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 - toturi

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 41
16
DFRPG / Re: New Player Question - durability for noncombat oriented characters
« on: July 23, 2014, 07:11:17 AM »
Some Resources - enough to afford physical Armor. Armor 1 or 2.

If spellcaster, spend as many Enchanted Item slots for as high a defense as your character practically can afford.

Or stealth - whether by spell/Glamour or just really stealthy. If they don't know you are there, then all you need to do is keep away.

17
DFRPG / Re: I am dissatisfied with 'Focused Practitioners', particularly Mortimer (spoilers)
« on: July 16, 2014, 03:25:40 AM »
Quote from: Haru on July 15, 2014, 12:30:01 PM
I'm not talking about trappings, I'm talking about how those trappings are used. Michael and Charity both have high craftsmanship skills. Michael is a carpenter, but he doesn't know how to work with metal, that's why Charity builds and repairs his armor. But Charity is no carpenter, so it's up to Michael to do anything related to that. Yet both of them are using craftsmanship with all its trappings. If Michael's player started to say he is now building something complicated out of metal, I would remind him of who his character can do, and he would be able to solve his problem with craftsmanship, just as he had planned, but in a carpenter way instead.
I still think it is a Compel. Michael wants to repair his armor, if the GM thinks he should do it in carpentry way, he can offer a Compel. Which Michael's player can buy off.

18
DFRPG / Re: Skill Replacements?
« on: July 16, 2014, 03:20:20 AM »
Quote from: narphoenix on July 15, 2014, 05:01:52 PM
In retrospect, I probably shouldn't have said that. I didn't think it was super insulting because Jim has called himself that on multiple occasions.

On one hand, you could put extra shifts into duration to manage the multi exchange skill replacement. On the other, you have a point about wizards already being ridiculously versatile.
As an elder used to tell me, "it is fine that Jesus did it, but you ain't Jesus, boy".

In fact, I think most people on this board are a little too quick to label someone else as "powergaming" and a little too free with using "munchkin" or "powergamer" as derogatory labels.

I think as long as the player is following the rules, he cast the spell, uses extra shifts for duration, it is fine. If he is using it in a fluid situation, even if it is social "combat", he needs to use Evocation or Evothaum to do it and take stress for it.

Quote from: Sanctaphrax on July 15, 2014, 11:43:57 PM
Nope. A standard skill replacement ritual replaces a roll, it doesn't actually increase a skill.

For example, you could call up a demon that tells you the boiling point of mercury instead of making a Scholarship roll. But adding duration to the spell won't let you have an effectively-higher Scholarship for the whole duration. (You could create a bunch of DEMONIC KNOWLEDGE Aspects though.)
May I know how you are getting this? My impression is that you can have effectively higher Scholarship for the whole duration.

19
DFRPG / Re: I am dissatisfied with 'Focused Practitioners', particularly Mortimer (spoilers)
« on: July 15, 2014, 01:57:54 AM »
Quote from: Haru on July 14, 2014, 02:03:30 PM
But it's different when it comes to active use of a skill. You can be an elite soldier with high athletics, but that doesn't mean you can do a backflip, or navigate a laser grid with your nimble cheerleading skills. You might have another way to use the skill, but you'll describe it differently. And that's exactly my point. I don't want to prohibit people from using their skills, I want them to use their skills in a way their character would actually do.

For example, I had a player with a wizard that was specialized in plant based thaumaturgy. But when it came to creating a trap for someone, he started talking blastwaves and explosions, etc. I stopped him and reminded him of what his character is actually about, and he switched that up and it became a vine trap instead. Mechanically, it was pretty much the same, Fate doesn't have many different actions, after all, but it felt a whole lot different, once the spell was cast.
I disagree. All of the trappings of the skill are available to the character. If some of the trappings are to be made unavailable to the character via their Aspects, then it is/they are a Compel/s.

20
DFRPG / Re: I am dissatisfied with 'Focused Practitioners', particularly Mortimer (spoilers)
« on: July 14, 2014, 06:41:44 AM »
Quote from: Haru on July 13, 2014, 06:08:24 PM
If a character has a high craftsmanship skill, that doesn't mean he can do everything crafty, he'd still need an aspect describing what exactly it is he can do. Or a high scholarship skill doesn't mean you know everything there is to know, it's going to have to be subject to your aspects, again. They are a big part of this, and I feel like you are totally ignoring them when it comes to this.

So just because I have thaumaturgy, doesn't mean I know everything that might be possible to do with magic. I know what is reasonable for my character to know, based on who he is and what he's done in the past.
So following this line of reasoning... just because your character has high Alertness doesn't mean he can react quickly unless he has an Aspect for it? A character with high Athletics cannot make use of that unless he has an Aspect stating he dodges bullets for a living? Or he can only use Athletics to dodge bullets but not punches?

21
DFRPG / Re: Looking for a List of the Accord Signers
« on: May 15, 2014, 04:02:35 AM »
Quote from: g33k on May 13, 2014, 01:33:55 AM
Not just the conflict, though:  the Knights are specifically guided by a different set of rules than the Accords.  Given enough raw power to bring to bear, it would be trivially easy for your average middleschool "queen bee" girl (let alone a manipulator like Mab) to create a situation wherein a signatory of the Accords could not uphold both the Accords and the standards of a Knight of the Cross.

