ParanetOnline
The Dresden Files => DFRPG => Topic started by: nadia.skylark on June 02, 2019, 04:20:16 PM
-
Does dancing fall under Performance or Athletics?
Does cooking fall under Craftsmanship or something else?
Is giving someone a free tag on one of their aspects a reasonable benefit for a stunt? How often: once per scene or once per session?
-
Does dancing fall under Performance or Athletics?
Performance, generally. I think though that there's a stunt to use Performance for dodging, so long as you do it acrobatically.
Does cooking fall under Craftsmanship or something else?
I think the general consensus is Craftsmanship; but I could also see it under Survival or Performance (possibly needing a stunt).
Is giving someone a free tag on one of their aspects a reasonable benefit for a stunt? How often: once per scene or once per session?
Seems unnecessary, honestly -- ideally, you should be getting a fair amount of compels and fate points. And if not, you get a Refresh between games often enough that you could just ditch the stunt and use the extra fate point.
-
Seems unnecessary, honestly -- ideally, you should be getting a fair amount of compels and fate points. And if not, you get a Refresh between games often enough that you could just ditch the stunt and use the extra fate point.
Okay, I phrased my question really badly--as in, I asked one question and somehow expected people to intuit that I was asking something else.
The situation is this: In Phoenix And Ashes, a book by Mercedes Lackey, the main character learns how to use her magic partly by having an entity walk her through the major arcana in her dreams. To pass from one card to the next, she has to both learn something about the elements and how they relate to people (the magic system in the world is elemental-based) and accept/learn something about herself.
I thought this would be a cool concept to use as the basis for all or part of the trials someone would have to undergo to graduate from apprentice to full wizard. I also thought that each trial ought to give the character a small bonus in certain situations, such that 22 of them were worth a relatively small number of refresh. What I need help with is how small each bonus should be, what some of the bonuses should be, and how many refresh the set should cost. I don't know why I thought I would get the answers to any of those by asking about stunts.
Here are the ideas I have so far:
The Questioning Fool: once per scene, you can have the gm tell you what the most relevant question to ask in your situation is, which your character then asks out loud.
Rose of the Empress: once per scene, when attacking with rapport or deceit, you get a free tag on one of your aspects.
Lantern of the Hermit: once per scene, when defending in a mental conflict, you get a free tag on one of your aspects.
-
22 individual bonuses seems like kind of a lot. You generally don't get 22 individual bonuses for a "relatively small amount of refresh." You'd get it for, probably, 22 refresh. Maybe 11-15, if you can double up on some of them like with Occultist (i.e., +1 bonus to a general thing, +2 to a specific thing within that general thing). But otherwise? This is a game where if you have a lot of different bonuses to a lot of different things, you have to pay for them.
And honestly, that post doesn't really change my original thought -- mechanically, it seems unnecessary. Just having an appropriate aspect you can invoke in those situations gets the job done. Remember that aspects are very flexible. "I'm a Wizard" can be invoked for anything from boosting a spell roll, to knowing about a monster, to boosting mental defense, to overcoming disease, to declaring that you know a demon, to declaring you know a way, and dozens of other ways.
On Questioning Fool, I'm kinda iffy about basically writing metagaming into the text of the game. It seems like the sort of thing you could just, like, do with your GM if both people are reasonable about it.
-
22 individual bonuses seems like kind of a lot. You generally don't get 22 individual bonuses for a "relatively small amount of refresh." You'd get it for, probably, 22 refresh. Maybe 11-15, if you can double up on some of them like with Occultist (i.e., +1 bonus to a general thing, +2 to a specific thing within that general thing). But otherwise? This is a game where if you have a lot of different bonuses to a lot of different things, you have to pay for them.
So I can't do something like have 4 individual bonuses that are so weak that they're collectively equal to 1 refresh, or something?
And honestly, that post doesn't really change my original thought -- mechanically, it seems unnecessary. Just having an appropriate aspect you can invoke in those situations gets the job done. Remember that aspects are very flexible. "I'm a Wizard" can be invoked for anything from boosting a spell roll, to knowing about a monster, to boosting mental defense, to overcoming disease, to declaring that you know a demon, to declaring you know a way, and dozens of other ways.
Quite possibly.
On Questioning Fool, I'm kinda iffy about basically writing metagaming into the text of the game. It seems like the sort of thing you could just, like, do with your GM if both people are reasonable about it.
It doesn't seem that different from the Exposition and Knowledge Dumping trapping of Scholarship, except that it happens when the player wants it to rather than when the gm wants it to, and it can get the character in trouble.
-
Okay, I phrased my question really badly--as in, I asked one question and somehow expected people to intuit that I was asking something else.
The situation is this: In Phoenix And Ashes, a book by Mercedes Lackey, the main character learns how to use her magic partly by having an entity walk her through the major arcana in her dreams. To pass from one card to the next, she has to both learn something about the elements and how they relate to people (the magic system in the world is elemental-based) and accept/learn something about herself.
I thought this would be a cool concept to use as the basis for all or part of the trials someone would have to undergo to graduate from apprentice to full wizard. I also thought that each trial ought to give the character a small bonus in certain situations, such that 22 of them were worth a relatively small number of refresh. What I need help with is how small each bonus should be, what some of the bonuses should be, and how many refresh the set should cost. I don't know why I thought I would get the answers to any of those by asking about stunts.
Here are the ideas I have so far:
The Questioning Fool: once per scene, you can have the gm tell you what the most relevant question to ask in your situation is, which your character then asks out loud.
Rose of the Empress: once per scene, when attacking with rapport or deceit, you get a free tag on one of your aspects.
Lantern of the Hermit: once per scene, when defending in a mental conflict, you get a free tag on one of your aspects.
Not every work of fiction is equally well represented by every RPG. Lackey's Elemental Masters series isn't particularly well-suited to DFRPG (although a different tuning of the Fate rules seems likely to be a nice EM fit!).
We're really looking at 1 refresh being the "quanta," the unit of construction, of DFRPG powers. 1/22 of a quantum step is... largely outside the scale of the rules.
All that being said... I kind of think I see a way to do what you are asking. Rather than try to build these as incremental powers that add up to "X" amount of power, focus on them as "lessons learned." 22 of them...
You get one of these "teaching dreams" and you now have a couple of tags "pending" -- there is a +1 tag that you need to use in some meaningful-to-the-lesson way (in your waking life); if you squander it in some shallow or trivial fashion, you will have a variation of the same dream, and need to do it right the next time. There is also a -1 tag (or a +1 for a foe/rival) that will be used against you, or that you will have to overcome; again, this will be somehow relevant to the lesson. 2 of the Major Arcana per dream, one positive & one negative. Once you've successfully "learned" the lessons of both (expended both tags AND done whatever narrative fulfillment is "learning the lesson"), you get a new dream, with 2 different tags on the new lesson(s).
And THEN -- after wisely using/experiencing those 22 tags -- you get your power-up.
It isn't terribly DFRPG-ish in flavor, but it works within the rules AFAICS.
-
So I can't do something like have 4 individual bonuses that are so weak that they're collectively equal to 1 refresh, or something?
The smallest "bonus" available tends to be a +1 to something. A reliable +1 to a given type of rule is the basic description of a stunt, and a stunt is -1 refresh.
Ergo, I would posit that if it's making enough of a difference to be called a bonus, it's probably worth -1 refresh at least.
It doesn't seem that different from the Exposition and Knowledge Dumping trapping of Scholarship, except that it happens when the player wants it to rather than when the gm wants it to, and it can get the character in trouble.
Honestly as a GM, I'd allow it stunt or not. My first couple groups were full of people who hadn't read the books, so having to nudge them here and there along the lines of, "BTW, what I just said sounds /super/ unusual to you," or "Nah, that's standard, what you should really be noting is ..." is pretty standard.
