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 - Ala Alba

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 7
16
DFRPG / Re: Making sure I understand Riposte?
« on: April 25, 2011, 09:31:49 PM »
My interpretation of it is the same as Haru's.

It's best used when your really good defense roll goes up against someone's really crappy attack roll. (So nothing is wasted.) :)

17
DFRPG / Re: Mercenary Spellcaster Character Concept Question
« on: April 25, 2011, 09:29:17 PM »
. Also it would determine whether the accords applied to him or not.

This is probably the most important part. Being subject to the accords might mean less possible work for a mercenary. If nothing else, the WC will come shut you down(probably in a permanent fashion) if you were one of their members and you were going around breaking the accords.

Or, you know, offer you to the offended party as repayment, like they wanted to do with Harry.

18
That is a good question and it can't be simple, regardless of how "easy" they are to supposedly dispatch by vanilla humans, if making more Bampires were easy, they could overrun whole towns, breed armies in a night....

Granted...  Drulinda did raise both rentacops within a radically short time period, so it's possible it is very easy, little more than drinking a human dry and letting the body get back up as a Bampire.  The low numbers could simply be that smart Bampires don't allow too many of thier victim's to raise, to keep their whereabouts more subtle and to reduce the competition.



But simplecreation does not indicate it would be simple to undo.

As per canon, it IS really easy and quick. That's why, in Blood Rites, Harry is so quick to take out the BCV nest. That's why the WCVs got the mortal world involved with Dracula.

19
DFRPG / Re: Spellcasting and maneuver duration
« on: April 19, 2011, 05:41:26 AM »
Here's an alternate take on it:

Whether a maneuver needs duration or just fragile/sticky depends entirely on whether or not it needs magic to sustain the effect. For example, creating an unnatural fog is maintained by magic, and thus needs a duration. On the other hand, using Earth to break up the ground and place the aspect "Tricky Footing" is a one-time expenditure of magic, and is thus fragile/sticky.

Those may not be the best examples, but I hope I got the idea across?

20
DFRPG / Re: Portraying Mortals With Negative Refresh
« on: April 17, 2011, 04:24:58 PM »
:)  Sanctaphrax, I'm suddenly curious as to how you, Sir Statting McAwesome, would draw up the Burn Notice crew.  :D

Good points; I'll certainly agree that druggies and other addicts are possibly in the negatives.  I also think that people who are deeply in debt or other spiraling obligations can be approaching that limit.

I'm pretty sure the Burn Notice main cast has been drawn up. I can't quite remember who did it, though, but I do remember that they did an admirable job of it.

Edit: Found them. As I thought, they were done by Deadmanwalking.
Michael: http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,19418.msg860490.html#msg860490
Sam: http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,19418.msg860667.html#msg860667
Fiona: http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,19418.msg868259.html#msg868259

21
DFRPG / Re: A cool house rule for throwing (sup. strength) powers.
« on: April 16, 2011, 10:01:33 PM »
Actually, I think the Strength line of powers implies greater muscle speed, given that they give bonuses not only to lifting/breaking but also damage from attacking. Punching something relies totally on velocity and mass, so in order to punch harder you either need to increase the mass or the velocity in the punch. While having denser muscle mass isn't out of the question, I think it's much more likely that the velocity is being increased. In other words, the explosive force that you mentioned does, in fact, increase.

So yeah, a character with the Strength line of powers should throw things faster, and thus farther.

22
DFRPG / Re: grapples and strength powers
« on: April 13, 2011, 03:29:09 PM »
Hulking Size the power that does give you the mass etc to resist a grapple with your definition of the lifting breaking power does not give any bonus to grapple defence. Even though it would be impossible for a Human sized mortal without strength powers to grapple (block on all actions) something with Hulking Size and Mythic Strength say Sue the Tyrannosaurs Rex this only provides a +3 bonus against grapples with your definition.   

Part of the normal grapple rules is that you need an aspect to tag that makes sense in terms of grapple opportunity. Which you're not likely to be able to justify when it comes to a pure mortal trying to grapple a T. Rex.

23
DFRPG / Re: Beast Change
« on: April 08, 2011, 03:52:03 PM »
Exactly, obviously one can invent house rule as one wished, but beast change involves an actual change into an actual animal. That's more than a flavour thing, since changing into an actual beast has significant drawbacks like robing you of your ability to speak, possibly to cast magic and it tends to attract unfavorable attention at mundane cocktail parties. Beast change without the actual beast change is a far more powerful ability that effectively increases the number of skill points available to the character by a huge margin. At -1 refresh it's ludicrously overpowered compared to other powers and stunts that in some way gives you access to additional skill points and there'd be virtually no reason for any character not to take it.

My point was mainly about trying to use it purely for for the skill-change without any actual shape-change. Personally I think using it for something with functional hands and/or speech is questionable, but a minotaur isn't that unreasonable, a pure skill-swap with no shape-change or changing into another human IMO is.

Were-Parrot/Crow/Raven (speech).

Were-Monkey/Chimp/Gorrilla (sign language/writing/opposable thumbs).