I think we all know which they'd choose... and *BAM* instant Accord-Outlaw.

That said... it wouldn't surprise me if the Accords designated the Knights (and some other entities) with some sort of status under the Accords, such that (for example) a Knight would be able to act as a Second to some half-baked young wizard who got into an Accord-sanctioned duel with a major RCV badass....

- Steve, the g33k
 
Unless the Knight was on the clock when he was "told" to sign the Accords. Then he is Protected.

I would not be surprised if there was a Force Majeure clause in the Accords and the actions of Knights of Cross were classified as acts of God.

22
DFRPG / Re: Magic Shields vs. Incite Emotions
« on: May 09, 2014, 09:24:43 AM »
Quote from: killking72 on May 09, 2014, 08:40:18 AM
I don't really understand how you could justify using an actual spell block to block something in your head. Yes the flavor of water magic is entropy; degradation and such, but you're using entropy magic, inside you head. I would say you'd entropy your own thoughts and mind to do that. Also you specifically said "Incite emotion". The primary skill used to keep your emotions in check is discipline, or conviction if you can flavor it correctly. If you want to be able to use a magical block against incite emotion then hell, it must obviously be fine for someone to put up a magical block in a social conflict because someone is using intimidate to scare you. You're using a magical block to protect against someone trying to make you mad, or scare you.
The spell uses entropy magic to shield the mind. Think of it as a moat around your thoughts, instead of a castle wall.

Alternatively I can also see using water magic to enhance your brain's thought processes in a way similar to Bruce Lee's "be water" philosophy. Incoming mental attacks simply find no purchase as your mind's sea part before the attack and crash and drown out the attack.

23
DFRPG / Re: Magic Shields vs. Incite Emotions
« on: May 09, 2014, 04:38:17 AM »
I think a block is a block is a block. But if the GM wants to bypass the block and if he thinks he has a good justification for it, he can offer a Compel.

24
DFRPG / Re: Listed Specialties?
« on: May 05, 2014, 04:57:32 AM »
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ThePornomancer
Pornomancy and the Pornomancer.

25
DFRPG / Re: Wizards and technology
« on: April 06, 2014, 03:06:20 AM »
Svartalven electronic products. With a permanent localised scene Aspect that acts in opposition to any Compels causing it to malfunction.

26
DFRPG / Re: Social Conflicts with a group.
« on: March 15, 2014, 12:07:25 AM »
My question is what do the players want. Sure, as the GM, you feel you have to provide a challenge. But what do the players want? Do they want to succeed? Are they ok with failure? Are they going to enjoy success more than failure?

27
DFRPG / Re: Playing as a member of the Venatori Umbrorum
« on: February 24, 2014, 04:31:12 AM »
Quote from: Jarrik32 on February 23, 2014, 09:21:54 PM
I've recently purchased a copy of the Dresden Files RPG, I've decided to put together a pure mortal Venatori character. While I have a pretty good idea of what I'm going for I was wondering if anyone else had posted anything I could draw from.

In case anyone is interested here's what I have so far
Name: Madison Parker
High concept: Field agent for the Venatori
Trouble: Suicidal missions ARE my day job...
Aspects: That wasn't supposed to happen..., Cautious; maybe too cautious, It's not cheating it's winning, Terrorist! since when???

What does everyone think?
Wait a minute... how does this translate into a playable character? I mean suicide missions are supposed to... you know, kill the guy doing it. So this guys is an abject failure? Everytime he tries to kill himself, he fails?

28
DFRPG / Re: The white court.
« on: January 30, 2014, 02:33:55 PM »
It really depends on the relative power of the WCV and the PCs.

For example, if one of the PCs is a socially powerhouse, is socially well connected, more powerful and influential than the WCV, then all he needs to do is to make that phone call.

Which a Pure Mortal PC is well capable of doing. Think Mycroft Holmes. Someone with the power and authority to "disappear" those that the WCV may make the phone call to, if not the WCV himself.

29
DFRPG / Re: "Pure Mortal" bonus
« on: January 17, 2014, 04:37:41 AM »
Quote from: Silverblaze on January 15, 2014, 07:10:57 PM
I played in a long term game as a KoC.

I had amazing armor.

I still couldn't take the beating the guys with speed or toughness or both could. Let alone wizards with awesome enchanted items

Eventually, mortals with all the fate points in the world (exaggeration obviously) still lack the durability to fight some things.
Could you explain what you mean by amazing armor? Armor 5?

A Pure Mortal's only edge is that he has slightly more Fate Points than the rest. So he is likely to be able to do *something* 2 more times than his mystically empowered counterparts.

30
DFRPG / Re: Maneuvers Help
« on: November 12, 2013, 08:07:22 AM »
Quote from: Taran on November 06, 2013, 08:05:33 PM
Making a VERY powerful maneuver just means that it would be impossible for them to remove the aspect (if they want to overcome the maneuver difficulty) - it doesn't mean they can't succeed on certain actions impeded by the maneuver.  Let them get creative.
Any examples? Isn't the point of the very powerful maneuver that they can't succeed on those certain actions?

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 41