-
We're really looking at 1 refresh being the "quanta," the unit of construction, of DFRPG powers. 1/22 of a quantum step is... largely outside the scale of the rules.
All that being said... I kind of think I see a way to do what you are asking. Rather than try to build these as incremental powers that add up to "X" amount of power, focus on them as "lessons learned." 22 of them...
You get one of these "teaching dreams" and you now have a couple of tags "pending" -- there is a +1 tag that you need to use in some meaningful-to-the-lesson way (in your waking life); if you squander it in some shallow or trivial fashion, you will have a variation of the same dream, and need to do it right the next time. There is also a -1 tag (or a +1 for a foe/rival) that will be used against you, or that you will have to overcome; again, this will be somehow relevant to the lesson. 2 of the Major Arcana per dream, one positive & one negative. Once you've successfully "learned" the lessons of both (expended both tags AND done whatever narrative fulfillment is "learning the lesson"), you get a new dream, with 2 different tags on the new lesson(s).
And THEN -- after wisely using/experiencing those 22 tags -- you get your power-up.
That's a good idea. I hadn't thought of the positive/negative thing, and that would be a really good way to tie the dream lessons/tests to real life. I was thinking of a kind of "pay half the cost before-hand and half the cost after" thing for the price, similar to what we're told happens with Harry getting hellfire, where he pays one refresh for it at the end of Death Masks, but only has limited access to it until after Blood Rites, when he pays the other refresh. That way, the character could have access only to those powers for which she's passed the dream test/lesson for.
The smallest "bonus" available tends to be a +1 to something. A reliable +1 to a given type of rule is the basic description of a stunt, and a stunt is -1 refresh.
Ergo, I would posit that if it's making enough of a difference to be called a bonus, it's probably worth -1 refresh at least.
What about the once per scene or once per session thing?
Honestly as a GM, I'd allow it stunt or not. My first couple groups were full of people who hadn't read the books, so having to nudge them here and there along the lines of, "BTW, what I just said sounds /super/ unusual to you," or "Nah, that's standard, what you should really be noting is ..." is pretty standard.
Yeah, I suppose it's more of a narrative thing.
-
What about the once per scene or once per session thing?
A reliable +2 or a reroll is ... basically exactly what a fate point is for. So, yeah, roughly equivalent to a stunt.
Yeah, I suppose it's more of a narrative thing.
The stunt is worded about asking the GM. What is the narrative reasoning behind it? Is she getting guidance from some deity or other sponsor?
-
A reliable +2 or a reroll is ... basically exactly what a fate point is for. So, yeah, roughly equivalent to a stunt.
Yeah, but most stunts provide a +1 or +2 every time a situation comes up, not just once. The "on my toes" stunt gives a +2 every time you're determining initiative. Likewise for every other stunt I've seen.
The stunt is worded about asking the GM. What is the narrative reasoning behind it? Is she getting guidance from some deity or other sponsor?
It's based on the idea that the perfect fool asks the right questions, because they're coming at things without preconceptions or biases--they ask the questions it's never occurred to anyone else to ask. The best example that I can think of is in a Harry Potter fanfic (can't remember the name right now) where they're dealing with horcruxes. Harry, Hermione, and a bunch of other smart people are researching how to destroy horcruxes, which have been around since the time of ancient Egypt. Ron, not being very good at research, wanders in at some point and asks "so if horcruxes have been around since ancient Egypt, why aren't we hip-deep in ancient Egyptian wizards?" This question was so basic that it never occurred to any of the smart people to ask it, and it led to the discovery that horcruxes don't work.
-
Yeah, but most stunts provide a +1 or +2 every time a situation comes up, not just once. The "on my toes" stunt gives a +2 every time you're determining initiative. Likewise for every other stunt I've seen.
You might be overestimating how often is "every time."
For instance, how often a scene do you think you're going to be determining initiative? Hell, I can't think of any games I've been in or run where we've started more than one combat in a session.
Plus, a free tag isn't just a +2. It's a reroll, which could be a much higher swing, or a tag for effect, which could be just about anything.
It's based on the idea that the perfect fool asks the right questions, because they're coming at things without preconceptions or biases--they ask the questions it's never occurred to anyone else to ask. The best example that I can think of is in a Harry Potter fanfic (can't remember the name right now) where they're dealing with horcruxes. Harry, Hermione, and a bunch of other smart people are researching how to destroy horcruxes, which have been around since the time of ancient Egypt. Ron, not being very good at research, wanders in at some point and asks "so if horcruxes have been around since ancient Egypt, why aren't we hip-deep in ancient Egyptian wizards?" This question was so basic that it never occurred to any of the smart people to ask it, and it led to the discovery that horcruxes don't work.
OK. I think my thing is that while most stunts by necessity refer to rolls and game mechanics, it's typically more about what the characters are capable of than the players.
How about something like: "No Such Thing As A Dumb Question: Even a broken clock is right twice a day, and sometimes coming at a problem completely ignorant without any prior assumptions is just what's needed. If you roll a -2 or lower in Lore, you may spend a fate point to turn it into an automatic success."
Not sure how balanced that is; it might need a lower threshold, or a once-a-scenario rider.
-
You might be overestimating how often is "every time."
For instance, how often a scene do you think you're going to be determining initiative? Hell, I can't think of any games I've been in or run where we've started more than one combat in a session.
Yeah, but if you're doing social combat, you're probably going to be attacking with rapport/deceit a bunch of times, and if you're doing mental combat, you're probably going to be defending a bunch of times. So a stunt would be objectively better.
Plus, a free tag isn't just a +2. It's a reroll, which could be a much higher swing, or a tag for effect, which could be just about anything.
So what about a +1 bonus instead? That's worse than what a normal stunt would give you, even if you could use it every time the situation came up.
How about something like: "No Such Thing As A Dumb Question: Even a broken clock is right twice a day, and sometimes coming at a problem completely ignorant without any prior assumptions is just what's needed. If you roll a -2 or lower in Lore, you may spend a fate point to turn it into an automatic success."
Not sure how balanced that is; it might need a lower threshold, or a once-a-scenario rider.
It's meant to reflect the character having learned to look at things with an open mind despite knowing a bunch about them. The reason it was a question was because it was meant to reflect the character realizing what they really needed to be investigating/researching--they might still not be able to find information on it, but they know what information they should look for.
I like the once-a-scenario thing, though.
-
Yeah, but if you're doing social combat, you're probably going to be attacking with rapport/deceit a bunch of times, and if you're doing mental combat, you're probably going to be defending a bunch of times. So a stunt would be objectively better.
Not necessarily. Any kind of attacking stunt tops out at +1, and any stunt cannot apply to every usage of a given skill, or a given trapping -- all of them have limits that keep them to particular situations. (i.e., a stunt might be "+1 to Rapport when attacking in social combat against a friend" but couldn't just be "+1 to Rapport when attacking in social combat.")
So what about a +1 bonus instead? That's worse than what a normal stunt would give you, even if you could use it every time the situation came up.
Again, not necessarily. A +2 is the max a stunt can give, in limited situations; broader stunts give +1, but it's still not for every situation.
Just, generally speaking, if you're getting a +1 on anything, it's because you spent refresh on it. There ain't no such thing as a free lunch in Dresden.
It's meant to reflect the character having learned to look at things with an open mind despite knowing a bunch about them. The reason it was a question was because it was meant to reflect the character realizing what they really needed to be investigating/researching--they might still not be able to find information on it, but they know what information they should look for.
I like the once-a-scenario thing, though.
