ParanetOnline

The Dresden Files => DFRPG => DFRPG Resource Collection => Topic started by: eberg on August 16, 2010, 08:54:48 PM

Title: Sample Combat
Post by: eberg on August 16, 2010, 08:54:48 PM
I wrote this up for my group to illustrate how the various systems work after they expressed some confusion after their first session. Thought it might be useful for others. Apologies for anything I got wrong or that's unclear.

Barry (a wizard) and Dave (a cop) have just stumbled on Voldemort (a sorcerer) and his henchman Igor (a ghoul) in an abandoned apartment building, about to disembowel some poor runaway in order to fuel 'Mort's dark ritual.

Initiative order is:
Igor (Alertness +3, +4 for the power Inhuman Speed = +7 total)
Dave (Alertness +2, +2 for the Alertness stunt On My Toes = +4 total)
Voldemort (Alertness +3)
Barry (Alertness +2)

Exchange 1

    * Igor attacks Dave. He has Fists at Great (+4), he rolls -1, so his effort is +3. Dave rolls Athletics (+2) to dodge, gets a +1, and also has effort +3. That means Igor hits. His claws are Weapon:4 so he does a 4-stress hit. Dave only has three spots on his track, so this would take him out. He decides to take a Mild Consequence instead (Nasty Scratches) which reduces it to a 2-stress hit, which he marks on his sheet.
    * Dave's first priority is the girl. He's going to put himself and his gun between her and anyone who tries to get near her. He rolls Guns (+3), gets +3, and so establishes a Fantastic (+6) block.
    * Voldemort doesn't think he can take Dave, so he throws up a shield of Hellfire, putting +5 shifts into it (costing him 1 mental stress, since his Conviction is +4 and his specialty in Fire gives him +1 to power). He rolls his Discipline (+4, +1 to defensive fire magic control from his ring focus = +5), gets a +1, and has an effort of +6. Since this is more than the power (+5), he successfully casts the spell without issue. He now has a Superb (+5) block against anyone trying to harm him.
    * Barry opts to screw defense and throws everything he has against the evil sorcerer. He puts +8 shifts of power into a force attack, to drive a lance of pure energy through him. His Conviction is +5 and has no boosters from his specialty or foci, so it will cost him a 4-stress mental hit which he soaks with a Moderate Consequence (Migraines). His Discipline is only +4 but his Force specialty gives him a +1 to control and his mighty rod gives him +2 to control offensive force magic for a total of +7. Unfortunately, he rolls 0 on the dice, so that's his effort. He can either soak another 1-stress mental hit to keep all the power on target, or let that last shift of power leak out as fallout. He opts for the latter, having already absorbed a consequence and given that it's only one shift. The +7 beats Voldemort's shield but he also gets a dodge roll. Alas, his Athletics is only Fair (+2) and he rolls a -1, for only +1 effort. The effect is +2 (+7 minus Voldemort's +5 shield) but it adds Weapon:7 (reduced from 8 because he couldn't control all the energy) for a total of a 9-stress hit. Voldemort takes a Severe Consequence (Shattered Ribs) to reduce it to a 3-stress hit and fills in the last box in his three box physical stress track. Also, since the attack beat his shield, it is gone. The GM decides that the fallout is that the excess force energy blows out every window in this and the adjoining rooms, alerting anyone outside that something's happening.

Igor: Physical OOOO
Dave: Physical OXO, Mild physical consequence (Nasty Scratches)
Voldemort: Physical OOX, Mental XOOO, Severe physical consequence (Shattered Ribs)
Barry: Physical OOO, Mental OOOO, Moderate mental consequence (Migraines)

Exchange 2

    * Igor, alarmed by the injury of his master, leaps at Barry. He rolls Fists (+4) and gets a +3, so his effort is +7. Barry rolls Athletics (+1) to get out of the way and gets an unfortunately -1, for 0 effort. Luckily, his protective amulet offers a Superb (+5) defense, put it only has one use per session, so its discharged. The effect is then +2 (+7 attack minus +5 defense) but it adds the ghouls Weapon:4 claws, so it is still a 6-stress hit. Barry decides, rather than being Taken Out (since the ghoul will almost certainly just kill him), he'll use his Severe Consequence (Gutted) to soak it.
    * Dave notes that nobody's attention is on the girl and so decides to take a shot at the ghoul that's trying to disembowel his friend. He rolls Guns (+3) and gets a +1 but spends a Fate point to invoke his Crack Shot aspect and another to invoke Nobody Fucks with My Friends for a total of +8. Igor rolls Athletics to dodge (+4, +1 for Inhuman Speed = +5), getting a -2, for an effort of only +3. That gives Dave a +5 effect (+8 - +3), plus the Weapon:2 rating of his pistol, for a 7-stress hit. Igor decides to take a Moderate Consequence (GSW to the Shoulder) to soak 4 and marks the remaining 3-stress hit.
    * Voldemort decides to get the hell out of dodge. He shifts a zone into the hall as a supplemental action and tries to fill the doorway with hellfire to prevent anyone from following him. He puts in +6 shifts of power into it, not really caring if some power leaks, and takes a 2-stress mental hit for it (since it is one higher than his specialty-boosted Conviction of +5). He rolls Discipline (+5 with his ring focus, -1 because he took a supplemental action = +4), and gets a +1, for an effort of +5. This isn't enough to control +6 shifts of power, but he just lets it be fallout. Thus, he establishes only a Superb (+5) block to movement out of the room through that doorway. The GM decides the extra shift of power sets the Building on Fire.
    * Barry decides that a good offense is the best defense and gathers power to pound the ghoul into the ceiling with force magic. He put in +5 shifts of power and takes a 1-stress mental (because it is equal to his Conviction) and rolls Discipline (+7 with focus and specialty), getting a +3, for an effort of +10. Dave offers his free tag of the consequence he inflicted, which Barry gracious accepts for another +2, or a total of +12. Igor rolls Athletics (+5 with Inhuman Speed), gets a -1, for +4 effort. With the Weapon:5 rating the power gives it, that's an 13-stress hit. Igor still takes a 5-stress hit even if he uses both his remaining consequences (Mild 2, Severe 6 = 8-stress absorbed), which takes him out. Barry decides the ghoul is crushed to a pulp by the powerful Force effect.

Igor: Taken Out, Mild physical consequence (Winded), Moderate physical consequence (GSW to the Shoulder), Severe physical consequence (Crushed Bones).
Dave: Physical OXO, Mild physical consequence (Nasty Scratches)
Voldemort: Physical OOX, Mental XXOO, Severe physical consequence (Shattered Ribs)
Barry: Physical OOO, Mental XOOO, Moderate mental consequence (Migraines), Severe physical consequence (Gutted)

Exchange 3

    * Dave picks up the unconscious girl, rolling Might (+1), getting +1, for an effort of Fair (+2), which the GM says is sufficient given the girl's weight.
    * Voldemort tries to make his way out of the building but Barry opts to use the free tag on his Shattered Ribs to compel him to collapse on the stairs, unable to catch his breath.
    * Barry, fighting his own severe injury and migraines, holds his guts in and gathers powers to counterspell the hellfire wall blocking their exit with raw force. He throws +5 shifts of power into it, takes the 1-stress hit (which fills his second box, because the first is already marked), and rolls Discipline (+7 with specialty and focus), getting a -2. This is still an effort of +5, which is sufficient to control the 5 shifts of power, which are just enough to destroy the Superb (+5) hellfire barrier.

Igor: Taken Out, Mild physical consequence (Winded), Moderate physical consequence (GSW to the Shoulder), Severe physical consequence (Crushed Bones).
Dave: Physical OXO, Mild physical consequence (Nasty Scratches)
Voldemort: Physical OOX, Mental XXOO, Severe physical consequence (Shattered Ribs)
Barry: Physical OOO, Mental XXOO, Moderate mental consequence (Migraines), Severe physical consequence (Gutted)

Exchange 4

    * Dave carries the girl out of the building, sprinting with Athletics (+2) modified by Might (it is +1, lower than Athletics, so it gives a -1) and a roll of 0 for an effort of +1. In order to get out completely (3 zones: upstairs hallway, downstairs hallway, outside, no border ratings because the front door was left open), he spends a Fate point to invoke Protect the Innocent to bring it to +3. He ignores the sorcerer on the stairs and hauls ass out of the building with the girl.
    * Voldemort pulls himself to his feet and tries again to leave. Barry spends his sole Fate point to invoke Building on Fire to declare that part of the ceiling collapses, on fire, blocking the way out. Voldemort draws himself up and turns to face his enemy. He draws +8 shifts of power, taking only a 3-stress mental hit because Hellfire gives +1 to power when used to hurt people. He rolls his Discipline (+4, +1 for offensive fire control from his staff = +5), but gets a -3 to the attack, for an effort of +2. In order to avoid detonating the entire building, he takes four of it as backlash, adding a 4-stress mental hit, allowing the attack to still be Weapon:6. The remaining two shifts will be fallout. Barry rolls his Athletics (+1) and gets +2, for an effort of +3. The attack misses him. The GM rules that it hits the wall at the far end of the hallway, blowing it out. New zone aspect: Hole in the Wall.
    * Barry is going to try to knock his opponent out with a carefully tuned mental attack. Mental attacks use the Spirit element, the same as Force. He puts +5 shifts of power into it, takes another 1-stress mental hit (now marking off his third box, because the two previous are marked), and rolls Discipline (+7 with specialty and focus, which still apply) and gets a 0, for an effort of +7. As a mental attack, it is resisted with Voldemort's Discipline (+4), and he gets a brutal -4, for an effort of 0. With the Weapon:5 rating, this is a 12-stress mental hit. Even if he uses his remaining Moderate and Mild consequences, that leaves a 6-stress hit which is more than enough to take him out. So, he falls unconscious from the brutal mental assault.

