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 - exploding_brain

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8]
106
DFRPG / Free Will among the Wild Fae?
« on: April 08, 2010, 02:59:40 PM »
I had an idea to play a pixie character, but I wasn't sure if fae ever have enough free will to be allowed as PCs. Yeah, a changeling comes close, but that isn't quite what I had in mind.

Took me a bit of a search to find actual game text covering this, but in the description of the Knight of a Faerie Court, it says that the Knights are the only members of the faerie courts that have mortal free will.

Two questions:

As far as Billy, Harry, and Bob understand it, is it possible for a member of the faerie courts to have non-mortal free will?
As far as Billy, Harry, and Bob understand it, are all wild fae completely creatures of their nature, or are there some that have a degree of free will (positive refresh)?

Sure, I can play a unique case, a fae who acquires free will under special circumstances, or maybe it's on of those things that Billy, Harry and Bob just don't know about.  Still, if I'm going to try this, I'd like to know how far I'm bending the expectation of the game world.

Thanks.

107
DFRPG / Re: Typo thread
« on: April 06, 2010, 02:02:56 AM »
It's helpful! Really, we just mean to rule out attacks there, though.

Really?  OK, that's interesting too.  If I may humbly suggest that it still needs a (different) re-wording? Cause I think that could result in some confusion and a disagreement or two at the table.

Ummm... "Give a +2 to a specific application of a defense or other non-attack trapping."   ...maybe?

"Give a +2 to a specific application of a trapping, provided it is not an attack trapping."  That sounds ugly.

"Give a +2 to a specific application of a trapping, excluding attacks." I think I might be misusing the game terms there.


P.S. Congrats on the sales numbers so far. :)

108
DFRPG / Re: Typo thread
« on: April 05, 2010, 04:33:13 PM »
Not so much a typo as a possibly confusing rule description.

YS, page 148, second column, first paragraph, list of possible mortal stunt effects:

"Give a +2 to a specific application of a nonattack or defense trapping."

I think this is meant to say that a +2 bonus is NOT OK for attack, NOT OK for defense, but OK for other trappings.  I'm afraid I'm finding the wording a little unclear.

I think you meant something along the lines of:

"Give a +2 to a specific application of a non-attack, non-defense trapping."

Hope that's helpful.


Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8]