bastards with some semblance of control, but isn't that the reason this is being brought up?
If anyone knows the page for that idea, please let me know; would be nice to know I'm not crossing my games too badly again ^^;
-
Of course NPCs don't have to worry about their Refresh, since Refresh is what determines whether or not a PC becomes an NPC. That's hardly any kind of a balance to not getting any Fate Points.
NPCs should be using Fate Points for things like ensuring that the main villain escapes, or to ensure the final big showdown isn't over in a single round of combat because a PC happens to get lucky on a Weapons roll.
For NPCs, Fate Points should only really reflect the GM's ability to keep the game fun and challenging for the players.
That sums it up nicely i think. It comes down to being able to adept the opposition on the fly when it seems necessary. I'm in no way suggesting that the fate point system should be used in the same way as it is for players. In most circumstances that's not even necessary. Just saying that in my opinion non human or negative refresh NPC not getting fate points is problematic.
-
The section on NPCs and Fate Points (YS 351-352) suggests that NPCs acquire fate points based on their status in the game. Main NPCs gain fate points like PCs, through compels, negative invocation of their aspects by other parties, etc. Supporting NPCs get fate points in all the usual ways, and additionally one extra per scene they participate in, since they have fewer aspects to compel. Finally, nameless NPCs don't usually get any since they have no aspects of their own, but optionally you can give them access to their master's fate points, and give any fate points the minions earn from consequences and cashing out back to the master.
Aside from starting with no fate points, I don't think that having a negative refresh has any mechanical impacts. In terms of roleplaying, I would say that the degree of negativity reflects the degree that the NPC is ruled by its nature. A -1 refresh NPC has a harder time overcoming its drives than a -30 NPC. As a GM, I would almost never refuse a compel to a -30 NPCs aspects, even when accepting it is wildly stupid.
-
Thank you DFJunkie for th page numbers, that helps me a lot :)
Also thank you everyone else for your thoughts and input so far, it helps to see this from the multiple viewpoints that you're bringing. I'm thinking I may still adopt some sort of side mechanic for my Negative NPCs, but at a much lower involvement level than I was thinking before. It would be something used mostly for Named NPCs and not lower involvement characters. It's just the sort of thing I like to have... a sort of symmetry in the system.
*shrug*
In the meantime... for "Negative NPCs", is there a "Bottom Limit" any other GMs consider when making folks for their game? It looks like -30 is the limit on what they have statted without going into the Canon Characters section.
-
theoretically, my bottom limit is twice the total refresh the group of PC's have spent on powers and stunts. However, it can get hard to stat up foes that have more than -30 refresh spent, and around -40 or so you might have to start making custom powers for it to work, and at that point, the power may not scale in a way that the refresh actually represents the challenge rating of the opponent.
-
In the meantime... for "Negative NPCs", is there a "Bottom Limit" any other GMs consider when making folks for their game? It looks like -30 is the limit on what they have statted without going into the Canon Characters section.
I don't think there is a "set" limit, but there was a comment on YS335 that explains when an NPC gets too out of hand with powers (you know, after you treated the powers section like a shopping list), you may want to consider how much more you want to do with one NPC.
Personally, I'd be tailoring the major faced foes based upon the party. Literally. Be fair and not cover EVERY weakness, but be enough of a jerk to make sure that their major, mainly used powers have to be used in new and creative ways.
If I ever have anything with the Refresh Costs in the range of the Nickleheads, it'll either be a majorly recurring villain that does little face-to-face work with/against the PCs, or one that I know my PCs can handle if they work together and are smart about it.
Then again, if I'm building something THAT big. . .I might as well go all out and break every rule in the book ^^;
Again, just tossing ideas out there.
-
I think YS p. 329 makes it clear that NPcs with Negative Refresh (Mavra for example) can still gain and lose Fate Points.
Still, the definitive word is YS p. 351:
"...as truly monstrous opponents will often start the game with no fate points due to negative refresh and require “on-camera” compels before receiving them."
So that's clearly how you do it.
-
Yes, but I think that Janus is now thinking about a house rule now.