Igor: Taken Out, Physical OOOO, Moderate physical consequence (GSW to the Shoulder)
Dave: Physical OXO, Mild physical consequence (Nasty Scratches)
Voldemort: Taken Out, Physical OOX, Mental XXXX, Severe physical consequence (Shattered Ribs)
Barry: Physical OOO, Mental XXXO, Moderate mental consequence (Migraines), Severe physical consequence (Gutted)

Exchange 5

    * Dave tries to go back to help his friend, but sees that the way is blocked. However, he notes the new hole blown in the side of the building and tries to get the on-lookers attracted by the earlier explosion to get a blanket to catch him. He rolls Rapport (+3) and gets a +3, for a total effort of +6. The GM was looking for only a Fair (+2) result, so decides that the extra four shifts will move the default time of "a few minutes" down to "an instant", meaning that they are ready to catch Barry immediately. The GM says this will put an aspect on the zone of Soft Landing.
    * Barry tries to pick up the unconscious sorcerer but the GM hands him a Fate point and compels his Gutted consequence, saying he can't lift him. Barry could ignore it, but he used his last Fate point. Instead, he haggles with the GM. He really doesn't want to leave him to burn alive, so he proposes he does it but takes an additional mild physical consequence. The GM finds this acceptable. Barry keeps the Fate point and, since it was already negotiated, picks up Voldemort without a roll, but taking a new Mild Consequence (Exhausted).
    * The GM decides that with two fallouts having occurred and the propensity of Hellfire to want to hurt people, that Barry is going to have to resist an environmental attack. Since a total of three shifts of power went into setting the building on fire and adding one for the Hellfire, he makes a Great (+4) attack, rolling a +1, for an effort of +5. Barry is told to resist with Athletics (+1), as he tries to get through the burning hallway. He rolls a +2 for an effort of +3 and marks a 2-stress physical hit.

Igor: Taken Out, Physical OOOO, Moderate physical consequence (GSW to the Shoulder)
Dave: Physical OXO, Mild physical consequence (Nasty Scratches)
Voldemort: Taken Out, Physical OOX, Mental XXXX, Severe physical consequence (Shattered Ribs)
Barry: Physical OXO, Mental XXXO, Mild physical consequence (Exhausted), Moderate mental consequence (Migraines), Severe physical consequence (Gutted)

Exchange 6

    * Dave is still coordinating the assembled to catch Barry, who has finally appeared in the hole, shrouded by smoke from the roaring hellfire. He rolls Rapport again (+3), getting a +1, for an effort of +4. This lets him put an aspect of Well-Coordinated on the crowd.
    * Barry jumps, rolling Athletics (+1) to try and soften the impact. The GM says this will be modified by his Might (+0), so he has a -1. He rolls a +2. This effectively gives him Armor:1 for the fall, but its a ten foot drop and so will do a 5-stress hit. However, Dave's prepared and gives him the free tags on both the aspects he's set up, raising it to +6, for Armor:3. He marks the 2-stress physical hit on his sheet (in the third box, because the second is filled) and is down on the ground with the unconscious sorcerer.
    * The GM notes that sirens are fast approaching. He hands both Barry and Dave a Fate point. Barry, he says, it far too injured to leave the scene. He is compelling his consequences. He is compelling Dave on his Nobody Fucks with My Friends aspects to remain with his friend. Dave wasn't going to abandon him anyway, so it is a self-compel.
    * The conflict is over, so stress clears as people catch their breath. Only the consequences remain.

Igor: Dead
Dave: Mild physical consequence (Nasty Scratches)
Voldemort: Severe physical consequence (Shattered Ribs)
Barry: Mild physical consequence (Exhausted), Moderate mental consequence (Migraines), Severe physical consequence (Gutted)
 
By the time they are taken to the police station and interviewed, their mild consequences are recovered enough to no longer be a hindrance. Barry's migraines will continue for a few days but he'll be feeling the repercussions of his disembowelment for weeks, if not months. Voldemort will be dealing with those shattered ribs for just as long, provided Barry and Dave don't get him out of police custody and in front of a White Council tribunal, where he belongs.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: JesterOC on August 16, 2010, 09:13:00 PM
Wow.. I'm going to send that to my players as a great example of a conflict.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: Belial666 on August 16, 2010, 09:24:55 PM
The following is mostly a commentary on the characters' choices in the conflict, not the conflict itself. It is what the good guys could do if they had a decent plan;


1) Spellcasters can take backlash as a mental or physical stress. In a combat where taking out their enemies is imperative, taking it as physical stress is the usual, to have the maximum spell power.

2) It is almost always better to blast an enemy spellcaster than defend if you got the initiative on him/her. A defense might stop one attack if you put all your power into it but the other guy will simply be free to blast your buddy until your shield fades in the next exchange.

3) If you want to win a combat vs a caster and a ghoul while protecting a girl, you do a zone-wide offensive (Tazering can be force. As can a telekinetic hold) block vs endurance on all of them (including the girl), feeding it with conviction 5, +3 from 4th mental box +4 from your 2 mild mental consequences, rolling +7 disipline, a fate point and your 2nd or 3rd physical box as backlash.
This gives you a zonewide block of strength 10, which you are going to maintain with more power in later exchanges. The enemies and the girl can probably do nothing to beat a 10-shift block vs endurance and your buddy is now free to shoot the bad guys dead while you do a soft maintain with 3-4 shifts of power every so often.

Fight won without any consequence over mild, without any danger of enemies escaping, without any property damage and without any danger to the girl. (that's why you always blast the wizard if you can - so he can't pull off the nova)
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: JesterOC on August 16, 2010, 09:35:08 PM
Damn Belial666 that is harsh. :)

But you can't taser someone just so you can have someone else blow a guy's head off. That breaks the 1st law of Magic right?
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: Belial666 on August 16, 2010, 09:41:37 PM
Not how I see it. You aren't doing the killing and you aren't using magic to kill. And the Wardens capture warlocks with magic all the time, which they then kill with a sword without violating the 1st Law.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: JesterOC on August 16, 2010, 09:53:05 PM
To me, it is the same as using magic to push someone off or a cliff or into traffic, according to the book, that still counts. You are holding someone in place with magic to kill them. A warden's sword does not count as a magic kill, but at the same time they don't hold them down with magic either (perhaps they do, I have not read all the books).

At the same time you can inflict a zone wide grapple to do about the same thing, but you just declare that they fall unconscious instead of die.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: vonpenguin on August 16, 2010, 10:26:02 PM
They don't use magic to hold them down no. I would rule that it doesn't break the first law though. Pushing someone off a cliff is entirly you. Holding someone in place while a friend shoots them is the friends choice not yours. Otherwise Luccio would violate the first law several thousand times over (She uses magic to make the swords that do the killing).

And remember the first law is a might fuzzy on the subject of kneeecaps.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: JesterOC on August 16, 2010, 10:36:15 PM
Ok sounds good to me. I concede the point. Good arguments by all. thanks.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: Bubba Amon Hotep on August 17, 2010, 03:06:42 AM
Nice post Eberg.  It will help people new to fate see a combat.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: Steed on August 17, 2010, 03:46:30 AM
Not only was this a good example of combat from a mechanics approach, it was also exciting and fun to read on break at work.  Kudos!
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: crusher_bob on August 17, 2010, 05:09:22 AM
I wrote this up for my group to illustrate how the various systems work after they expressed some confusion after their first session. Thought it might be useful for others. Apologies for anything I got wrong or that's unclear.

Barry (a wizard) and Dave (a cop) have just stumbled on Voldemort (a sorcerer) and his henchman Igor (a ghoul) in an abandoned apartment building, about to disembowel some poor runaway in order to fuel 'Mort's dark ritual.

Initiative order is:
Igor (Alertness +3, +4 for the power Inhuman Speed = +7 total)
Dave (Alertness +2, +2 for the Alertness stunt On My Toes = +4 total)
Voldemort (Alertness +3)
Barry (Alertness +2)

Exchange 1

    * Igor attacks Dave. He has Fists at Great (+4), he rolls -1, so his effort is +3. Dave rolls Athletics (+2) to dodge, gets a +1, and also has effort +3. That means Igor hits. His claws are Weapon:4 so he does a 4-stress hit. Dave only has three spots on his track, so this would take him out. He decides to take a Mild Consequence instead (Nasty Scratches) which reduces it to a 2-stress hit, which he marks on his sheet.
    * Dave's first priority is the girl. He's going to put himself and his gun between her and anyone who tries to get near her. He rolls Guns (+3), gets +3, and so establishes a Fantastic (+6) block.
    * Voldemort doesn't think he can take Dave, so he throws up a shield of Hellfire, putting +5 shifts into it (costing him 1 mental stress, since his Conviction is +4 and his specialty in Fire gives him +1 to power). He rolls his Discipline (+4, +1 to defensive fire magic control from his ring focus = +5), gets a +1, and has an effort of +6. Since this is more than the power (+5), he successfully casts the spell without issue. He now has a Superb (+5) block against anyone trying to harm him.
It's a very common house rule to allow caster to create 'reactive' evocation blocks (i.e. generating an evocation block instead of trying to dodge with athletics).  And even without this houserule, spending your action to create a block is usually not a good idea, they other side can just blast your buddy instead, and you've wasted your action, since your block only has a duration of one turn.