I think maybe you're getting too granular about it -- what you're describing -- "character realizes what they need to look into" -- is, basically, one way to interpret a successful Lore roll. Or heck, I could see it as a successful Lore roll that the GM complicates with a compel ("OK, you rolled a 6, but it doesn't make sense for you to know this based on your aspects; here's a fate point, you have a solid idea of what you need to look into, but you'll have to spend some time researching") or a negotiated failed roll ("OK, you rolled only a 3, and you needed a 5, so instead of a failure, I'm going to put it a couple steps up the time chart -- you know what you need to look into, but you're going to need a trip to the library to figure it out.")
-
Regarding The ‘asking The right question’ power, why not re-skin Guide My Hand?
@Mr. death: asking the right question is, essentially, the fortuitous arrival trapping of the power. And its other benefits seem in line with what nadia wants.
Probably covers the dreams and quests too.
As far as dreams go, Cassandra’s Tears creates an aspect that guides you to an objective. It can be invoked to push the story in a direction or compelled to push it similarly in a direction at an inconvenient time. So reskin it to push you towards wisdom and learning instead of Disaster(which is the hat Cassandra’s Tears was based on. You’d have to change the ‘people don’t believe you’ part of it.
-
Has anyone used the Ordo Torca from Paranet Papers as antagonists? I'm trying to decide whether to involve them at some point, and I was wondering what other people have done with them.
-
And does anyone have a good Nutcracker-related catch for a rat-type lycanthrope? I feel like just "nutcrackers" isn't a very good one.
-
The nutcracker was a transformed prince of some kind, wasn't he?
Royalty might be an appropriate Catch.
-
The nutcracker was a transformed prince of some kind, wasn't he?
Royalty might be an appropriate Catch.
Thanks! Some kind of supernaturally-enhanced royal blood catch would be really cool.
-
Thanks! Some kind of supernaturally-enhanced royal blood catch would be really cool.
Royalty isn't so common these days that I think you need to add the "supernatural" extra.
OTOH, if you include "all descendents of" it's... kind of common, actually, and NOT that much of a Catch. Everyone with ancestors in Europe (or who came from Europe in the past 2-3 centuries) is a descendent of Charlemagne. Everybody alive is descended from Nefertiti.
I'd go with "heir to the throne" -- even if the throne was gulped up by an aggressor 1100years ago, if the reigning monarch had a clear and unambiguous heir who survived (and so on down the generations), such that the laws of the (no longer existing) realm would hold "Joe the warehouse guy" to be the True Heir... Then Joe would be incredibly dangerous to these were-rats.
-
Royalty isn't so common these days that I think you need to add the "supernatural" extra.
OTOH, if you include "all descendents of" it's... kind of common, actually, and NOT that much of a Catch. Everyone with ancestors in Europe (or who came from Europe in the past 2-3 centuries) is a descendent of Charlemagne. Everybody alive is descended from Nefertiti.
The idea was that because everyone has some kind of royal blood, you'd have to do some sort of ritual to mystically enhance it, which would involve making yourself more like the ruler whose blood you're invoking. I was thinking something sort of similar to temporary sponsored magic, where you get a minor advantage (in this case, you fulfill the catch for x time; in the case of sponsored magic, you get to supercharge your attack spell with a thunderstorm) and in return you're hit with a compel to act in a certain way or do something.
I'd go with "heir to the throne" -- even if the throne was gulped up by an aggressor 1100years ago, if the reigning monarch had a clear and unambiguous heir who survived (and so on down the generations), such that the laws of the (no longer existing) realm would hold "Joe the warehouse guy" to be the True Heir... Then Joe would be incredibly dangerous to these were-rats.
That might work better, yes. What value would you put on this catch?
-
How much refresh would a power that links two characters and allows them to draw on each other's power cost?
-
The idea was that because everyone has some kind of royal blood, you'd have to do some sort of ritual to mystically enhance it, which would involve making yourself more like the ruler whose blood you're invoking. I was thinking something sort of similar to temporary sponsored magic, where you get a minor advantage (in this case, you fulfill the catch for x time; in the case of sponsored magic, you get to supercharge your attack spell with a thunderstorm) and in return you're hit with a compel to act in a certain way or do something.
Since everybody has it, the issue of "royal blood" is a non-issue. It's just a narrative trapping, a research-element you need to turn up, so that you can invoke / enhance it.
This makes it not really fulfill the elements of a "catch" imho: the info may be hidden or obscure, but the necessary royal blood is EVERYWHERE, literally; there are no people -- zero -- without it. It's like the Catch being "air" or something.
Also, I'm not wild about attaching a Ritual prerequisite to a Catch. Mechanically, it makes "has done the ritual (maybe within <X> time ? Does it expire?)" the actual, game-mechanical Catch, which... I dunno, I guess it works? I have a gut instinct saying its a problem, but I can't articulate it.
-
Since everybody has it, the issue of "royal blood" is a non-issue. It's just a narrative trapping, a research-element you need to turn up, so that you can invoke / enhance it.
This makes it not really fulfill the elements of a "catch" imho: the info may be hidden or obscure, but the necessary royal blood is EVERYWHERE, literally; there are no people -- zero -- without it. It's like the Catch being "air" or something.
Also, I'm not wild about attaching a Ritual prerequisite to a Catch. Mechanically, it makes "has done the ritual (maybe within <X> time ? Does it expire?)" the actual, game-mechanical Catch, which... I dunno, I guess it works? I have a gut instinct saying its a problem, but I can't articulate it.
Yeah, I think the "royal heir" thing works better.
-
How much refresh would a power that links two characters and allows them to draw on each other's power cost?
Depends entirely on what drawing on each other's power entails.
-
Depends entirely on what drawing on each other's power entails.
Basically, I'm trying to create something similar to the vampire marks from Anita Blake, only less strong and without all the crazy sex stuff that accompanies them, and also making getting the marks more interesting than just "vampire gives them to you."
My idea is that I'm creating a dhampir (defined here as a being created when a pregnant woman is Turned into a blampire--when she gives birth, the child is a dhampir) who is something like a cross between Jean-Claude from Anita Blake and Stefan from the Mercy Thomson series. The way dhampirs work in this story is that, so long as their mother is still alive, they are forced to obey the master vampire that turned her (non-master blampires can't create dhampirs) and dhampirs have a limited amount of supernatural ability (inhuman powers and maybe a negligible amount of magic, basically) but if they kill the master that created them, they 'unlock' the ability to develop their powers further (the idea for this comes from a WoJ that blampires gain power by killing people). Also, because their natures are so unbalanced in favor of death and darkness, all dhampirs are drawn to sunlight, despite the fact that it kills them.
This dhampir is no longer obligated to obey his master, but that master is still alive. So this dhampir decides to convince my character to trust him (via asking for help with stuff my character would want to get involved in, offering his help to her practically free of charge, and generally being nice and helpful) in order to manipulate/convince her to perform a ritual that would give him both an ally and more power in order to kill his master, and also would allow him to walk in sunlight, to some extent.
In the course of this, they become friends, and they end up binding themselves together with the five elemental Marks, for various reasons.
The Water Mark is placed by the dhampir/vampire sending his energy into a person, causing some of their energy to flow back into him. This has a mild healing effect when it happens, but not long-term. Without this or the Earth Mark, however, the other Marks cannot be taken.
The Earth Mark is an exchange of blood between the vampire/dhampir and a person. This allows the person to keep functioning for a scene even if they are badly injured (basically, it works similarly to Harry's bear belt buckle).
The Air Mark is triggered by looking into the vampire/dhampir's eyes--which normally allows a blampire or a dhampir access to your mind, and is sort of like them having your Name in terms of problems blocking it--and having the will to take control of the connection and reach back rather than succumbing or breaking the link. This allows the dhampir/vampire and the person to speak mentally when they are close to each other or in each other's dreams.
The Fire Mark is triggered by the vampire/dhampir allowing a person to pour faith magic into them and accepting it (essentially allowing themselves to be taken out) and allows both of them to know when the other is lying to them, and allows them to sense extremely strong emotions in the other.
