Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Dracorex

Pages: [1] 2
1
DFRPG / Re: I Think Water Magic Is Misunderstood
« on: June 29, 2016, 01:26:09 PM »
R.e. Misinterpretation of water: the canon is told from Harry's point of view, and he even directly admits he doesn't understand the principles to water magic. The RPG stuff is written by Billy with advice from still-clueless Harry, and an addendum that Bob's tried to explain it to him/them unsuccessfully.

So it is a misunderstanding, but that's probably on Harry's own part, as intended by Butcher.

And we're free to figure it out ourselves XD. Great write-ups, by the way XD.

2
DFRPG / Re: Modeling Self-Harm for Spellcasting
« on: May 21, 2016, 12:47:06 AM »
As interesting as it is to discuss the intricacies of his motivation, where are we going with this in terms of game mechanics?

I mean, if you're suggesting a relevant aspect to invoke/compel, I have one already. "Blood on my Hands" is nicely punny  and also happily vague since I still haven't decided what exactly it was that he did.

3
DFRPG / Re: Modeling Self-Harm for Spellcasting
« on: May 20, 2016, 11:20:11 AM »
Hm.

But he's not using the knife for- hm. If he was working thaumaturgy, then the knife itself would serve as a focus item. But for evocation he'd be using the pain to drive himself.

It's a character concept I'm playing with more than something I need for a campaign. So there's stuff up in the air and things he doesn't tell me about and all. But I'm pretty sure it involved desperate circumstances, bad inflence and Lawbreaking unknowingly  (of the letter, anyway, you can't really kill someone in cold blood while being innocent of the idea that it's wrong).

4
DFRPG / Re: Modeling Self-Harm for Spellcasting
« on: May 18, 2016, 05:17:21 PM »
Isn't the blood magic Sponsored Magic about using other people's blood and being driven by bloodlust?

Something to consider in addition to the rest, I think.

Haven't heard of it XD.

5
DFRPG / Re: Modeling Self-Harm for Spellcasting
« on: May 16, 2016, 08:14:28 AM »
So essentially I'll be writing it all up as a stunt that doesn't cost refresh. Thanks very much for your thoughts, guys.

6
DFRPG / Re: Modeling Self-Harm for Spellcasting
« on: May 15, 2016, 02:26:43 AM »
Stormraven - I'd definitely be treating a consequence taken in this form as a normal consequence with all the bad news that implies, yeah: say I did take a severe consequence for 6 focus slots, that's it, there goes my slot for -6 stress, and I have a bad physical injury that's subject to compels and everything.

But are you saying then that you wouldn't charge refresh/fate points for this? Because that would be why I would put them in, as limiters against the possible overkill you're saying can happen. I mean, this guy is a wizard; he's not going to have a lot of refresh XD.

Haru - I feel that it needs a stunt because part of the intended effect is that this removes the need for my character to carry physical focus/enchanted items? I mean, I can't be compelled into "oh, you forgot to bring your blasting rod", I appear unarmed everywhere I go (while Harry Dresden points out that bringing his staff is effectively open carry as far as supernatural beings are concerned), I can't be disarmed (unless I'm literally dis-armed)....

And I want to tie it to consequences rather than Endurance simply because I feel like the character causing himself injury like this should have consequences (pun intended). Like, I mean, taking a knife to your own flesh over and over again really shouldn't be dismissed as flavour.

7
DFRPG / Modeling Self-Harm for Spellcasting
« on: May 14, 2016, 07:41:01 PM »
So I'm fiddling with a wizardly character concept for kicks. At 3am in the morning.

So the character is a guilt-ridden guy who also doesn't want to carry around foci and enchanted items for his magical shenanigans, and I'm envisioning him carving symbols into the skin/flesh of his arms in order to use his own blood and pain to fuel his evocation. So I'm not even thinking of it as a once-off-ish thing like when a ritualist/thaumaturge can inflict consequences on themselves to make up requirements for their ritual, I'm thinking this guy basically has scars and new(er) wounds on him basically all the time, as he renews the cuts in a really masochistic version of maintaining/upgrading a focus item.

So how would folks suggest I model this?

So I was thinking a stunt to let me spend fate points to declare physical consequences (1 FP per consequence) in order to use the corresponding number of available focus item slots (as determined by my Evocation + Refinement) for evocation control and/or power bonuses determined on the spot and then locked in for the duration of however long the corresponding consequence takes to be removed as a result of recovery.

But I'm not sure if the cost/limitations are not enough, or overkill, or what, or if someone can suggest a more elegant solution, of if this is actually a pretty okay plan.

8
DFRPG / Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
« on: August 18, 2013, 12:48:58 PM »
Clarification: The item strength/frequency/slots needed is using the maker's crafting stats. The person considered to possess the item is not the maker, as the maker crafted it for her.

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

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

9
DFRPG / Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
« on: August 16, 2013, 06:55:38 AM »
Quick question: If I have a wizard who's a better item-craftsman make an enchanted object for his apprentice's use, the item is -1 strength and uses the same number of slots as it would have for the maker, and that's all, right?

10
DFRPG / Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
« on: June 20, 2013, 08:10:15 AM »
Swift Transition is two-way. It's the kind WCVs have, isn't it? That's how Thomas and Michael got back out in Grave Peril. Michael was complaining about how they came out in a 'flesh pit' or something; Thomas was protesting about how he can only jump in and out via 'places close to his heart', and that it was a 'gentleman's club'.

11
DFRPG / Re: Fate Points and NPCs
« on: May 12, 2013, 12:04:43 PM »
You could also just wing it as appropriate. Obviously random one-shot goons wouldn't get round to spending any, while you decide when a recurring antagonist might spend a fate point for that extra edge, to keep things challenging for players. The risk is overdoing it, naturally, while some form of fixed pool would prevent that eventually.