Quote
* Barry opts to screw defense and throws everything he has against the evil sorcerer. He puts +8 shifts of power into a force attack, to drive a lance of pure energy through him. His Conviction is +5 and has no boosters from his specialty or foci, so it will cost him a 4-stress mental hit which he soaks with a Moderate Consequence (Migraines). His Discipline is only +4 but his Force specialty gives him a +1 to control and his mighty rod gives him +2 to control offensive force magic for a total of +7. Unfortunately, he rolls 0 on the dice, so that's his effort. He can either soak another 1-stress mental hit to keep all the power on target, or let that last shift of power leak out as fallout.
Note that you can take backlash on either your physical or mental track.  Most spellcasters prefer to take backlash on the phyasical track so that they have the maximum amount of mental stress boxes available for more spellcasting.

Quote
He opts for the latter, having already absorbed a consequence and given that it's only one shift. The +7 beats Voldemort's shield but he also gets a dodge roll.
You normally only get a dodge roll either when your dodge roll total is greater that the effect of the evocation block protecting you, or that evocation defense was used to create armor instead of a block.

Quote
Alas, his Athletics is only Fair (+2) and he rolls a -1, for only +1 effort. The effect is +2 (+7 minus Voldemort's +5 shield) but it adds Weapon:7 (reduced from 8 because he couldn't control all the energy) for a total of a 9-stress hit. Voldemort takes a Severe Consequence (Shattered Ribs) to reduce it to a 3-stress hit and fills in the last box in his three box physical stress track. Also, since the attack beat his shield, it is gone. The GM decides that the fallout is that the excess force energy blows out every window in this and the adjoining rooms, alerting anyone outside that something's happening.

Igor: Physical OOOO
Dave: Physical OXO, Mild physical consequence (Nasty Scratches)
Voldemort: Physical OOX, Mental XOOO, Severe physical consequence (Shattered Ribs)
Barry: Physical OOO, Mental OOOO, Moderate mental consequence (Migraines)

Exchange 2

    * Igor, alarmed by the injury of his master, leaps at Barry. He rolls Fists (+4) and gets a +3, so his effort is +7. Barry rolls Athletics (+1) to get out of the way and gets an unfortunately -1, for 0 effort. Luckily, his protective amulet offers a Superb (+5) defense, put it only has one use per session, so its discharged. The effect is then +2 (+7 attack minus +5 defense) but it adds the ghouls Weapon:4 claws, so it is still a 6-stress hit. Barry decides, rather than being Taken Out (since the ghoul will almost certainly just kill him), he'll use his Severe Consequence (Gutted) to soak it.
    * Dave notes that nobody's attention is on the girl and so decides to take a shot at the ghoul that's trying to disembowel his friend. He rolls Guns (+3) and gets a +1 but spends a Fate point to invoke his Crack Shot aspect and another to invoke Nobody Fucks with My Friends for a total of +8. Igor rolls Athletics to dodge (+4, +1 for Inhuman Speed = +5), getting a -2, for an effort of only +3. That gives Dave a +5 effect (+8 - +3), plus the Weapon:2 rating of his pistol, for a 7-stress hit. Igor decides to take a Moderate Consequence (GSW to the Shoulder) to soak 4 and marks the remaining 3-stress hit.
    * Voldemort decides to get the hell out of dodge. He shifts a zone into the hall as a supplemental action and tries to fill the doorway with hellfire to prevent anyone from following him. He puts in +6 shifts of power into it, not really caring if some power leaks, and takes a 2-stress mental hit for it (since it is one higher than his specialty-boosted Conviction of +5). He rolls Discipline (+5 with his ring focus, -1 because he took a supplemental action = +4), and gets a +1, for an effort of +5. This isn't enough to control +6 shifts of power, but he just lets it be fallout. Thus, he establishes only a Superb (+5) block to movement out of the room through that doorway. The GM decides the extra shift of power sets the Building on Fire.
    * Barry decides that a good offense is the best defense and gathers power to pound the ghoul into the ceiling with force magic. He put in +5 shifts of power and takes a 1-stress mental (because it is equal to his Conviction) and rolls Discipline (+7 with focus and specialty), getting a +3, for an effort of +10. Dave offers his free tag of the consequence he inflicted, which Barry gracious accepts for another +2, or a total of +12. Igor rolls Athletics (+5 with Inhuman Speed), gets a -1, for +4 effort. With the Weapon:5 rating the power gives it, that's an 13-stress hit. Igor still takes a 5-stress hit even if he uses both his remaining consequences (Mild 2, Severe 6 = 8-stress absorbed), which takes him out. Barry decides the ghoul is crushed to a pulp by the powerful Force effect.

Igor: Taken Out, Mild physical consequence (Winded), Moderate physical consequence (GSW to the Shoulder), Severe physical consequence (Crushed Bones).
Dave: Physical OXO, Mild physical consequence (Nasty Scratches)
Voldemort: Physical OOX, Mental XXOO, Severe physical consequence (Shattered Ribs)
Barry: Physical OOO, Mental XOOO, Moderate mental consequence (Migraines), Severe physical consequence (Gutted)

Exchange 3

    * Dave picks up the unconscious girl, rolling Might (+1), getting +1, for an effort of Fair (+2), which the GM says is sufficient given the girl's weight.
    * Voldemort tries to make his way out of the building but Barry opts to use the free tag on his Shattered Ribs to compel him to collapse on the stairs, unable to catch his breath.
    * Barry, fighting his own severe injury and migraines, holds his guts in and gathers powers to counterspell the hellfire wall blocking their exit with raw force. He throws +5 shifts of power into it, takes the 1-stress hit (which fills his second box, because the first is already marked), and rolls Discipline (+7 with specialty and focus), getting a -2. This is still an effort of +5, which is sufficient to control the 5 shifts of power, which are just enough to destroy the Superb (+5) hellfire barrier.
As Voldy did not put any extra duration into his block, it would have only lasted until this end of his action this turn anyway.  So Barry didn't have to spend an action to dispel it, it would have dissipated by the time his action rolled around.  Also, take a look at prolonging spells (YS 259), for another way to extend the duration of evocation effects. 

Also note that greater duration is one of the advantages offered by 'thaumaturgy at the speed of evocation' available to sponsored magic.

Quote
Igor: Taken Out, Mild physical consequence (Winded), Moderate physical consequence (GSW to the Shoulder), Severe physical consequence (Crushed Bones).
Dave: Physical OXO, Mild physical consequence (Nasty Scratches)
Voldemort: Physical OOX, Mental XXOO, Severe physical consequence (Shattered Ribs)
Barry: Physical OOO, Mental XXOO, Moderate mental consequence (Migraines), Severe physical consequence (Gutted)

Exchange 4

    * Dave carries the girl out of the building, sprinting with Athletics (+2) modified by Might (it is +1, lower than Athletics, so it gives a -1) and a roll of 0 for an effort of +1. In order to get out completely (3 zones: upstairs hallway, downstairs hallway, outside, no border ratings because the front door was left open), he spends a Fate point to invoke Protect the Innocent to bring it to +3. He ignores the sorcerer on the stairs and hauls ass out of the building with the girl.
    * Voldemort pulls himself to his feet and tries again to leave. Barry spends his sole Fate point to invoke Building on Fire to declare that part of the ceiling collapses, on fire, blocking the way out. Voldemort draws himself up and turns to face his enemy. He draws +8 shifts of power, taking only a 3-stress mental hit because Hellfire gives +1 to power when used to hurt people. He rolls his Discipline (+4, +1 for offensive fire control from his staff = +5), but gets a -3 to the attack, for an effort of +2. In order to avoid detonating the entire building, he takes four of it as backlash, adding a 4-stress mental hit, allowing the attack to still be Weapon:6. The remaining two shifts will be fallout. Barry rolls his Athletics (+1) and gets +2, for an effort of +3. The attack misses him. The GM rules that it hits the wall at the far end of the hallway, blowing it out. New zone aspect: Hole in the Wall.
    * Barry is going to try to knock his opponent out with a carefully tuned mental attack. Mental attacks use the Spirit element, the same as Force. He puts +5 shifts of power into it, takes another 1-stress mental hit (now marking off his third box, because the two previous are marked), and rolls Discipline (+7 with specialty and focus, which still apply) and gets a 0, for an effort of +7. As a mental attack, it is resisted with Voldemort's Discipline (+4), and he gets a brutal -4, for an effort of 0. With the Weapon:5 rating, this is a 12-stress mental hit. Even if he uses his remaining Moderate and Mild consequences, that leaves a 6-stress hit which is more than enough to take him out. So, he falls unconscious from the brutal mental assault.
Mental attacks like this are probably a third law violation

Quote
Igor: Taken Out, Physical OOOO, Moderate physical consequence (GSW to the Shoulder)
Dave: Physical OXO, Mild physical consequence (Nasty Scratches)
Voldemort: Taken Out, Physical OOX, Mental XXXX, Severe physical consequence (Shattered Ribs)
Barry: Physical OOO, Mental XXXO, Moderate mental consequence (Migraines), Severe physical consequence (Gutted)

Exchange 5

    * Dave tries to go back to help his friend, but sees that the way is blocked. However, he notes the new hole blown in the side of the building and tries to get the on-lookers attracted by the earlier explosion to get a blanket to catch him. He rolls Rapport (+3) and gets a +3, for a total effort of +6. The GM was looking for only a Fair (+2) result, so decides that the extra four shifts will move the default time of "a few minutes" down to "an instant", meaning that they are ready to catch Barry immediately. The GM says this will put an aspect on the zone of Soft Landing.
    * Barry tries to pick up the unconscious sorcerer but the GM hands him a Fate point and compels his Gutted consequence, saying he can't lift him. Barry could ignore it, but he used his last Fate point. Instead, he haggles with the GM. He really doesn't want to leave him to burn alive, so he proposes he does it but takes an additional mild physical consequence. The GM finds this acceptable. Barry keeps the Fate point and, since it was already negotiated, picks up Voldemort without a roll, but taking a new Mild Consequence (Exhausted).
    * The GM decides that with two fallouts having occurred and the propensity of Hellfire to want to hurt people, that Barry is going to have to resist an environmental attack. Since a total of three shifts of power went into setting the building on fire and adding one for the Hellfire, he makes a Great (+4) attack, rolling a +1, for an effort of +5. Barry is told to resist with Athletics (+1), as he tries to get through the burning hallway. He rolls a +2 for an effort of +3 and marks a 2-stress physical hit.