The Spirit Mark is triggered by the vampire/dhampir jointly casting a (strong) spell together, and can only be taken by someone who has at least one of the Earth/Water Marks and at least one of the Air/Fire Marks. It allows either of them to be able to find the other no matter where they are (if you're too far away, you may only get a vague direction, but you can follow that to get closer).
When someone has taken all five Marks, they can draw on the vampire/dhampir's power, and the vampire/dhampir can draw on theirs. What this means for the living person is that if the vampire/dhampir has supernatural speed and/or strength, the person can draw on the inhuman version of one of those (but not both at once, and you can't switch mid-scene); can draw on any spellcasting abilities that the dhampir/vampire might have, but with an effect like Demonic Co-Pilot; and can gain shifts for necromantic spells by inflicting physical stress or consequences on the vampire/dhampir if they don't resist. What this means for the vampire/dhampir is that they can heal themselves by drawing energy from the person (inflicting physical stress, or optionally mental if the person is a spellcaster)--the person cannot resist this, which can be a problem in a fight; can draw on any spellcasting abilities that the person may have (or possibly other supernatural powers, if they have those); and gains armor:1 or 2 (I don't know which it should be yet) against any attacks made with their Catch.
-
The effects of the individual marks sound like they'd be best represented through Aspects.
For the effect of all the marks together, perhaps you could use Variable Abilities (https://dfrpg-resources.paranetonline.com/index.php?title=Variable_Abilities) with a Limitation (https://dfrpg-resources.paranetonline.com/index.php?title=Limitation).
...well, damn. Looks like the wiki's been overrun with spambots. And here I was thinking being preposterously obscure would protect us.
Well, it should be possible to revert to an earlier version. Gonna be a pain in the neck, though.
-
...well, damn. Looks like the wiki's been overrun with spambots. And here I was thinking being preposterously obscure would protect us.
That's the thing about bots & spiders & other automation.
They follow ALL the links.
-
What kind of wishes should a wish-granting flounder be able to grant in the Dresdenverse?
-
I have no idea what the canon answer is, but if I was running the game I'd say that the flounder can grant any imaginable wish partway. No matter what you wish for, you can get a slipshod and incomplete version of it.
Dunno why, but that kind of thing just feels flounder-y to me.
-
Perfect! That makes a lot of sense, and also solves the problem of why it's being used the way it is.
I'm trying to come up with 12 demonic lords, and right now I can only think of 3: the demonic lord of emptiness, the demonic lord of deception, and the demonic lord of pain. Can you think of any others?
-
Also, what do you think about this?:
Oathbroken [+1/+2?]
Available only to spellcasters. You broke an oath made upon your power. As a result:
-you suffer a -1 penalty to all discipline rolls made for spellcasting.
-you suffer a -1 penalty to any action that opposes the person you broke your oath to when they're in the same area as you.
-every time you try to work against them (when they're in the area, as above) and succeed, you must roll discipline (with the -1 penalty) against the result as if you were defending against an attack. Failure results in mental stress.
-increase all penalties by 1 for every additional time you break a promise to the person you broke your original oath to (subsequent promises need not be sworn on your power) (increase refresh rebate for this?)
-
I thought that if you break an oath on your power it makes you unable to use your power at all.
I’d treat it as a compel or make it a block on all spellcasting. The block, depending on its strength, would prevent spellcasting all together or reduce its efficiency. It wouldn’t be a power you buy but an aspect attached to the wizards high concept or a new aspect put on the scene/campaign.
-
I thought that if you break an oath on your power it makes you unable to use your power at all.
I’d treat it as a compel or make it a block on all spellcasting. The block, depending on its strength, would prevent spellcasting all together or reduce its efficiency. It wouldn’t be a power you buy but an aspect attached to the wizards high concept or a new aspect put on the scene/campaign.
It gives you a slight drop to your power, but do it enough and you drop to power zero.
Compels are the easiest way to model this, though I understand why a separate rebate might be considered necessary. I think the flat penalties may not be the best idea though: Sanctaphrax has a limitation power on the wiki that might be your best bet.
-
I think the flat penalties may not be the best idea though: Sanctaphrax has a limitation power on the wiki that might be your best bet.
Would the limitation power allow for things like mental attacks if a character resists doing what the person they'd sworn an oath to wants? I'm trying to model Harry's reactions to Lea in Grave Peril.
-
Would the limitation power allow for things like mental attacks if a character resists doing what the person they'd sworn an oath to wants? I'm trying to model Harry's reactions to Lea in Grave Peril.
Compels. What you're looking for is compels on an aspect.
Compels allow for pretty much anything, and not everything is suited to be represented by a power.
-
In general, rebate Powers are only used to modify other Powers. You can't really get Refresh from a weakness in this game, you can only reduce the Refresh costs of your strengths by limiting their usefulness in some way.
Compels pick up the slack. On its own, The Catch just makes you as vulnerable as a normal person to whatever your Catch is. If you're more vulnerable than that, you get Fate Points.
Anyway, here's Limitation (https://dfrpg-resources.paranetonline.com/index.php?title=Limitation).
I'm trying to come up with 12 demonic lords, and right now I can only think of 3: the demonic lord of emptiness, the demonic lord of deception, and the demonic lord of pain. Can you think of any others?
I figure you can probably use any vaguely negative-sounding concept. Fear, gluttony, bigotry, foolishness, bureaucracy, pride, vengeance, sorrow, laziness, whatever.
-
Compels. What you're looking for is compels on an aspect.
Compels allow for pretty much anything, and not everything is suited to be represented by a power.
Compels pick up the slack. On its own, The Catch just makes you as vulnerable as a normal person to whatever your Catch is. If you're more vulnerable than that, you get Fate Points.
Yeah, yeah :)
Anyway, here's Limitation.
Thanks!
I figure you can probably use any vaguely negative-sounding concept. Fear, gluttony, bigotry, foolishness, bureaucracy, pride, vengeance, sorrow, laziness, whatever.
The problem is, there are so many negative things out there, it's hard to pick. I'm trying to choose things that would make good story contributions (well, and one of them is just me ripping off another book series), but I'm stuck.
Yet another question, how would you represent Alex Verus' divination powers (and how much would they cost)?
-
The problem is, there are so many negative things out there, it's hard to pick. I'm trying to choose things that would make good story contributions (well, and one of them is just me ripping off another book series), but I'm stuck.
Just pick at random and start writing, I say. If it doesn't work out, change it.
Yet another question, how would you represent Alex Verus' divination powers (and how much would they cost)?
I'm not familiar with Alex Verus, but divination is generally Ritual or Thaumaturgy. There's also a couple of custom Powers for predicting the future:
https://dfrpg-resources.paranetonline.com/index.php?title=Prophecy (https://dfrpg-resources.paranetonline.com/index.php?title=Prophecy)
https://dfrpg-resources.paranetonline.com/index.php?title=Precognition (https://dfrpg-resources.paranetonline.com/index.php?title=Precognition)
Precognition is excessively die-roll-y, unfortunately.
-
A thing to remember is that even if your setting canonically has 12 major demons, you don't have to involve or even explain all 12 of them in the story.
-
A thing to remember is that even if your setting canonically has 12 major demons, you don't have to involve or even explain all 12 of them in the story.
True, but I need to know who all of them are if I want to involve even one of them, because it's important to the motivations and decision-making of the one involved.
-
A belated response re: why I should be using compels for my oathbroken wizard rather than a rebate power.
Yes, compels will work. But compels will also work for preventing a loop garou from changing when its not the full moon and being forced to change when it is, and yet they still get a rebate from human form--rare/involuntary change. How is what I'm doing different?
Not being argumentative, just confused. As people who have read some of my other posts know, I'm really bad at figuring out when something should be a power vs when it should be handled with aspect compels, and I'm hoping to get some guidelines.