I can't imagine why a wizard would not be able to cast magic after shapeshifting, given that shapeshifting is itself magic. Furthermore, unlike, say, Living Dead, there are no social penalties for Beast Change(the changes are "only ... cosmetic").

Finally, True Shapeshifting gives you the ability to use infinitely many skillsets without requiring the beast part of it. The fact that you can rearrange your skills however you want, whenever you want, is more than enough to justify the increase from -1 to -4.

24
DFRPG / Re: Beast Change
« on: April 07, 2011, 07:20:24 PM »
Or perhaps it's possession by a being with a different set of skills and knowledge.

Or perhaps it's simply the best way you can think of for representing some kind of magical skill enhancement(with, obviously, certain drawbacks).

Although by this point, I think I'm talking less about Beast Change and more about the Skill Shuffle trapping of it.

25
DFRPG / Re: The Game in Play-By-Post / Play-By-Email Format
« on: March 28, 2011, 01:16:43 AM »
I don't have time for a in-depth reply, but I would suggest you check out the PbP sub-board and/or the DFRPG channel in the chat.

26
DFRPG / Re: Compels, Accidental Killings and the 1st law
« on: March 03, 2011, 04:15:00 AM »
Exactly, Richard.

In any case, it's not only fair for GMs to compel players that are out of fate points, I'd say it should be expected. After all, how else are you going to get more fate points? Just wait until the next refresh? In the OP's example, the compel is not "save the thugs and you cannot buy out of it unless you want a lawbreaker". It means that if you do buy out of the compel, the thugs are no longer in danger of dying. This complicates things for the player, makes things more interesting, etc.

Sorry if I'm not being very coherent, but basically if you have an aspect on your character sheet, especially if you choose that aspect yourself, it's completely fair game to be compelled, no matter how many fate points you have at the moment. Now, you're right that a compel shouldn't necessarily result in your character being unplayable... but sometimes it could. A changeling could be compelled to choose his fairy side and save the day, or something. Now, unless you've warned the players ahead of time that certain actions will result in certain compels, you probably shouldn't compel a player with no fate points to lose their character. But if you have warned them, and they still do it anyway, they are implicitly giving their consent to have that compel given to them.

27
DFRPG / Re: Giving teeth to enforcement of The Laws
« on: March 03, 2011, 12:06:13 AM »
That has come up before, and it's a way to do it, my problem with it though is that is seems to arbitrary.  Since when this comes into question it is generally a case of causing the Wizard to become an NPC the compel system leads to one of three scenarios.

1) The Wizard has no fate chips and therefor become an NPC because the GM is mean.

2) The Wizard has fate chips and unless he wants to retire the character has to give one up because the GM is a little mean.

3) The GM is not mean which means Wizards without Fate chips enjoy the benefit of being incapable of accidentally killing.


None of those are very satisfying to me.

I find that conclusion shortsighted. If the GM informs the group of his intentions(i.e., to compel for death on every attack made with weapon ratings greater than 3 or something) and enforces this consistently, then more reasonable possibilities are:

1) All players who don't want to accidentally kill the wrong person will keep a fate point in reserve to ensure that they'll never suffer the consequences of accidentally killing their targets while still using full force.

2) The players start using attacks with lower weapon ratings whenever they're up against something they don't want to accidentally kill.

3) They do neither and accept the resulting consequences.

If the player of a wizard character decides to go ahead and use high weapon rating magical attacks on a mortal without having a fate point in reserve, they know what the consequences are and accept them. Alternately, if said player has fate points to spare, they can go ahead and use maximum force without worries, because they plan on narratively enforcing their desired outcome(by using a fate point).

It's that simple.

28
DFRPG / Re: Giving teeth to enforcement of The Laws
« on: March 02, 2011, 11:41:08 PM »
Alternately, use compels.

If a wizard uses a powerful, obviously dangerous spell on a mortal, the GM could always compel them to accidentally kill their target. Of course, the same is also true if you have a character with supernatural strength punching someone, or a guy with a anti-material rifle shooting at someone, etc.

29
DFRPG / Re: Breath Weapons
« on: January 30, 2011, 01:24:35 AM »
I agree Breath Weapon is a bit underpowered, it's not really a full refresh point better than Claws. (Given that Claws allows strength bonuses, I wonder if it really shouldn't be just a -1 ability?)

Originally, Claws only gave a single extra damage shift (i.e. weapon: 1), however, the community argued that it was too weak for a [-1] refresh power.

30
DFRPG / Re: Breath Weapons
« on: January 29, 2011, 04:39:55 PM »
I don't really want to get into an argument with someone who seems to have made up his mind already, but I think that you're underestimating the value of having a possibly non-physical damage causing weapon.

If a character can breathe flame, then not only do they have a self-generating thrown weapon: 2, basically a hand gun that they can never lose, but they can also use it to do anything that fire can, such as satisfy catches, create light, set something on fire, etc. Also, it's actually really difficult to stop someone from breathing if you still want them alive, obviously. Even if forced into a muzzle that completely stops them from opening their mouth... why wouldn't they be able to snort flames?

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 7