Igor: Taken Out, Physical OOOO, Moderate physical consequence (GSW to the Shoulder)
Dave: Physical OXO, Mild physical consequence (Nasty Scratches)
Voldemort: Taken Out, Physical OOX, Mental XXXX, Severe physical consequence (Shattered Ribs)
Barry: Physical OXO, Mental XXXO, Mild physical consequence (Exhausted), Moderate mental consequence (Migraines), Severe physical consequence (Gutted)

Exchange 6

    * Dave is still coordinating the assembled to catch Barry, who has finally appeared in the hole, shrouded by smoke from the roaring hellfire. He rolls Rapport again (+3), getting a +1, for an effort of +4. This lets him put an aspect of Well-Coordinated on the crowd.
Leadership tasks like this are normally done with presence, not rapport.

Quote
    * Barry jumps, rolling Athletics (+1) to try and soften the impact. The GM says this will be modified by his Might (+0), so he has a -1. He rolls a +2. This effectively gives him Armor:1 for the fall, but its a ten foot drop and so will do a 5-stress hit. However, Dave's prepared and gives him the free tags on both the aspects he's set up, raising it to +6, for Armor:3. He marks the 2-stress physical hit on his sheet (in the third box, because the second is filled) and is down on the ground with the unconscious sorcerer.
    * The GM notes that sirens are fast approaching. He hands both Barry and Dave a Fate point. Barry, he says, it far too injured to leave the scene. He is compelling his consequences. He is compelling Dave on his Nobody Fucks with My Friends aspects to remain with his friend. Dave wasn't going to abandon him anyway, so it is a self-compel.
    * The conflict is over, so stress clears as people catch their breath. Only the consequences remain.

Igor: Dead
Dave: Mild physical consequence (Nasty Scratches)
Voldemort: Severe physical consequence (Shattered Ribs)
Barry: Mild physical consequence (Exhausted), Moderate mental consequence (Migraines), Severe physical consequence (Gutted)
 
By the time they are taken to the police station and interviewed, their mild consequences are recovered enough to no longer be a hindrance. Barry's migraines will continue for a few days but he'll be feeling the repercussions of his disembowelment for weeks, if not months. Voldemort will be dealing with those shattered ribs for just as long, provided Barry and Dave don't get him out of police custody and in front of a White Council tribunal, where he belongs.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: gaelvin on August 17, 2010, 05:19:01 AM
Damn Belial666 that is harsh. :)

But you can't taser someone just so you can have someone else blow a guy's head off. That breaks the 1st law of Magic right?

I'd say it comes down to intent. Did you know that your buddy was going to kill the guy you immobilized with magic? If so, that there's a First Law infraction. Did you think he might? That's a grey area, but we know how some Wardens might view it.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: toturi on August 17, 2010, 06:50:10 AM
I'd say it comes down to intent. Did you know that your buddy was going to kill the guy you immobilized with magic? If so, that there's a First Law infraction. Did you think he might? That's a grey area, but we know how some Wardens might view it.
I'd say that it comes down to the specific intent to kill with magic. You must specifically want to kill the person with your magic, not as a means for you to make it easier to kill with something else. Magic must be the murder weapon in order to break the First Law.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: Craftzero on August 17, 2010, 01:46:17 PM
It should be stated that this is awesome.  Thank you, Eberg.  I'm going to forward the bulk of your combat to my players, and I think it should help them to understand the game a little better. 

So... uhh... when are you going to do social combat as well...?

:)
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: Doc Nova on August 17, 2010, 02:13:46 PM
   * Barry opts to use the free tag on his Shattered Ribs to compel him to collapse on the stairs, unable to catch his breath.

Not to get all rulesy on this, but I don't think this is how it works.

A consequence enables one tag, which is a free invoke.  An invoke is either +2 to a roll or a reroll.  In order to compel the consequence, the player (Barry, in this case) would need to spend a fate point, which Voldy would get...and could also have begun an escalation on the compel, making it far more costly to the compelling player.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: JesterOC on August 17, 2010, 03:33:30 PM
You get a free Invoke. You can either do a standard invoke, or an invoke for effect. Invoking for effect lets you declare a fact or circumstance that would be of benefit to your character.

Seems to me that having the bad guy fall while trying to get away, benefits the character.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: greycouncilmember on August 17, 2010, 04:30:31 PM
The following is mostly a commentary on the characters' choices in the conflict, not the conflict itself. It is what the good guys could do if they had a decent plan;

3) If you want to win a combat vs a caster and a ghoul while protecting a girl, you do a zone-wide offensive (Tazering can be force. As can a telekinetic hold) block vs endurance on all of them (including the girl), feeding it with conviction 5, +3 from 4th mental box +4 from your 2 mild mental consequences, rolling +7 disipline, a fate point and your 2nd or 3rd physical box as backlash.
This gives you a zonewide block of strength 10, which you are going to maintain with more power in later exchanges. The enemies and the girl can probably do nothing to beat a 10-shift block vs endurance and your buddy is now free to shoot the bad guys dead while you do a soft maintain with 3-4 shifts of power every so often.

Fight won without any consequence over mild, without any danger of enemies escaping, without any property damage and without any danger to the girl. (that's why you always blast the wizard if you can - so he can't pull off the nova)

I have two questions because I don't really understand how this block works.  What does a block do against endurance, does that mean they can't do anything at all? 
Wouldn't the block affect both the caster casting the spell (Barry) and the cop (Dave) if it's a zone effect?
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: babel2uk on August 17, 2010, 04:41:19 PM
Seems to me that having the bad guy fall while trying to get away, benefits the character.

Just my point of view, but I'd say that's far more heavily weighted towards the detriment of Voldemort - which edges it into Compel territory.

The paragraph on page 98 says that Invocation for Effect allows you to make a Declaration - which is defined on page 116 as introducing a new Aspect. So effectively you can add another aspect to Voldemort, and then tag that, and then again and again ad infinitum - which seems a little silly. In this case I wouldn't allow an Invocation for Effect, just a straight Invocation or Compel.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: wyvern on August 17, 2010, 04:44:53 PM
While a PC compelling that consequence with the free tag is questionable, the GM compelling it (and giving the guy a fate point) is not; that's a perfectly valid and reasonable thing to do, and is one of the things that give consequences teeth - I mean, if compels don't get involved, you'd have guys with broken legs running around at no penalty, and that's obviously just wrong.

edit: I'd also point out that Voldemort gets a fate point when the conflict ends, as per YS206 (cashing out).
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: Doc Nova on August 17, 2010, 04:56:07 PM
I would also rule the effect of Voldy toppling being far more detrimental to him than beneficial to the player, hence it being a compel.  And certainly the GM is within rights to (and rightly should) compel the consequence, that is not what a tag enables, however, which was my only point.  I'd hate for one of my players to read this and suddenly think they would have that ability at the table.  It is neither how the rules are written, nor would they want the GM doing the same to their characters without recourse (in this case, a fate point to the villain).

Otherwise, what was to stop the ghoul's player from compelling the wizard's "Gutted" consequence to eliminate action and without awarding them a fate point?

Conseqeunces are vicious things as written, but they, at least in my opinion, do not need added teeth.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: JesterOC on August 17, 2010, 05:31:13 PM
There is no set answer to the issue about Invoking for effect. However just to be clear the book has an example spell that shows Invoking for effect being used to bring misfortune upon a target, not giving a direct benefit to the caster.

It is Harry's Blinding spell. All the spell does is place an aspect of Blinded on the target. When that is done the player can tag for effect and say "The target is blinded and won't be able to hurt anyone else tonight". Which was done in a novel.

However it is different if the target is a quarter mile away from you, than if it is right up in your grill. 

When chatting about this with Rob D.(via twitter)  he said that the amount of narrative control of tagging for effect during a conflict is a subtle subject and that must be agreed to by all parties involved. (I'm paraphrasing here).

In other words (my interpretation) it will depend on the GM and the other players to accept the power of the Invocation of effect. In a nutshell it just has to feel right to all the parties involved. In the current it feels right to me, your mileage may differ.

JesterOC
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: babel2uk on August 17, 2010, 07:34:00 PM
There is no set answer to the issue about Invoking for effect. However just to be clear the book has an example spell that shows Invoking for effect being used to bring misfortune upon a target, not giving a direct benefit to the caster.

It is Harry's Blinding spell. All the spell does is place an aspect of Blinded on the target. When that is done the player can tag for effect and say "The target is blinded and won't be able to hurt anyone else tonight". Which was done in a novel.

If you're talking about the 'Harry Blinds The Loup Garou' spell, the actual spell doesn't mention Invoking for Effect, it says that it applies a temporary aspect of Blindness, which is highly likely to be sticky because of the complexity involved. This does alow you to tag it (obviously), but I'd say the example of driving off the Loup Garou in Full Moon would be accomplished in game terms by Compelling the Blindness aspect rather than an Invocation for Effect. I'd have no problem with someone invoking the aspect for effect to say the Loup Garou thrashes wildly and doesn't hit his intended target this exchange or similar, or invoking it to give them a bonus to hit or dodge while it can't see, both of which seem like reasonable uses of a freebie. But a long term effect like driving it off for the rest of the night just screams Compel.