Edit to avoid triple-posting: How many shifts of power would be needed for a Darkhallow? And do you think one could be cast at Chichen Itza, now that all the vampires are dead?
-
Yes, compels will work. But compels will also work for preventing a loop garou from changing when its not the full moon and being forced to change when it is, and yet they still get a rebate from human form--rare/involuntary change. How is what I'm doing different?
As I said, rebate Powers modify normal Powers. Your Oathbreaker Power does other stuff, like hitting you with mental stress.
That said, there's a bias on this board towards using Compels over rebate Powers. There's a good reason for that bias; Compels play better. Even in the case of the loup-garou, it's healthy to use a fair number of Compels.
Compels are at their best, and rebate Powers are at their worst, when it's unpredictable how often your weakness is going to matter. So "you're weaker when you're facing the person you broke your oath to" is a classic Compel thing.
Edit to avoid triple-posting: How many shifts of power would be needed for a Darkhallow? And do you think one could be cast at Chichen Itza, now that all the vampires are dead?
I don't think Chichen Itza could sustain one. My understanding is that you need to eat a whole bunch of souls to make the thing work, so there needs to be a large + dense population present.
As for the shifts, it's really up to you. The game has never made anything about the Darkhallow clear, as far as I can remember.
-
As I said, rebate Powers modify normal Powers. Your Oathbreaker Power does other stuff, like hitting you with mental stress.
True. It's basically a combination of modifying spellcasting powers (albeit slightly indirectly) and the downsides of demonic co-pilot.
That said, there's a bias on this board towards using Compels over rebate Powers. There's a good reason for that bias; Compels play better. Even in the case of the loup-garou, it's healthy to use a fair number of Compels.
Compels are at their best, and rebate Powers are at their worst, when it's unpredictable how often your weakness is going to matter. So "you're weaker when you're facing the person you broke your oath to" is a classic Compel thing.
Thanks!
But what about the part of the rebate power that's completely consistent?
I don't think Chichen Itza could sustain one. My understanding is that you need to eat a whole bunch of souls to make the thing work, so there needs to be a large + dense population present.
My understanding was that you had to eat a lot of ghosts--souls didn't enter into it. There's also the necessity of sacrificing living people, but that bit's fairly unclear. The best theory I've heard is that the Darkhallow is like a straw--you drink in all the power, and a bunch of people die when their energy gets ripped out to replace what you drank. If you try to do the Darkhallow with no life around, it's like trying to drink through a straw with your finger over one end.
What I'm trying to figure out is if you could combine the Ley line power and all the non-sapient life around Chichen Itza to substitute for all the human sacrifice, or if it would fundamentally change the nature of the ritual, or if it would just make it weaker, or if it would fizzle because you're not killing sapient beings. (Several of these possibilities are more interesting than others, but I'm trying to find out which is more true to the books, and if one of the less interesting possibilities ends up being that, I have modifications I can make.)
-
Seems like a bit of a cheat to me, but if it turned up in a story I was reading I'd just shrug and accept it.
But what about the part of the rebate power that's completely consistent?
Penalizing spellcasting would be a reasonable concept for a rebate Power, but spellcasting abilities already scale with Refresh investment. So it seems cleaner just to, say, remove a Refinement. Or demote Evocation to Channelling.
-
The actual terms used in Dead Beat as I recall are "spirit" and "life force," which I took to mean that it includes both the dead and the living.
Plus, I'm not sure that Red Court even have spirits that you could suck in.
As to the compels, another point is that the "oathbreaker" power as you wrote it is revolving around who they broke the oath to, which I don't think is accurate to the series (it's specifically fae that hold you to your oath like that; making a general promise on your power and then breaking it reflects on you regardless of who you're acting against); plus, it seems just killing the dude you broke oath against would remove the penalties entirely -- would it also remove the rebate?
-
Plus, I'm not sure that Red Court even have spirits that you could suck in.
True. I more meant that, given the number of people the Red Court has murdered there, there should be a lot of ghosts.
As to the compels, another point is that the "oathbreaker" power as you wrote it is revolving around who they broke the oath to, which I don't think is accurate to the series (it's specifically fae that hold you to your oath like that; making a general promise on your power and then breaking it reflects on you regardless of who you're acting against); plus, it seems just killing the dude you broke oath against would remove the penalties entirely -- would it also remove the rebate?
Good point!
How about this?:
Oathbroken [+1]
Available only to spellcasters. You broke an oath made upon your power. As a result:
-you suffer a -1 penalty to all discipline rolls made for spellcasting.
-this upgrades to -2 against the both the person you broke your oath to and to people related to your broken oath (ie, If you promised person A on your power that you would stay with their daughter for a week and keep her safe, but then broke your oath to them and the daughter got turned into a vampire, then this penalty applies to both of them); also take a -1 conviction penalty against such people
upgrade: Faerie Oathbroken [+1]
The person you broke your oath to was actually a faerie. As such:
-you suffer a -1 penalty to any action that opposes the person you broke your oath to when they're in the same area as you.
-every time you try to work against them (when they're in the area, as above) and succeed, you must roll discipline (with the -1 penalty) against the result as if you were defending against an attack. Failure results in mental stress.
-increase all penalties by 1 for every additional time you break a promise to the person you broke your original oath to (subsequent promises need not be sworn on your power) (increase refresh rebate for this?)
upgrade: Murderous Oathbroken [+1]
You murdered the person to whom you broke your oath, hoping to escape the consequences. It didn't work. As such:
-a magical mark is on you, showing what you've done. Whenever dealing with someone in the magical community, you operate at -1 to all social skills. You can try to hide it, but as per "Marked by Power" this should be difficult and not last long.
Note: Some or all of these power rebates should not be taken unless you expect to regularly encounter the person to whom you've sworn your oath. Also, if you're a Denarian, you can't take these. The Fallen deals with the problem.
-
Since you don’t seem to like the idea of a block, I think it would work better to make oathbreaker act as a threshold. This would require you to add more power to spells. Even a 2 or 3 shift threshold would be a huge inconvenience. And a threshold makes sense thematically as a broken promise creates a barrier to trust and a barrier to your power that must be rebuilt.
-
The thing about the -1 penalties is, in the long run, they're kind of toothless.
Breaking an oath against a Faerie means the faerie owns your ass. It does not mean it's only slightly more difficult for you to interact with them socially. It means they can assert direct control over you, more or less without a contest. The power you've written simply does not reflect that. An aspect that you could compel would.
I seriously think just having an appropriate aspect and a compel is both much simpler and much more in line with what we see in the books.
Not everything is appropriate as a power.
-
Since you don’t seem to like the idea of a block,
Did I miss you suggesting using a block somewhere? If so, I apologize.
I think it would work better to make oathbreaker act as a threshold. This would require you to add more power to spells. Even a 2 or 3 shift threshold would be a huge inconvenience. And a threshold makes sense thematically as a broken promise creates a barrier to trust and a barrier to your power that must be rebuilt.
That's a good idea.
Breaking an oath against a Faerie means the faerie owns your ass. It does not mean it's only slightly more difficult for you to interact with them socially. It means they can assert direct control over you, more or less without a contest. The power you've written simply does not reflect that. An aspect that you could compel would.
1) They can't always assert direct control over you without contest. Harry was able to fight against Lea most of the time. That's why I represented it as mental attacks.
2) You can also use compels, in the same way you can still compel a loop garou even though it gets a power rebate.
-
1) They can't always assert direct control over you without contest. Harry was able to fight against Lea most of the time. That's why I represented it as mental attacks.
He was able to outmaneuver her. I do not recall any point in the books where she moves to assert control and Harry resists it.
Also bear in mind that Lea has a separate deal, with Harry's mother, that she has to respect when dealing with Harry.