Personally I'd consider charging ubernegative NPCs extra fate points to buy out of compels.
One thing I want to make clear, when I talk about an NPC with negative refresh, I mean an NPC that has spent more points on powers and stunts than it can afford with its base refresh. It isn't so much a balancing mechanism (total points spent on powers/stunts determines actual power) as it is a measure of how much control the NPC has over its nature.
Think of a character who picks up a Denarius while at a +1 total refresh. At first he resists the Fallen and maintains his positive refresh. Eventually our tragic anti-hero gives in and buys Hellfire at the angel's urging, bringing him to -1. Sure, he's an NPC, but he isn't going to go around slaughtering his friends and family for no good reason. He might even help out his former comrades from time to time. As time goes buy the Fallen helps him master his magic, and he buys four more points of refinements, for a total of -5. At this point he's pretty far gone, but still recognizably the same person he was. Twisted and evil, yes, but still the same person. Then he goes hog wild and takes all the shapeshifting powers, bringing him to a total of -15. Ouch. At that point I'd say the person he was is gone, entirely under the thrall of his Fallen.
Come to think of it, I'd say that the Denarians who keep their human names probably don't have substantially negative refresh totals.
-
Great thoughts there everyone, and thank you.
Yes... I'm thinking both in terms of house rules and as a progression into "uncontrolled power" for roleplay. I like DFJunkie's progression thoughts, and agree with the progression of the mortal away from their original personality and towards the nature and instincts of one of The Fallen. I'm still not sure if there's anything I'll actually do different for my game from what's in the book, but whenever I start seeing number ranges my brain starts juggling through permutations and formulas to find ways of defining and explaining things. If I playtest anything with the group that seems to work, I'll bring it forward here to see if there are any new thoughts on the matter.
-
Negative respect equals being predictable when long term planning is not an issue.
Remember the scene on Demonreach where Harry and Sanya and Michael assaulted all of the Denerians? Now this is pure guesswork but I would say Nick is somewhere about -1 or 3 at most while Tessa's faction would be around -5 or much much less (like the rhino analog guy. don't have book with me, the one elder gruff killed). When they had to act on instict, they all acted predictably and Tessa did what she always does, backstabbed her husband :)
In game mechanic terms, the more negative refresh your enemy has, the more stuff you can pin on him (tags, compels, free invokes) so that "YOU" control the encounter instead of random dice rolls.
-
Yeah, until the NPC buys off his negative, he has no FATE points. If Niccodemus is compel, sure he gets a FATE point. Now he's only 17 in the hole, rather than 18 or whatever.
It's pretty simple. Heavyweights like Mab and such never, never get FATE points. She has no free will at all. She is waht she is. Same with BCV and RCV. They are what they are. They're not resisting they're aspects. Unless maybe they buy them off with a whole lotta compels.
-
Yeah, until the NPC buys off his negative, he has no FATE points. If Niccodemus is compel, sure he gets a FATE point. Now he's only 17 in the hole, rather than 18 or whatever.
That really isn't supported in the text. NPCs with 0 or lower refresh don't start the session with fate points, but the section on NPCs and fate points goes into several examples of such NPCs earning them through play. If you want to houserule that negative refresh NPCs start with negative fate points they need to buy off before usable ones will accumulate that's fine, but it's still a houserule.
-
Check YS p. 329. That is in fact, exactly how it works by the official rules.
-
Check YS p. 329. That is in fact, exactly how it works by the official rules.
I confused, the only time the word refresh appears on YS p.329 is "If you want to make a really powerful adversary, you may need to give the NPC additional refresh and skill points, as per character advancement (page 88).", the words fate, invoke and compel don't appear at all.
-
I'm sorry, I was skimming my previous post and referenced the wrong page. My bad.
I meant YS p. 351. Specifically:
"...as truly monstrous opponents will often start the game with no fate points due to negative refresh and require “on-camera” compels before receiving them."
Though looking at it again, I guess that's less definitive than I was remembering it as. Maybe you're right...
-
It would be nice if we had an example of someone like Mavra gaining refresh through compels, or if they clarified the issue.