In other words (my interpretation) it will depend on the GM and the other players to accept the power of the Invocation of effect. In a nutshell it just has to feel right to all the parties involved. In the current it feels right to me, your mileage may differ.

I'm not going to argue with that, like I said, it's my point of view that allowing an Invocation for Effect as a tag  action is fine, but the effect shouldn't be to immediately end combat or capture the bad guy. That level of narrative power should require a Compel rather than an invocation.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: eberg on August 18, 2010, 02:50:36 PM
Not to get all rulesy on this, but I don't think this is how it works.

A consequence enables one tag, which is a free invoke.  An invoke is either +2 to a roll or a reroll.  In order to compel the consequence, the player (Barry, in this case) would need to spend a fate point, which Voldy would get...and could also have begun an escalation on the compel, making it far more costly to the compelling player.
This might be my confusion from having read Diaspora and Dresden Files back-to-back. The former allows a tag to either be an invoke or a compel.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: eberg on August 18, 2010, 02:58:59 PM
It's a very common house rule to allow caster to create 'reactive' evocation blocks (i.e. generating an evocation block instead of trying to dodge with athletics).  And even without this houserule, spending your action to create a block is usually not a good idea, they other side can just blast your buddy instead, and you've wasted your action, since your block only has a duration of one turn.

I prefer forcing players to choose between using their magic to attack or defend each round. I think it makes for more interesting choices during a combat. Also, I defend V's decision to put up the block. He doesn't really care if they attack Igor instead (that's what he's there for) and he can always put more energy into the block next round if he needs to keep it up.

Quote
Note that you can take backlash on either your physical or mental track.  Most spellcasters prefer to take backlash on the phyasical track so that they have the maximum amount of mental stress boxes available for more spellcasting.

Quite true. I'll have to clarify that to the players.

Quote
You normally only get a dodge roll either when your dodge roll total is greater that the effect of the evocation block protecting you, or that evocation defense was used to create armor instead of a block.

You don't know if it is higher until you roll it. :) Granted, in this case it wasn't likely he was going to beat his shield, but I put it in anyway to illustrate to the players that they get both the defense and the shield against attacks.

Quote
As Voldy did not put any extra duration into his block, it would have only lasted until this end of his action this turn anyway.
 

It would have lasted long enough to be effective against Dave's attack if Barry hadn't collapsed it with his attack.

Quote
So Barry didn't have to spend an action to dispel it, it would have dissipated by the time his action rolled around.

Only if V didn't sink more power into it. :)

Also note that greater duration is one of the advantages offered by 'thaumaturgy at the speed of evocation' available to sponsored magic.

Quote
Mental attacks like this are probably a third law violation

It's arguable. He isn't violating his mind, he's just doing a brute force punch to his brain. Given that the alternative is another force attack, it is less likely to kill him (from an in-character perspective).

Quote
Leadership tasks like this are normally done with presence, not rapport.

You are correct. I got hung up on the description of Presence as a passive skill, like Alertness, and forgot that trapping.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: JesterOC on August 18, 2010, 03:23:10 PM
After rereading the rules for invoking for effect, compels, and all the examples in the book I can find. I agree that having V fall in the stairs is a compel and not an invoke for effect. It makes PC's using narrative control to short circuit much more costly which I think it more beneficial.

Thanks for clarifying all this folks, especially before our game tonight.

JesterOC
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: KOFFEYKID on August 18, 2010, 09:50:56 PM
I have two questions because I don't really understand how this block works.  What does a block do against endurance, does that mean they can't do anything at all?  
Wouldn't the block affect both the caster casting the spell (Barry) and the cop (Dave) if it's a zone effect?

The wording is off, it shouldn't be a block versus endurance, its a block, against some action, which is opposed by endurance. Which means that the block keeps X from happening, but you can overcome the block by means of your high endurance.

So for example you can have two blocks that do the same thing be opposed by different skills.

A block against movement opposed by athletics.
A block against movement opposed by might.

In the first block you are doing something like dodging past whatever is blocking you, as long as its athletic.

On the second block you are using your brute strength to bypass the block, like maybe the block manifests as chains which bind you in place, and you go all hulk smash on the chains and then proceed to move.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: Miso on August 19, 2010, 01:53:01 AM
After rereading the rules for invoking for effect, compels, and all the examples in the book I can find. I agree that having V fall in the stairs is a compel and not an invoke for effect. It makes PC's using narrative control to short circuit much more costly which I think it more beneficial.

Thanks for clarifying all this folks, especially before our game tonight.

JesterOC

I don't want to be a spoilsport but I'm asking myself if this isn't indeed a tag.  ???
Take the example on YS 106, headline Tagging:
Harry assesses an aspect via skill roll and is due to a tag.
This tag is spend as +2 dice roll. Harry doesn't spend a fate point because it's a free tag.
"This is clearly to the Shadowman's detriment, but since the tag was free for Harry, the Shadowman doesn't get a fate point."

If I'm not mistaken, Voldy's aspect Shattered Ribs wasn't tagged so I think the GM could rule that tripping off Voldy counts as a tag without a fatepoint for him.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: Doc Nova on August 19, 2010, 04:24:08 AM
+2 to a roll, or a reroll, as an invoke (or a tag, which is a free invoke) is not the same as denying an action (such as falling down, which denied movement, in this case).  That is the realm of compels.  At least as I see them.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: Miso on August 19, 2010, 07:20:07 AM
I can live with that but I wanted to have it clarified.
I think you can see it the other way round, too.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: chrislackey on August 19, 2010, 07:59:12 AM
 * Igor attacks Dave. He has Fists at Great (+4), he rolls -1, so his effort is +3. Dave rolls Athletics (+2) to dodge, gets a +1, and also has effort +3. That means Igor hits. His claws are Weapon:4 so he does a 4-stress hit. Dave only has three spots on his track, so this would take him out. He decides to take a Mild Consequence instead (Nasty Scratches) which reduces it to a 2-stress hit, which he marks on his sheet.

I thought if you get a net "0," you miss. +3 for Igor, +3 for Dave. I'm confused.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: toturi on August 19, 2010, 10:03:28 AM
* Igor attacks Dave. He has Fists at Great (+4), he rolls -1, so his effort is +3. Dave rolls Athletics (+2) to dodge, gets a +1, and also has effort +3. That means Igor hits. His claws are Weapon:4 so he does a 4-stress hit. Dave only has three spots on his track, so this would take him out. He decides to take a Mild Consequence instead (Nasty Scratches) which reduces it to a 2-stress hit, which he marks on his sheet.

I thought if you get a net "0," you miss. +3 for Igor, +3 for Dave. I'm confused.
p200 YS. If you get a net 0, you still hit but no additional stress.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: Miso on August 19, 2010, 10:10:10 AM
p200 YS. If you get a net 0, you still hit but no additional stress.

Yes but: if you tie with a 0 and you have a weapon rating, you add the weapon rating to the zero-shift attack. Thus inflicting 4 stress.
YS 202 "Weapon Rating"
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: Belial666 on August 19, 2010, 10:20:10 AM
@KOFFEYKID:

You are right in that I didn't word it correctly but your explanation doesn't fit what I've been trying to do. I intended it as a harmless area version of the Orbius spell. I.e. it is a grapple -this means a block against ALL actions- and it is opposed by might or endurance. Unlike the Orbius spell though it won't slowly kill the affected people, merely hold them in place. (because you don't want to kill the girl and because your buddy can kill the bad guys instead)
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: Doc Nova on August 19, 2010, 11:48:08 AM
I can live with that but I wanted to have it clarified.
I think you can see it the other way round, too.

I don't see it the other way around.  To me, what Voldy suffered is a compel.  It's a potent effect that had no roll, denied actions, and occured out of line of sight and immediate action.  But if it works for you and your game, go for it.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: greycouncilmember on August 19, 2010, 12:39:57 PM
The wording is off, it shouldn't be a block versus endurance, its a block, against some action, which is opposed by endurance. Which means that the block keeps X from happening, but you can overcome the block by means of your high endurance.

So for example you can have two blocks that do the same thing be opposed by different skills.

A block against movement opposed by athletics.
A block against movement opposed by might.

In the first block you are doing something like dodging past whatever is blocking you, as long as its athletic.

On the second block you are using your brute strength to bypass the block, like maybe the block manifests as chains which bind you in place, and you go all hulk smash on the chains and then proceed to move.

So a block against movement prevents you from doing anything physical even a wizard casting spells?
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: Doc Nova on August 19, 2010, 01:05:02 PM
So a block against movement prevents you from doing anything physical even a wizard casting spells?

I think that would depend on the block.  If it were a lasso roped around your legs, then likely no.  If it were a series of mystical bands that have you wrapped up good and tight, then maybe...although I don't think it's absolutely necessary to have gestures with spellcasting...although I am sure it helps with "targeting", focus, and a dozen other things.  I could easily see a GM still allowing it, but upping the difficulty by two points or so (simply inverting the benefit from an invoke is handy, but also more of a houserule...I think).
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: greycouncilmember on August 19, 2010, 01:19:42 PM
I think that would depend on the block.  If it were a lasso roped around your legs, then likely no.  If it were a series of mystical bands that have you wrapped up good and tight, then maybe...although I don't think it's absolutely necessary to have gestures with spellcasting...although I am sure it helps with "targeting", focus, and a dozen other things.  I could easily see a GM still allowing it, but upping the difficulty by two points or so (simply inverting the benefit from an invoke is handy, but also more of a houserule...I think).