Recall when Mab -- who has no such deal with Harry's mother -- demonstrates that she owns Harry's debt, and physically makes his body do things, and he describes it as something he has no defense or resistance against.
My left palm slammed down onto the table. I watched, startled,
as I gripped the letter opener in my right hand, slasher-movie style.
In a panic, I tried to hold back my hand, to drop the opener, but my
arms were running on automatic, like they were someone else's.
...
I slammed the letter opener down onto the back of my own hand,
hard. My desk is a cheap one. The steel bit cleanly through the
meat between my thumb and forefinger and sank into the desk,
pinning me there. Pain washed up my arm even as blood started
oozing out of the wound. I tried to fight it down, but I was panicked,
in no condition to exert a lot of control. A whimper slipped out of
me. I tried to pull the steel away, to get it out of my hand, but my
arm simply twisted, wrenching the letter opener counterclockwise.
There's no contest there. Mab simply wills it and Harry's body obeys, with nothing he can do to stop it.
2) You can also use compels, in the same way you can still compel a loop garou even though it gets a power rebate.
The rebate and all the messy penalties are not necessary, and do not accurately reflect the effect breaking a promise on your power is supposed to have based on the books.
-
I don't think a Power for Oathbreaking is necessary. It's story a element.
If I were running a game where a player made an Oath, it might be a result of:
A social Take Out or Consequence where the victor of the conflict dictated the result of their victory. "If you break your Oath, you will suffer a 3 shift threshold against all spellcasting. It will last until the Consequence is healed (probably finding a way to rectify what you did to break the Oath, which would justify allowing time to heal the consequence).
Or a deal that was just hand-waived: You agreed to do xyz. If you don't do it, you will be considered to have broken an Oath and suffer penalties of xyz until the debt is repaid. I might still use an aspect to keep track of the Oath/debt and use it for compels but I wouldn't have to.
I don't think Killing the subject should erase the broken Oath. In fact, the Oath could have been "On my Power I will not injure or kill the person with whom I make this Oath." In this case, killing them triggers the loss of power. In fact, I think killing a person you owe a debt to should probably exacerbate the problem.
-
He was able to outmaneuver her. I do not recall any point in the books where she moves to assert control and Harry resists it.
I had interpreted the scene where he dumped ghost dust on her to be him resisting her attempt to control him, but I could be wrong.
Recall when Mab -- who has no such deal with Harry's mother -- demonstrates that she owns Harry's debt, and physically makes his body do things, and he describes it as something he has no defense or resistance against.
Yeah, but Mab is an order of magnitude more powerful than Lea.
I don't think a Power for Oathbreaking is necessary. It's story a element.
If I were running a game where a player made an Oath, it might be a result of:
A social Take Out or Consequence where the victor of the conflict dictated the result of their victory. "If you break your Oath, you will suffer a 3 shift threshold against all spellcasting. It will last until the Consequence is healed (probably finding a way to rectify what you did to break the Oath, which would justify allowing time to heal the consequence).
Or a deal that was just hand-waived: You agreed to do xyz. If you don't do it, you will be considered to have broken an Oath and suffer penalties of xyz until the debt is repaid. I might still use an aspect to keep track of the Oath/debt and use it for compels but I wouldn't have to.
Good point.
Next question: What powers do you think a praying mantis-type theriothrope should have?
-
I'm stealing this thread for a second to ask a question of my own:
What level of limitation would you apply to one that does not actually STOP someone from using a power, just radically incentivizes against using it? I'm thinking of a scenario in which someone has powers whose uses end up being too costly for them to use often, which I would mechanically represent by automatically creating an aspect for the GM to tag against the person for free later every time they draw on the power for an exchange.
-
Next question: What powers do you think a praying mantis-type theriothrope should have?
Probably nothing interesting. Thropes don't seem to have much going on.
What level of limitation would you apply to one that does not actually STOP someone from using a power, just radically incentivizes against using it? I'm thinking of a scenario in which someone has powers whose uses end up being too costly for them to use often, which I would mechanically represent by automatically creating an aspect for the GM to tag against the person for free later every time they draw on the power for an exchange.
Depends on the Power, honestly. It's a pretty crippling drawback in a direct conflict, but not too big a deal outside of one.
-
Depends on the Power, honestly. It's a pretty crippling drawback in a direct conflict, but not too big a deal outside of one.
I’d be attaching it to spellcasting powers, both slow and fast. I’m basically trying to represent a power that’s always available, but whose use has intangible but ruinous costs.
-
I'd be inclined to offer a 50% refund on evocation and no refund on thaumaturgy.
Unfortunately, I suspect that such a limitation would encourage undesirable patterns of play among evokers. Would never be worth casting a maneuver with it, and you'd be strongly encouraged to go for a one-hit-kill in every fight.
-
How would you model the ability from The Name of the Wind to split your mind into pieces, and how much should it cost?
I'm thinking something like:
-you can split your mind into two, allowing you to take two actions at a time, provided that it is reasonable for you to do so (you still only have one body)
-this takes an action
-while your mind is split, you take a -1 penalty to everything you do
-each portion of your mind has its own mental stress track, but it is 1 shorter than your normal mental stress track
-when 1 portion of your mind is taken out, the other portions have to defend against a mental attack of X
-a concession of one portion of your mind is always represented as that portion merging back into the rest
-when handling mental attacks, you cannot split the effects of a single attack between different portions of your mind
-upgrade: you can split your mind one additional time; this can be taken multiple times, until you can split your mind a number of times equal to your Discipline
I'm not sure if this would work, or how much this should cost, or whether it's just plain overpowered, given the advantage it gives to spellcasters.
-
I’d use the rules for multiple attacks. Role to hit, take the result of shifts and divide them among as many people as you are trying to hit. Normally you need justification for this: spellcasting, automatic weapons etc...
I wouldn’t require any investment in refresh. If you have an appropriate aspect, I’d just let you do it.
This has a name in the book but I forget what it is.
Edit: Spray attacks: pg 326
-
I’d use the rules for multiple attacks. Role to hit, take the result of shifts and divide them among as many people as you are trying to hit. Normally you need justification for this: spellcasting, automatic weapons etc...
I wouldn’t require any investment in refresh. If you have an appropriate aspect, I’d just let you do it.
This has a name in the book but I forget what it is.
Edit: Spray attacks: pg 326
Would that cover things like being able to do things like read a book and solve a riddle simultaneously, or cast multiple different spells at once, or hide information from yourself in the event of interrogation or mental invasion?
-
Would that cover things like being able to do things like read a book and solve a riddle simultaneously,
If you read the page I quoted, you see what it covers. It only covers attacks. Stunts let you do tasks 1 or 2 shifts quicker.
cast multiple different spells at once,
it lets you target multiple people with the same spell. Doing multiple spells - like a block + aspect or block + damage is the realm of Thaumaturgy. Enchanted items can already do that. But if you'd want to do two separate types of damage, it would be fine probably.
As a GM, I already let maneuvers do damage. I've actually let powerful maneuvers Take Out mooks.
I'd even let you do a block and damage or a block and a maneuver by splitting the shifts. Maybe a -1 power. It would be finicky with focus items and specializations, though. It's kind of stretching the bounds of the game since you are supposed to choose: attack, block or maneuver. But grappling lets you block and do damage.
or hide information from yourself in the event of interrogation or mental invasion?
That's just a conviction or discipline block. Maybe An aspect as a justification.
If you want to do all that stuff together, I might just charge a few refresh 2 or 3.
For that refresh, it would let you do all the things I just mentioned.
-
Most of that could probably just be a maneuver to put an Aspect on yourself. No need to get fancy.
-
So, I've recently noticed that Inhuman Speed in the RPG doesn't actually line up with either what we've seen from people who have the power in the books or with real-world physics. So this is my (quite possibly bad) attempt to fix it via splitting the power up into two different powers:
Inhuman Speed [-2]
Improved Initiative: Your Alertness is at +1 for the purpose of determining initiative.