Another reason I don't think the NPCs need to make up some sort of debt is that Our World only gives the NPCs total refresh costs which are relevant for balancing opposition to the PCs and not net refresh which is only mechanically relevant if you need to figure out when they pay off their negatives and start gaining points.
-
It think it's just one of those things where they think it's clear, so didn't clarify. I mean, to me, there's a big honking negative sign in front of their refresh number. I just assumed that meant that they had negative refresh, with all of the resulting math that comes with that and whatnot, ya know?
I don't think it's really a play issue. People with negative refresh not having access to FATE points is the backbone of Dresden. I mean, why make PCs without refresh into NPCs if they can just easily get FATE like it ain't no thang?
-
I'm sorry, I was skimming my previous post and referenced the wrong page. My bad.
I meant YS p. 351. Specifically:
"...as truly monstrous opponents will often start the game with no fate points due to negative refresh and require “on-camera” compels before receiving them."
Though looking at it again, I guess that's less definitive than I was remembering it as. Maybe you're right...
It's rather more explicit on p. 333, in the sidebar "What's the Base?"
Assume that any main NPC is going to have a base refresh equal to a PC (accounting for milestones and the like). If you spend over that, they have no fate points when they start play.
No fate points. Not negative fate points.
-
Hmmm. I guess you're right. I stand corrected.
Never let it be said I'm not willing to admit when I'm wrong. :)
That said, making negative Fate Points free compels seems a perfectly valid house rule, at least to me.
-
i'm not sure where i read it, but i'm pretty sure i read somewhere in the books that -
"if a creature has negative refresh they have given into their nature and cannot resist compels, as compels are to act in line with your nature. They can still gain fate points but they cannot spend them to resist compels."
Then again maybe i just imagined reading that lol. Oh well thats how i've been running negative refresh creatures.
-
That said, making negative Fate Points free compels seems a perfectly valid house rule, at least to me.
No doubt. I mean, sure the PCs start with fate points, er, fate point. As in one, because they're not morons and spent all their refresh. It does seem somewhat unfair that someone who is fifteen points in the hole only acts a little more in tune with their nature than a free-willed PC.
I'd say that viable houserules could be:
1) Negative refresh NPCs gain fate points as normal, but cannot refuse compels until they have accumulated a number of fate points equal to their net negative refresh (this will require assigning refresh totals to the NPCs statted out in OW, since it only tells you how much they spent, not how much they overspent).
2) Negative refresh NPCs do not gain fate points at all until they've paid off their debt.
3) Negative refresh NPCs must pay more than one fate point to buy out of compels.
I'm leaning towards using 3) in my games to see how it goes. I'll assume everyone starts out as Submerged (so subtract 10 from their spent refresh). If they are between 0 and -5 they buy out of compels as normal. From between -6 and -10 it will cost them 2 fate points to buy out of a compel. From -11 to -15 it will cost 3, and creatures who are more than sixteen points in the hole can't buy out at all.
It is also possible that I will restrict the higher costs to compels against an NPCs high concept.
-
No doubt. I mean, sure the PCs start with fate points, er, fate point. As in one, because they're not morons and spent all their refresh.
Huh? I have a single PC who's at 1 Refresh, and most of the rest at two or so, with a Pure Mortal at 5. I haven't noticed a meaningful dischotomy in abilities between said characters. Well, the Pure Mortal's a little fragile, but he's also one of the most effective comabtants (Superb Guns with military grade weaponry and a specialty in knowing Catches is scary).
I agree with the rest of your post (more or less, I incline towards #2 myself), but anyone with Refresh above 1 being a moron is just a ridiculous statement.
-
Nah. I mean, if Mab, with -30 fate points or whatever, can get a FATE point for ANY reason and use it resist a compel, then that's just bad design that's contrary to the intro stuff about free will and FATE.
No reason to not let my players play -40 refresh characters. They have free will; they just have to do one thing in accordance with their beliefs and then they get their free will back, in the form of a FATE point.
That's silly. I'd go further and say that not only is it a good house rule, but that Evil hat dropped the ball in design terms.
Never let it be said that I don't think I know better than everyone else. ;D