The example given was a zone wide force field or tazer effect.  If that targeted movement would it prevent a caster from casting?  Being able to neutralize an entire zone without them being able to do anything seems very overpowered, but I guess that could be used on either side in combat. 
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: Miso on August 19, 2010, 03:00:12 PM
I don't see it the other way around.  To me, what Voldy suffered is a compel.  It's a potent effect that had no roll, denied actions, and occured out of line of sight and immediate action.  But if it works for you and your game, go for it.

If you word it this way you are clearly right.
I stand corrected.
I think it's a bit confusing that the players couldn't tag Voldys Shattered Rips. I can imagine that my players will complain about that.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: Doc Nova on August 19, 2010, 04:15:44 PM
The example given was a zone wide force field or tazer effect.  If that targeted movement would it prevent a caster from casting?  Being able to neutralize an entire zone without them being able to do anything seems very overpowered, but I guess that could be used on either side in combat. 
Do keep in mind that a wizard (good, bad, or whatever) could "overcome" the effects with a successful roll, or, if the GM was willing, by "buying" their way out of it with 1 (or more) fate points (akin to buying out of a compel).  There are multiple avenues available.  But, more importantly, if the power-level of a zone-wide block bugs you, don't allow them, or be very tight-fisted about those you do allow (maybe it costs a fate point, or has a greater shift cost).
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: Doc Nova on August 19, 2010, 04:18:07 PM
If you word it this way you are clearly right.
I stand corrected.
I think it's a bit confusing that the players couldn't tag Voldys Shattered Rips. I can imagine that my players will complain about that.
They could tag the consequence...but it would be a +2 to a roll or a reroll.  If they wanted to make him collapse, they could still...potentially...do it but it would be treated as a compel and cost the players 1 (or more) fate points, which Voldy would get.  It's a give and take that also protects them from it happening to them, as well.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: luminos on August 19, 2010, 05:03:46 PM
They could tag the consequence...but it would be a +2 to a roll or a reroll.  If they wanted to make him collapse, they could still...potentially...do it but it would be treated as a compel and cost the players 1 (or more) fate points, which Voldy would get.  It's a give and take that also protects them from it happening to them, as well.

Absolutely.  Think of how mad your players will get when you tell them that an opponent tags one of their consequences to do something similar, and they aren't allowed to buy it off, they don't get a chance to resist it, and they don't even get paid a fate point for it.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: Belial666 on August 19, 2010, 05:09:47 PM
Quote
if the GM was willing, by "buying" their way out of it with 1 (or more) fate points (akin to buying out of a compel).

It's not a compel, it's an attack. They could use a fate point to get +2 to their roll but not to negate it. And with a block of 10 against might or endurance of, say, 3, they need to roll +4 and use two fate points.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: JesterOC on August 19, 2010, 05:33:09 PM
There is an economy to fate point use, and I wish it was a bit more clearly stated.  Here is my take on it.

Effect                                   Cost
Narrative control that benefits the player = Free Die roll, Setup action or 1 Fate
Give yourself a re-roll or a +2 = Setup Action or 1 Fate
Narrative control that Limits the actions of an enemy = 1 Fate Plus the enemy gets the Fate if accepted or looses a fate point if declined.

The fate point is the most expensive way to accomplish the effects listed.
It appears that the game considers player narrative control to be the least expensive effect, because it can be put into effect with a free die roll.
Next costly is giving yourself a bonus or a re-roll, this costs either a tag (which in effect is costing you an exchange and only on a successful die roll).
Finally a compel is the most costly because it will always cost you 1 fate and it may not always work as intended (but it will always do something).

p.s.
I only bring this up, because it helps me understand how to arbitrate invokes for effects and compels, because it indicates that compels are considered more costly than declarations and thus any invokes for effects that border on the strength of a compel should be carefully considered.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: infusco on August 19, 2010, 06:30:35 PM
Generally, a block is intended to create a hindrance to one specific action. A grapple is a special case and, the way it is written, I'd rule that it could only target a single person or creature and would tie up your own action in the process. A long duration block to all actions to an entire zone would indeed be significantly overpowered.

Remember, even the Orbius spell is a block against breathing that could cause someone to suffocate and pass out. Nothing about the spell's description claims that the person under it's effect can't do any other action, like shooting at the caster. Now you could call it a complete physical grapple, but notice that the grapple rules state you need to tag an aspect first to establish the grapple, so the spell is clearly missing something ... i.e A maneuver creating evocation the previous round.

In the Invoke For Effect/Compel argument, that does indeed look like a compel. I wouldn't allow tagging for that as it's too strong. Now the GM himself could claim that the NPC passed out from his wounds and quietly write down that this NPC has a Fate point to use in the future should he survive.

As for Mental attacks, it is indeed skirting dangerously into 4th law territory due to one simple fact: mental consequences are almost always psychological scars that last a while and generally compel someone into either following specific actions or denying them others. For example, you could blast him with a mind-crushing wave of fear. If they survive, they could get stuck with moderate or severe consequence of The Bogeyman Is Real And He Is After Me, and hence be naturally paranoid and constantly looking over his shoulders. You could try to narrate it with your GM that you are casting a sleep spell who's effects only last the scene and should not inflict any consequences, but even there it's a hard sell.

Although in the latter case, you could cast it as a maneuver, defended by Endurance, that afflicts someone with the Sleepy aspect as a *physical* effect rather than a mental one.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: JesterOC on August 19, 2010, 07:01:21 PM
Just when I thought I had the whole invoke for effect vs Compel down pat....

Can someone please explain how Entanglement works on page 293.

All it does is place a Bound In Place aspect on the target, and adds one point to make it last the entire scene.

So if this was cast on V what happens on V's turn? Can he move? Does the aspect by itself lock down the target. Does the GM compel it? if so can the target buy himself out of it? Does the caster need to burn an invoke for effect to make it work?

Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: infusco on August 19, 2010, 08:46:44 PM
Just when I thought I had the whole invoke for effect vs Compel down pat....

Can someone please explain how Entanglement works on page 293.

All it does is place a Bound In Place aspect on the target, and adds one point to make it last the entire scene.

So if this was cast on V what happens on V's turn? Can he move? Does the aspect by itself lock down the target. Does the GM compel it? if so can the target buy himself out of it? Does the caster need to burn an invoke for effect to make it work?

Well, first off, the spell description itself clashes with the rules. You can't make an evocation maneuver last an entire scene. :P

This one's a bit tricky as it adds an Aspect. You could, in principle, compel that aspect to prevent your foe from changing zones, but that could end up costing you more than a few Fate points over multiple exchanges. Or you could tag that Aspect for a reroll or +2 to actions against that foe that would normally be defended by Athletics (which is pretty much all of them).
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: Bubba Amon Hotep on August 19, 2010, 09:04:16 PM
Let me just say I am glad the Original Poster Posted the example of combat.

Let me also say that two groups of players can run the same scene, and come up with different actions/outcomes.

Let me also say that two GM's will rule differently on actions, and use the rules in different ways.

Now let me say, if both groups had fun.  The GM's and Players did it right.

I just hope all these discussions about rulings, and meanings, are not happening around the table. 

Afterwords, okay.  During, NOT okay.  Everyone is there to have fun, not rules lawyer.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: Arcteryx on August 19, 2010, 09:46:45 PM
Now let me say, if both groups had fun.  The GM's and Players did it right.
I just hope all these discussions about rulings, and meanings, are not happening around the table. 
Afterwords, okay.  During, NOT okay.  Everyone is there to have fun, not rules lawyer.

And therein lies the ultimate version of the truth right there. Well said man.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: Doc Nova on August 19, 2010, 11:19:06 PM
Let me just say I am glad the Original Poster Posted the example of combat.

Let me also say that two groups of players can run the same scene, and come up with different actions/outcomes.

Let me also say that two GM's will rule differently on actions, and use the rules in different ways.

Now let me say, if both groups had fun.  The GM's and Players did it right.

I just hope all these discussions about rulings, and meanings, are not happening around the table. 

Afterwords, okay.  During, NOT okay.  Everyone is there to have fun, not rules lawyer.


I couldn't agree more.  If in doubt, I always go back to Rule 0.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: JesterOC on August 20, 2010, 03:15:31 PM
The existence of rule 0 should not stop the discussion that was going on here.

It is important to take a stand and tell others how you think the game should be played, and why it should be played like that.  Only then does it become useful information, where players can use rule 0 to determine which style they like best.

 
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: YuriPup on August 20, 2010, 05:31:39 PM
I want to go back to the tazer field and confining someone with magic to get them killed. I think that if it doesn't count as a breaking of the First Law, any wizard who keeps someone around who is willing to kill will be able to kill far too easily. I would also say that the wizards will is far to involved in the taking of the life not to be tainted.

The reason the ward swords don't count is the will to create the enchantment on the sword is far, far removed from the will used to do the killing. Additionally, the swords don't do magical damage, as far as we know,  and are enchanted only to cut through enchantments and don't do extra damage to flesh. The magic of the sword isn't involved in the kill--removing the enchanting will by another degree.

I am thinking, on the laws, that the scale to be used is how much is the attacker's free will being used to magically remove the defender's free will.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: greycouncilmember on August 20, 2010, 06:07:07 PM
I want to go back to the tazer field and confining someone with magic to get them killed. I think that if it doesn't count as a breaking of the First Law, any wizard who keeps someone around who is willing to kill will be able to kill far too easily. I would also say that the wizards will is far to involved in the taking of the life not to be tainted.