Athletic Ability: All of your athletics checks not to do with reacting quickly to outside stimuli are made at +1 (for example, you get a +1 bonus when climbing a wall, but not when balancing on a log). This includes dodging only when you also move at least one zone. Increase this bonus to +2 when sprinting.
Improved Striking: It's easier to hit someone, and you do more damage, when you are moving fast. As such, you get a +1 bonus to fists and weapons. When using thrown weapons, however, you do not get a +1 bonus, but instead increase the weapons value by 1.
Casual Movement: as in YS
Almost Too Fast To See: as in YS
Inhuman Reflexes [-2]
Improved Initiative: Your Alertness is at +4 for the purpose of determining initiative.
Athletic Ability: All of your athletics checks to do with reacting quickly to outside stimuli are made at +1 (for example, you get a +1 bonus for catching yourself if you fall out of a tree, but not when climbing the tree in the first place). This includes dodging. Increase this bonus to +2 when making a full defense.
Improved Aiming: Your quick reflexes make it easier for you to aim quickly. Gain a +1 when shooting guns or throwing weapons. This doesn't help with sniper stuff.
Ambush Reaction: When being ambushed, your quick reflexes allow you to react better than most people. Instead of defending at Mediocre, you can defend at half your skill level (rounded down).
Obstacle Avoidance: Difficulty factors for moving due to obstacles in the terrain (for example, trees or broken pavement) are reduced by two.
What do people think?
-
To be honest, I don't see the point. Speed powers fit the books pretty nicely, I think.
-
The issue I have is twofold: first, that supernatural beings like Thomas and Kincaid are supposed to be able to aim without trying particularly hard--Harry identifies Kincaid as supernatural because he doesn't miss, and Thomas is specifically called out as never having to practice in order to shoot well; second, that physics says that swinging a weapon faster should make it do more damage if it hits, and should also make it harder to dodge. Neither of these things appears to be represented in the game.
-
The issue I have is twofold: first, that supernatural beings like Thomas and Kincaid are supposed to be able to aim without trying particularly hard--Harry identifies Kincaid as supernatural because he doesn't miss, and Thomas is specifically called out as never having to practice in order to shoot well; second, that physics says that swinging a weapon faster should make it do more damage if it hits, and should also make it harder to dodge. Neither of these things appears to be represented in the game.
It probably is just represented as giving them a high Guns score, maybe with some invoking occasionally when a shot is important. If it’s really important, a stunt might be called for, but not a separate power. I actually have a concept for a character who is a telekinetic (as the telekinesis power on the wiki) and took a stunt to apply strength bonuses to their weapon shooting.
-
I, too, don't see the need or the point in effectively doubling the price of Inhuman Speed.
For one, I think it's an unwarranted assumption that those aspects of Thomas and Kincaid are specifically attributed to the speed power.
For another, removing the bonus from dodging makes the power more or less useless, or at least, not worth -2 refresh, since in all the games I've played, the vast majority of athletics checks go toward dodging.
And Thomas and most supernatural creatures already have at least one strength power, which does the legwork for the damage bonuses anyway.
-
Resurrecting this thread because I've come up with yet another random question:
What would be an interesting result of a White Court Virgin sleeping with someone who is in true love with them, but whom they don't feel the same about?
I've decided that if a WCVirgin is in love with the person they sleep with, but that person doesn't feel the same, then the person still dies but the WCVirgin's demon is killed. I had considered using the reverse of that (the person lives, but the WCVirgin becomes a WCVampire) for if the person is in love with the WCVirgin but not the reverse--but that doesn't feel traumatic enough, so I'm looking for suggestions.
Also, to resurrect a couple of old points that I'm still looking for answers about:
Has anyone used the Ordo Torca in their game, and how did that go?
And is there anything interesting and unique about praying mantis theriothropes?
-
What would be an interesting result of a White Court Virgin sleeping with someone who is in true love with them, but whom they don't feel the same about?
I've decided that if a WCVirgin is in love with the person they sleep with, but that person doesn't feel the same, then the person still dies but the WCVirgin's demon is killed. I had considered using the reverse of that (the person lives, but the WCVirgin becomes a WCVampire) for if the person is in love with the WCVirgin but not the reverse--but that doesn't feel traumatic enough, so I'm looking for suggestions.
Hmmm.
I think Jim Butcher is rather a romantic. I recall a fair number of topics where he stresses the "mutuality" factor, including that parent/child love doesn't offer protection vs. the Raith's because it the child is so dependent, the parent so protective.
I think it's the WCV's own love for their partner -- that very first time, while still a wcV -- that insulates them from being burned; but maybe it's the actual mutuality; I could see that argument too!
Maybe the WCV just gets burned, and has to stop, like most other cases. That's certainly a traumatic and tragic experience...
I don't think the canon speaks to the specific, so make up the answer you like best!
And is there anything interesting and unique about praying mantis theriothropes?
I don't think they exist, as a class. Imariel's battle-form is unique to that Fallen, just like Ursiel's is, etc.
So far as I know, the DF offers no theriomorphs who aren't mammals. The Naagloshii can do more, but that's a (very) special case! There was a Naga, but that's a Naga, not a human shapeshifter.
I think invertebrates are right off the table, except at extreme power levels (like, probably not even the Merlin is strong enough).
But again -- your game, do it if you think it's more fun.
-
Maybe the WCV just gets burned, and has to stop, like most other cases. That's certainly a traumatic and tragic experience...
That might work. It has the right feel to it, but I'm looking for something with longer-lasting consequences, since the first feeding is so significant. Maybe the hunger demon gets burned directly instead of the person? But I'm not sure how to represent that...
I don't think they exist, as a class. Imariel's battle-form is unique to that Fallen, just like Ursiel's is, etc.
So far as I know, the DF offers no theriomorphs who aren't mammals. The Naagloshii can do more, but that's a (very) special case! There was a Naga, but that's a Naga, not a human shapeshifter.
I meant something like lycanthropes are, where they have a spirit inside them but don't transform. Sorry if that wasn't clear.
And they don't exist in canon, but I'm trying to find something interesting about one because I'm having my wizard apprentice deal with one (in a fanfic, not in a game, but I'm using game mechanics to keep track of what my characters can and can't do) and I need to give it something besides speed powers or it will take out my wizard apprentice way too easily (she doesn't know combat evocation yet, and isn't supposed to learn it for a while, so I'm trying to avoid her getting into too many direct fights). But the praying mantis needs some combat stuff (and also can't have guns, because this encounter is the first time she uses her shield spell in combat, so she's not going to be fast or good enough to block gunfire). Strength powers don't feel quite right, though, so I'm looking for something that has a "praying mantis"-like feel to it.
-
How would you build the spear of longinus? The artifact that pierced christs side and was bathed in its blood.
-
I meant something like lycanthropes are, where they have a spirit inside them but don't transform. Sorry if that wasn't clear.
... and I need to give it something besides speed powers or it will take out my wizard apprentice way too easily (she doesn't know combat evocation yet, and isn't supposed to learn it for a while, so I'm trying to avoid her getting into too many direct fights). But the praying mantis needs some combat stuff (and also can't have guns, because this encounter is the first time she uses her shield spell in combat, so she's not going to be fast or good enough to block gunfire). Strength powers don't feel quite right, though, so I'm looking for something that has a "praying mantis"-like feel to it.
So, not physical shapeshifting, but just the human body empowered by a "mantis-spirit"?
Hmm. You're right, I didn't understand! Thanks for clarifying this.
Further thoughts, then...
IIRC, those spirits don't actually grant "powers" in any supernatural manner, just a "limits off" physicality, "hysterical strength" or the like. And, of course, the mind-set of the spirit.