12
DFRPG / Re: Playing "Free Will-less" Characters
« on: April 29, 2013, 12:53:28 PM »
It's in a monster's nature to kill, but it's up the monster when and how they do it.

A Black Court vampire might work with a group of more heroic characters for its own ends, perhaps revenge or to protect its own territory. It's still an evil monster that eats people, but it can choose who to eat and to keep the other characters around so long as they remain useful, resisting compels to feed on them when they're injured, etc.

Once those characters have served their purpose, or someone comes along who is more useful, that's when the vampire's nature should kick in and lead them to turn on the rest of the group.

And I would consider the being spending their limited fate points to resist compels to be it making those choices on when and how they want their urges to manifest. Even animals get to make such choices - decide human is not a threat and ignore it, attack human, flee.

13
DFRPG / Re: Playing "Free Will-less" Characters
« on: April 28, 2013, 03:35:03 PM »
I suggest that you guys might be overthinking it slightly.

Characters with free will have a Refresh rate. The ones who don't, don't.

At the very least, it means that starting a game with a PC without free will, you start with 0 fate points. Whatever compel the GM first throws at you, you have to take it, because you lack the FP to buy out of it. You will probably also take the next couple compels, so you have them to spend in a big fight, or to buy out of a compel at a more crucial moment so you don't give in to your urge to eat your allies or whatever.

And now you're back to being starved of FP, so you have to take the compel eventually, or even start self-compelling. Rinse and repeat.

Observe how very, very entrapped by your lack of Refresh your character is.

There we go.


It now merely gets into which Aspects the GM will compel to make life difficult for you, and how. If it's agreed at your table to go easy on the Aspects which might encourage back-stabbing allies, then you can totally have a varied party (Blampire, pure mortal, true believer, etc.) working together, sure. Stranger things have happened in real life.

14
DFRPG / Re: Sponsored Magic and Refinement
« on: February 17, 2013, 04:22:26 PM »
And so we conclude that for a character with only Sponsored Magic, no Evocation or Thaumaturgy, one probably can't take Refinement specialisations, only item slots.

Very probably, but not explicitly stated, no way to define further short of definite Word of God, which doesn't happen, I believe.

I gather that a related question is whether your sponsor's magic theme qualifies as an 'element' in evocation, or a theme/field of application in thaumaturgy. It then leads into whether you can take specialisations in your form of sponsored magic if you already have full Evocation and/or Thaumaturgy.

Quote from: YS pg288
In addition, if you already practice evocation, you may use a sponsored power source to “supercharge” an element you’ve already specialized in. So Summer magic might combine with the air element to give a “breath of life” effect; hellfire might combine with fire to produce, well, hell-fire; and Kemmlerian necromancy might combine with the spirit element to inflict potent visions of death upon a victim. This sort of combination allows the spellcaster to use his existing evocation specialization bonuses with the new power source.

I believe the only useful part of this is the last sentence of the paragraph, where what they mean is that if you have +4 to offensive fire or spirit evocation, you may apply the +4 bonus to when using soulfire to attack.

Which suggests that your Sponsored Magic theme acts like a free supplementary element that does nothing except colour your magic - the soulfire-boosted attack would do the Catch-satisfying, Toughness-downgrading thing it does, plus your standard fire attack shifts, and that's it.

And it seems to imply you still can't take Refinement specialisations for Sponsored Magic, because it wouldn't make sense for you to be able to do that and still have the book give this roundabout way of getting your bonuses. It does mean you can just pile your Refinements into the relevant elements for using your sponsored theme with, though, getting the same general effect.

Most of the Sponsored Magic themes we've seen can easily fit into one or two of the five elements Harry and co. work by, so this shouldn't be a major hurdle. With hellfire and soulfire, it's even been explicitly noted that despite the -fire description, as the primal forces of creation and destruction, you can apply them to any element. There isn't even a problem, with those two.

15
DFRPG / Re: Sponsored Magic and Refinement
« on: February 17, 2013, 03:26:50 PM »
I've been reading my way up and down the spellcasting-relevant parts, and nowhere does it say you can take Refinement specialisations for Sponsored Magic. At best, I note that the text for Refinement says, under the options: "Or, gain two additional specialization bonuses for Evocation and/or Thaumaturgy."

Evocation and/or Thaumaturgy. Doesn't include Sponsored Magic.

I do recognise also that Channeling and Ritual specify that you can only take Refinement for extra item slots, while nowhere in Sponsored Magic does it say that.

What it does say is that you're effectively taking Channeling and Ritual with Sponsored Magic, hence the -4 refresh cost, with the sponsor's power as the single specialised focus that you specify for Channeling/Ritual.

So it seems to be implying that you can't use Refinement to get specialisation bonuses for Sponsored Magic.

Or maybe they just left it vague on purpose so we can decide on a table-by-table basis.

I'm not sure if I would allow it yet, because I'm still pretty new to things. But it seems Sponsored Magic gets kind of weaksauce if, in a campaign getting steadily high-powered, it's still the only spellcasting power your character has. Getting full Evocation and/or Thaumaturgy is going to require you save up over quite a few major milestones (unless you've been opting to stay with high refresh instead of getting powers/stunts/whatever), as they're rather costly, so you really may be facing that speed bump for a while, unless the GM decides to allow Refinement specialisations for it.

EDIT: Or maybe this is the mechanics expressing how your sponsor wants you to keep invoking for bonuses - and stacking up debt with him/her/it. Sponsors being largely not very nice, I don't think you would be allowed permanent effectively free upgrades to their power, which is what Refinement specialisations are. They get no benefit from that spent refresh, after all.

Pages: [1] 2