The reason the ward swords don't count is the will to create the enchantment on the sword is far, far removed from the will used to do the killing. Additionally, the swords don't do magical damage, as far as we know,  and are enchanted only to cut through enchantments and don't do extra damage to flesh. The magic of the sword isn't involved in the kill--removing the enchanting will by another degree.

I am thinking, on the laws, that the scale to be used is how much is the attacker's free will being used to magically remove the defender's free will.

In the DFRPG system you choose the method of taking somebody out.  You don't have to kill them.  Why not just knock them out?  If I thought for a second that my tazer spell was being used to kill, I would not use it.  That's the kind of spell you use to buy some time possibly when you want to negotiate or you just need to stop them from doing something?  if a caster's life is in danger and he stops somebody in a way that only prevents them from further hurting, how does that break any laws? 
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: babel2uk on August 20, 2010, 06:23:50 PM
I want to go back to the tazer field and confining someone with magic to get them killed. I think that if it doesn't count as a breaking of the First Law, any wizard who keeps someone around who is willing to kill will be able to kill far too easily.

At which point they are likely to be attracting the attention of the Mortal authorities. Don't confuse not breaking the First Law of Magic with not having to face consequences of killing someone. It might not cause an instant Wizards trial, but it will certainly cause the Wardens to start watching you, and you can expect hard questions to be asked about why you did it. And the answers had better be damn good.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: eberg on August 23, 2010, 06:07:01 PM
Well, first off, the spell description itself clashes with the rules. You can't make an evocation maneuver last an entire scene. :P
I got clarification from Fred that Aspects generated from Evocation maneuvers work the same as non-magical maneuvers. That is, if you get at least one shift of effort, it is sticky and will last the scene or until it is removed.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: Jaxom Faux on August 24, 2010, 04:19:33 PM
the book says that if someone dies as a result of your magic (even accidentally or through other means ie. falling to death) that you are still responsible for the effects of you magic and therefore a lawbreaker 1st.

you holding them helpless while someone else decaps them means they still died as a result of your magic. lawbreaker time.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: wyvern on August 24, 2010, 05:14:08 PM
...But then they didn't die as a result of your magic.  They died as a result of someone else decapitating them.  Certainly, your magic made that possible.  But the spell you cast did not have lethal intent behind it.  That'd be like saying "Well, I healed my friend, and then he went and killed the guy who hurt him.  I guess I need to take a lawbreaker power, because my healing spell caused that other guy's death."

Say you use magic to make a warlock fall asleep.  Then you slit his throat.  Did you break the first law?  What if you tie him up and wake him up before killing him?  What if you tie him up, wake him up, and hand him off to the wardens for a "trial" that will inevitably end in someone else killing him?  By your logic, *all* of those are Lawbreaker actions.  So you're telling me that every warden who ever uses magic at any point when apprehending a warlock has a Lawbreaker power?  Really?

I'd draw the line at there being a direct causal effect between your magic and the target's death - with no further act of free will involved.  Summon a demon to kill someone for you?  Direct causal effect - your magic resulted in their death with no further act of free will involved.  Blast the ceiling to make it crash down on the enemy?  Direct causal effect.  Use magic to trigger a rube goldberg device that eventually sets off a lethal trap?  Direct causal effect.  Immobilize a target so that some second action - whether by you or someone else (as long as it's by a creature that has free will) - can kill them?  No direct causal effect.  Gift your allies with a potion of speed so they can run down a particularly fleet-of-foot enemy and kill it?  No direct causal effect.  Etc.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: ClassDunce on August 24, 2010, 05:31:11 PM
...But then they didn't die as a result of your magic.  They died as a result of someone else decapitating them. 

Say you use magic to make a warlock fall asleep.  Then you slit his throat.  Did you break the first law?  What if you tie him up and wake him up before killing him?  What if you tie him up, wake him up, and hand him off to the wardens for a "trial" that will inevitably end in someone else killing him?  By your logic, *all* of those are Lawbreaker actions.  So you're telling me that every warden who ever uses magic at any point when apprehending a warlock has a Lawbreaker power?  Really?

Let's go back to the sleeping and then slitting his throat thing, in my mind that would be a violation of the first law of magic. It's well established that a wizard can't use magic to do something that they don't believe in, it does go back to intent. The spell was used so that you could then slit his throat. The spell was used to kill a man. Capturing a Warlock and turning him over to the Wardens to be tried (if you can call it a trail) is not breaking the first law of magic even if he's then executed, You're working within the laws of the White Council.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: babel2uk on August 24, 2010, 06:28:28 PM
My opinion is that it's a matter of degrees of separation of magic and killing. In my view the example of throat slitting while target is sleeping due to a spell simply isn't a breach of the First Law. Yes it's murder, yes it's unpleasant, but the actual weapon that dealt the killing blow is unconnected to the magic that caused the sleep. Otherwise the Wardens themselves would be guilty of breaking the first law if they used magic in a fight that resulted in the death of a warlock. The sleep didn't cause the death, it merely made it easier to accomplish. The magic wasn't directly responsible. The example used in the First Law section of the book mentions using air to throw someone off a building. If the magic is a direct cause it violates the first law. Otherwise it's just likely to get you looked at closely by the Wardens and the mortal authorities. In the sleep case the slitting of the throat is a completely separate act from putting the person to sleep. In the air blast example from the rulebook the spell actually throws the person to their death.

My reading in the section on the First Law is that there is a lot of unpleasant grey area that may not result in a Lawbreaker stunt (so no metaphysical consequences) but may result in a trial and a Doom of Damocles punishment. Much of it is going to be down to personal interpretation by the GM, depending on how severe they want the First Law to be.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: Lukas the Dead on August 24, 2010, 06:47:47 PM
First off, Thank you eberg for the example.

My opinion is that it's a matter of degrees of separation of magic and killing.

I like to add in one more variable to that equation, and that is intention. If you put them to sleep in order to kill them, you used magic with the intention of killing. It's a little more restrictive, but still allows some escape from an accident. Blowing someone off a building still lands you in first law territory, but holding a person who someone else kills only gets you a Lawbreaker stunt if you knew that would be the outcome. (However, I'd except most wizards would be upset by that outcome, if only for the fact they know they are still in deep trouble if the wardens find out.)

My reading in the section on the First Law is that there is a lot of unpleasant grey area that may not result in a Lawbreaker stunt (so no metaphysical consequences) but may result in a trial and a Doom of Damocles punishment. Much of it is going to be down to personal interpretation by the GM, depending on how severe they want the First Law to be.

Which leads into this, which I completely agree with. You can avoid the metaphysical consequences and still have to face some consequences. It allows the GM to go, "Yes, I am aware of the difference, but the Wardens aren't so discerning."
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: infusco on August 24, 2010, 07:22:34 PM
I got clarification from Fred that Aspects generated from Evocation maneuvers work the same as non-magical maneuvers. That is, if you get at least one shift of effort, it is sticky and will last the scene or until it is removed.

Uhm ... then why this line from that section on page 253?:

"As with other effects, you can pay an additional shift to make the effect persistent at the cost of 1 shift per additional *exchange*"

Me thinks a new sticky thread with Errata and an FAQ should rear it's head soon ;)
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: JesterOC on August 25, 2010, 04:23:42 PM
We just need to get Lenny in here and grill him for 5 days and we would be fine.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: eberg on September 22, 2010, 08:50:23 PM
Uhm ... then why this line from that section on page 253?:

"As with other effects, you can pay an additional shift to make the effect persistent at the cost of 1 shift per additional *exchange*"

Me thinks a new sticky thread with Errata and an FAQ should rear it's head soon ;)
It occurred to me, pondering this the other day, that maybe it has to do with whether the aspect is caused by an instantaneous effect or an ongoing one. If you call up a magical windstorm that puts the aspect HIGH WINDS on the scene, you need to give it power to keep it going or it ends. If, however, you use a flash of light to temporarily blind someone, it will work like any other combat maneuver and be sticky if you get one or more shifts. Does that make sense to folks?
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: fabulator on September 23, 2010, 05:23:32 PM
So what you mean there is that if you create an aspect that covers the whole zone (High Winds) you've got to apply shifts of power to keep it going but if you create an aspect that just hits one person (or a few) then if you apply an extra shift of power it becomes sticky. Is that it?


Also, in regards to all the discussion on Law-breaking, the original act in question was a 'direct mental attack' that (I believe) was aiming for unconsciousness. Now, to my eye, that doesn't automatically violate any laws but as a DM I would definitely be asking the player for more description.  A spell that seeks to overload the target's sense with false and/or contradictory info and thereby produce confusion would be a mental attack but most likely that would be a maneuver to apply an aspect.  A spell that plays upon a target's fears and tries to call up his worst nightmares; that's a direct mental attack that could definitely cause some stress damage. It's also a grey area for the Third Law at the very least.  I think the major issue becomes if the subject is impressing his or her own fears onto a sort of 'fear-template' provided by magic that's not Lawbreaking; the caster has not invaded the subject's mind or thoughts. However, if the caster actually reaches into someone's mind to find their fear of clowns and then uses that to drive the person insane, that's Lawbreaking. Someone brought up the fact that mental stress/consequences usually involve things like The Bogeyman is Real or somesuch and I don't think that kind of thing is grounds for Lawbreaking. If the caster applies an aspect to a target, the caster is responsible for that aspect and the nature of its application. If the target applies the aspect themselves (they chose to do so instead of taking stress hits) then the target is responsible for the nature of the aspect.

Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: eberg on September 24, 2010, 06:01:53 PM
So what you mean there is that if you create an aspect that covers the whole zone (High Winds) you've got to apply shifts of power to keep it going but if you create an aspect that just hits one person (or a few) then if you apply an extra shift of power it becomes sticky. Is that it?

No no, it is a matter of whether there is some magical creation causing the aspect or if the aspect is a side-effect of something that happened instantaneously and is done. To use the blindness example, if I use the instant flash of bright light to make you blind, it is fragile if I get no shifts and sticky if I do. If I wrap your head in magical shadow, though, you will only be blind until the magical shadow goes away, so I need to put power into making it last for as many exchanges as I want it to stick around. Is that more clear?

Quote
Also, in regards to all the discussion on Law-breaking, the original act in question was a 'direct mental attack' that (I believe) was aiming for unconsciousness. Now, to my eye, that doesn't automatically violate any laws but as a DM I would definitely be asking the player for more description.

Reading the laws closely we have:

The Third Law: No mind-reading.
The Fourth Law: No mind-controlling.

To my reading, nothing here prohibits mental attacks, provided you aren't (as fabulator points out) dredging up deep-seated fears out of their sub-conscious or otherwise turning their mind against them. What I envisioned happening in the sample combat was a blast of raw mental energy to knock him out. Basically punching him in the mind. :)
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: AlexFallad on December 22, 2010, 02:39:54 AM
Exchange 2

    * Igor, alarmed by the injury of his master, leaps at Barry. He rolls Fists (+4) and gets a +3, so his effort is +7. Barry rolls Athletics (+1) to get out of the way and gets an unfortunately -1, for 0 effort. Luckily, his protective amulet offers a Superb (+5) defense, put it only has one use per session, so its discharged. The effect is then +2 (+7 attack minus +5 defense) but it adds the ghouls Weapon:4 claws, so it is still a 6-stress hit. Barry decides, rather than being Taken Out (since the ghoul will almost certainly just kill him), he'll use his Severe Consequence (Gutted) to soak it.

Quick question:  Could Igor also attempted a Declaration here?  Maybe something like Fists vs. Fists that Barry is "Not Used To Putting Up His Dukes" or Fists vs. Athletics "Backpedals In Panic" ?
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: eberg on December 22, 2010, 09:06:19 PM
Quick question:  Could Igor also attempted a Declaration here?  Maybe something like Fists vs. Fists that Barry is "Not Used To Putting Up His Dukes" or Fists vs. Athletics "Backpedals In Panic" ?
No, because Barry is a PC with established Aspects. Declarations are generally for NPCs and such that aren't fully statted out.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: AlexFallad on January 20, 2011, 08:50:03 PM
No, because Barry is a PC with established Aspects. Declarations are generally for NPCs and such that aren't fully statted out.

I'm not convinced that an established PC is exempt from Declarations, especially if the Ghoul above was replaced with a Martial Artist (as in Fists w/ Martial Artist stunt).  The whole point of Declarations is to create aspects.  Aspects created via Declaration seem to me to be just as valid as other Aspects that are "created" temporarily on established PCs through game mechanics.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: devonapple on January 20, 2011, 10:09:25 PM
Aspects created via Declaration seem to me to be just as valid as other Aspects that are "created" temporarily on established PCs through game mechanics.

Just as valid, yes. Just as temporary, no. Declarations are assumed to be permanent facts, have always been facts, but have only just now come into focus.

YS 116:
"As with assessments, aspects created with declarations don’t go away after being tagged, so long as circumstances make it reasonable that they hang around. This does mean that occasionally assessments and declarations can backfire on the character establishing them (other characters might use the same aspect, or the GM might bring that aspect back around to complicate the character’s endeavors)."

But that's not the point - the point is: should PCs get Declarations made about them. I think not, but your game may thrive with the option. Especially if your GM doesn't limit characters to only 7 Aspects.

Edit: But oh, heaven help you if your GM's NPCs are fond of making Declarations like "Wall-Eyed," "Skips When Running," "Shoots like a Stormtrooper," or "Broke-Broke."
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: Daeglan on February 08, 2011, 06:09:44 AM
Can you use force to throw the ghoul at Voldemort?
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: AlexFallad on February 09, 2011, 09:51:22 PM
Well, diving into playing and running has forced me to plow through YS in depth.

1) Page 192, Non-Conflict Actions section clearly states that Declarations can create aspects for an NPC or another PC.
2) Page 98, lasts para before "Using Aspects".  "You will also encounter temporary aspects during the course of play. [Examples follow] Typically, you use your skills to create or discover these aspects during play (see page 113 for more information)."

Page 113 starts a major heading topic called 'Creating And Discovering Aspects In Play' and includes all the information from 113 through 116, and Declarations is in this section.

Clearly Declaration Aspects are temporary.  The text on YS 114 'Temporary Aspects' states that "temporary" has different durations, but certainly not permanent or even worth recording on the char sheet.

3) Incidentally, what skill would you use to Declare someone "Shoots Like a Stormtrooper"?  The Gun Knowledge Trapping on YS 131 seems to indicate knowledge about the guns and ammo ITEMS, not the skill/ability of the shooter.  I can see a Declaration "Using Hollow Points" on an opponent to reduce the effectiveness of their Guns attack and you are wearing decent kevlar armor, but that is a huge difference from the Martial Artist's stunt ability to declare/assess styles.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: citadel97501 on March 01, 2011, 02:11:55 AM
Well I am a little unsure on this, but isn't there an example of an enemy using a Declaration in Blood Rites?
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: AlexFallad on March 03, 2011, 09:22:57 PM
Well I am a little unsure on this, but isn't there an example of an enemy using a Declaration in Blood Rites?
(click to show/hide)

Well, I've become a devotee of the Fate system for my rp needs, but I'm pretty ignorant (not completely though) of the Dresdenverse.  If the "him" you refer to above is Harry, I would guess Harry is certainly a PC.  The example you give above would probably be a Declaration stemming from her Lore...not really sure if I'd buy it as a Guns Declaration since I see from reading the Gun Knowledge trapping as covering things a char knows about their gun and ammo and not that
(click to show/hide)
.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: batmanjr on March 21, 2011, 05:21:24 PM
I have a different rule question in the write up  VERY helpful BTW.

In the combat Dave offered up an aspect he put on the Ghoul to Barry as a free tag.

I thought only the person who created the aspect could tag it for free?  This came up in a sample combat we had so I'm curious if there is something I missed.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: devonapple on March 21, 2011, 05:45:41 PM
I thought only the person who created the aspect could tag it for free?  This came up in a sample combat we had so I'm curious if there is something I missed.

It is legitimate. This is why teamwork is so essential in this game: players can set up to their companions for a more decisive impact.

While flunkies can't pass along free tags to their villain bosses, they can pass along knowledge of an Aspect, which can be activated with a Fate Point per normal.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: batmanjr on March 21, 2011, 05:50:29 PM
Thanks again DA.

Any chance that can be backed up with a rule?  I only ask because if it gets brought up again I'd like to be able to show it to them in writing somewhere.  And as much as I'd like to say your post IS writing, I can't really refer to it as law.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: devonapple on March 21, 2011, 06:01:51 PM
Thanks again DA.

Any chance that can be backed up with a rule?  I only ask because if it gets brought up again I'd like to be able to show it to them in writing somewhere.  And as much as I'd like to say your post IS writing, I can't really refer to it as law.

Sure! YS 106: "If you wish, you can allow another character to use the tag for an aspect you’ve discovered or introduced. This allows for some great set-up maneuvers in a fight; you can maneuver to place an aspect on a target, then pass the tag to an ally who attacks, using the advantage on his own roll. This can only be done, however, if it is reasonable that the advantage could be passed off."

Also, my previous comment about passing along a free tag to a villain - that's not actually legal. Passing along the Aspect, however, is: the villain will just need a Fate Point to activate it.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: batmanjr on March 21, 2011, 06:15:10 PM
Perfect!  You just helped hurt some PC's.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: devonapple on March 21, 2011, 06:22:32 PM
Perfect!  You just helped hurt some PC's.

You are welcome! AND, I also earned some PCs a few Fate Points.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: fantazero on March 25, 2011, 02:25:31 AM
Sample Fight
Fantazeros Character, Brian Moman.
Generic Bad Guy

Brian Moman is out Fishing
Suddenly Bad guy shows up.
Brian Moman looks bad guy in the face, Bad guy turns to Dust
Brian Moman wins at everything, for forever.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: polkaneverdies on May 23, 2011, 05:52:12 PM
I would hazard the guess that brian moman is not at "feet in the water" level.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: fantazero on May 23, 2011, 10:19:04 PM
I would hazard the guess that brian moman is not at "feet in the water" level.
Brian Moman is so deep hes drowning in his own thoughts
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: redjackraven on July 07, 2013, 05:06:05 PM
My take on the lawbreaking aspect of this discussion:

This exact discussion going on should be going on amongst the wardens in the campaign - the very murkiness of this issue is part of the Dresdenverse. There may very well be some wardens who feel the action does break the first law, and others who do not. And most should be somewhere inbetween (their cloak color is not a coincidence imo...)

In game-mechanics-speak, whether or not this or any action by a player character breaks one of the laws of magic is up to the GM. And he may answer "yes" or "no" differently depending on the NPC doing the talking (for in-game consequences), or after discussion with the player(s) (for mechanics consquences such as the law-breaker powers).

Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: redjackraven on July 07, 2013, 05:07:40 PM
Oh, and thanks to eberg for the great sample combat! I'm about to start running my first campaign, and this is exactly what I needed for my and my group's introduction.
Title: Re: Sample Combat
Post by: fantazero on July 07, 2013, 09:49:39 PM
Man I haven't thought about this in awhile