The real-life mantis is a stalk-and-strike ambush hunter, using a strike-and-hold immobilization. It usually then begins feeding... often without even bothering to kill the prey! A wizard could have a unique advantage vs. such a mantis-spirit, in that they don't need to move to take effective action, "immobilized" but still effective!
I'm also thinking of "mantis-style" kung fu; maybe a practitioner of the martial art got into some weird occult state, and got possessed, or maybe that's just how a mantis-spirit inhabits a body -- maybe it's even the Dresdenverse origin of Mantis Kung Fu!
-
I'm also thinking of "mantis-style" kung fu; maybe a practitioner of the martial art got into some weird occult state, and got possessed, or maybe that's just how a mantis-spirit inhabits a body -- maybe it's even the Dresdenverse origin of Mantis Kung Fu!
This is an awesome idea! Thanks.
How would you build the spear of longinus? The artifact that pierced christs side and was bathed in its blood.
Well, the spear of Longinus is supposed to ensure victory for the one who has it. So, maybe a modified Righteousness where you define a single victory condition instead of a "Divinely-inspired purpose" and also apply that instead of the "when a friend, ally, or innocent victim is taken out etc" for the desperate hour portion (so it reads: "any time you are required to take a severe or extreme consequence to avoid being taken out, or something happens to directly and substantially threaten your ability to meet your stated victory condition..." (ex if your stated victory condition is "kill or capture all the vampires" and one of them runs away)).
Also, it should probably have True Aim.
You could also justify giving it "All creatures are equal before god" on the basis that if it can hurt Jesus, it should be able to hurt anyone, but that might make it to similar to the Swords of the Cross.
-
... You could also justify giving it "All creatures are equal before god" on the basis that if it can hurt Jesus, it should be able to hurt anyone, but that might make it to similar to the Swords of the Cross.
Good call... I agree that it's too much like the Swords that way!
Also, it ignores the fact that Jesus was SUPPOSED to suffer and die there: rather than some sort of "OMG it can even hurt God" feature, there's some sort of Holy Sacrifice thing going on.
There should be no direct benefit to the wielder, though maybe something for allies in the scene? Dunno... it feels like any sort of "tactical advantage" element is off-theme here...
-
Also, it ignores the fact that Jesus was SUPPOSED to suffer and die there: rather than some sort of "OMG it can even hurt God" feature, there's some sort of Holy Sacrifice thing going on.
There should be no direct benefit to the wielder, though maybe something for allies in the scene? Dunno... it feels like any sort of "tactical advantage" element is off-theme here...
Maybe something like if the wielder uses the spear to cut themselves and bleeds on someone, any current injuries that person has heal as if they have inhuman recovery? Or something like if the person wielding the spear has to take a consequence in a fight, all their friends, allies, and any innocents involved get armor:1 for the rest of the scene?
-
Maybe something like if the wielder uses the spear to cut themselves and bleeds on someone, any current injuries that person has heal as if they have inhuman recovery? Or something like if the person wielding the spear has to take a consequence in a fight, all their friends, allies, and any innocents involved get armor:1 for the rest of the scene?
Jesus died for your sins. The sacrifice needs to be bigger than any one person's benefit (not bigger than the total/aggregate benefit!); but as I said, any tactical advantages seem off-theme.
How about if all of the friends/family/allies/etc of everyone fighting on the side of the Longinus-wielder (that is to say, everyone NOT in the scene but connected to anyone who IS in the scene) get an immediate Recovery: the most-severe Consequence moves one step less-severe, including Mild consequences just going away. No tactical advantage in-scene, but a pretty vast & sweeping benefit (potentially to hundreds of people) out-of-scene. People at death's door become merely "very ill," etc.
-
I feel like the spear should have a curse attached to it. The shroud already heals, the coins are cursed, the noose gives immortality with a Catch.
Wasn’t the soldier who stabbed Jesus cursed?
True Aim fits if it makes ensures victory. Maybe even temporary immunity but with some kind of backlash. Maybe tie a Hunger Power to it. Or give it blood drinker so that it needs to be hated in blood to give you a recovery. Maybe it compels you to do battle.
-
How about if all of the friends/family/allies/etc of everyone fighting on the side of the Longinus-wielder (that is to say, everyone NOT in the scene but connected to anyone who IS in the scene) get an immediate Recovery: the most-severe Consequence moves one step less-severe, including Mild consequences just going away. No tactical advantage in-scene, but a pretty vast & sweeping benefit (potentially to hundreds of people) out-of-scene. People at death's door become merely "very ill," etc.
I feel like the spear should have a curse attached to it. The shroud already heals, the coins are cursed, the noose gives immortality with a Catch.
Wasn’t the soldier who stabbed Jesus cursed?
Maybe something like every time the Longinus-wielder takes a moderate or higher physical consequence, the current injuries of all his friends/allies heal as if they were one step less severe, but the Longinus-wielder's injuries all heal as if they were one step more severe, and when it comes to the consequence that triggers the healing, the person who inflicted it gets an extra tag. That would provide healing, a curse, some tactical advantage (since it also clears mild consequences for friends and allies involved in battle, but also some tactical disadvantage to the Longinus-wielder, so there's still the element of sacrifice.
-
Why would the roman soldier in question be punished for doing his job?
Also, I have a few more questions that I would appreciate if I could get answers. Are white court vampires considered monsters, even if they are being piloted by a pc? Outside of fate points what differentiates them from any other monster? Even if they look more human than most.
What are ways to remove a curse? Like say if someone was vindictive enough to lay a powerful curse on a victim. Like withering their legs to prevent them from being used and their bloodline to suffer the same fate? Is it truly curtains for that character is there something that they can do to fix it?
Also, if the victim is cursed, if they knew someone who is magically inclined would they be able not only trace it back to the original source but also affect them magically as well or no? Because I assume that magic is like a dna and that someone competent enough can trace it back to the source.
-
Are white court vampires considered monsters, even if they are being piloted by a pc? Outside of fate points what differentiates them from any other monster? Even if they look more human than most.
White Court vampires have free will, unlike most other monsters. They can choose to act against their nature.
-
Would shapeshifting powers be useful for a WCV? What non-WCV powers might an old WCV develop?
-
Would shapeshifting powers be useful for a WCV? What non-WCV powers might an old WCV develop?
WCV's can learn some sorcery, though they don't get to the power-levels of White Council wizards. I can imagine they might develop novel ways to combine Vamp-powers with magic; that could get remarkably dangerous! Imagine Raith-Lust, Skavis-Despair, etc... add in mind-magic, or body-based (water?) magic to play into the psychic Vamp-Whammy stuff ...
Also imagine magic enhancing a Whamp's natural speed & strength... Harry's "Bear" belt-buckle, speed potions, etc.
They can learn any mortal skill to more-than-mortal skill levels.
I think the Whamp-demon is too anthropomorphic to allow for any significant shapechange, but that's an "IMHO:" my understanding of how the Dresden universe works, by inference; not explicit in canon or rulebook.
-
We have a very long running campaign with a very high (16) Refresh with 2 WCVs. One went the "fighter" way, boosting Strength, Recovery and Speed. The other went the "Mind-Whammy"-way and that kind of fizzled out after a while. At first we added some extra steps for bonus damage on the Lust-Attack (basically going towards the Kiss of Death that the King of the WCVs has in the books, as her character is the WCV-Queen of Prussia), but you can never keep up with the bonus damage a wizard will dish out. And then there is always the question on which monsters the attack will work: Humans, sure. WCV - yes. BCV? No, yuck! Fey? Dunno, roll lore to declare.
The player then dropped her last points into a white panther shapeshift, because her WCV became a one-tick-pony. Either it can be mind-whammied, then she wins. Or not, then she's pretty helpless. As a shapeshifter she can fight a little better and has some more options.