1
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.
2
DFRPG / Re: Dresden File RPG vs Dresden Files RPG Accelerated
« on: March 04, 2017, 10:14:09 PM »In DFA, you have 6 stress boxes and, like before, if you take a 4 stress hit, if you dont absorb it, you fill in the first four boxes leaving you two left. Is that correct?
I don't quite remember exactly how DFrpg worked, but DFA is pretty simple to explain so I will do that.
Yes you have 6 stress. You also have the conditions In Peril and Doomed. if you are attacked you can opt to use check one to remove damage. In Peril removes 4 shifts of damage, Doomed removes 6 shifts. One you check them off you have take an aspect that describes the wound you have taken, then there are rules on how to remove that aspect and uncheck the box.
3
DFRPG / Re: How hard is it to dm
« on: August 17, 2016, 04:58:51 PM »One small addition from me: I ran my first game in DFRGP, three sessions in. I mostly did improv along very general lines, and it exhausted me, despite the fact that FATE is kind of encouraging much more improv than most other systems. I strongly suggest preparing a more detailed gameplan.
When I started to GM this game, I made the opposite error. I prepped too much. Had too many scenes worked out that never occurred. It burnt me out. It was the only time I had ever given up GMing a game. So as Mongward said generate a gameplan, but I would suggest that it is a broad overarching plan and not many details unless you are sure that they will happen.
4
DFRPG / Re: Adapting Rules from Other FATE Games
« on: January 16, 2011, 08:29:24 AM »Brutal is not a word I would have thought to apply to this system. So far of any game system I've played, this one has the players in the least danger. It's more like interactive story telling with role playing than actual risk.
It depends on the group. If a PC takes too much stress, he is taken out. If the threat wanted to kill the PC, the PC is dead. The book mentions that people who don't want to run the game this way (which the texts appears to imply are the majority of players) the players should ask for concessions to avoid death.
The concession mechanic has two conditions that if not fulfilled means the PC's die when fighting an NPC who is intent on killing the PC.
1) You can't use a concession after a die has been rolled against a PC. So the players must be careful and request a concession BEFORE the final blow is rolled (and depending on the power of the NPC, the player may not know the NPC is brutally strong until after a strike that would take him out).
2) A Concession does not have to be accepted by the GM.
So it is entirely possible to play dfrpg as a brutal cutthroat game where if the players are not cautious and flee the moment they realize they can't take the NPC. It is also possible to use it as interactive story telling system where players desires always supersede the desires of the NPCs. It all depends on the group.
5
DFRPG / Re: Social Conflicts Like Pulling Teeth
« on: January 05, 2011, 06:54:12 PM »I definitely think full Social Conflict should be reserved for really meaty encounters with important NPCs at critical points. If the mother is there primarily for clues and information, make it a skill test rather than a full conflict.
Agreed.
However if you want to make this challenging for the PCs just make a challenge with consequences. Win or Loose give them the info, but on a failure have the mom upset at them for prying into her life, or perhaps the PC's take a consequence of "upset with Mom".
6
DFRPG / Re: Rate the ritual flavor, please.
« on: January 05, 2011, 04:43:09 AM »
The following is my opinion with my experience with my group, and other groups I have played with... your mileage will vary.
Sorry but it looks way too long. Fate point or not I would not want to be listening to box text for that long. I have been in several games where the GM starts off on something this long, and it always ends in bored politeness or rude comments. Plus if that was beginning to happen in front of any able bodied player, they would intervene to try to stop the ritual. To not let them without a damn good reason will make the situation worse.
Perhaps you can have the PC's find the ritual and you can hand them a copy of it, but to act it out will kill the game. Then when they do happen to come across her start describing what she is saying.."Summon the Old Ones and open wide the Gates so Fate demands." They will realize they have but seconds to try to stop the spell!
JesterOC
Sorry but it looks way too long. Fate point or not I would not want to be listening to box text for that long. I have been in several games where the GM starts off on something this long, and it always ends in bored politeness or rude comments. Plus if that was beginning to happen in front of any able bodied player, they would intervene to try to stop the ritual. To not let them without a damn good reason will make the situation worse.
Perhaps you can have the PC's find the ritual and you can hand them a copy of it, but to act it out will kill the game. Then when they do happen to come across her start describing what she is saying.."Summon the Old Ones and open wide the Gates so Fate demands." They will realize they have but seconds to try to stop the spell!
JesterOC
7
DFRPG / Re: NPCs and Consequences
« on: January 05, 2011, 04:30:19 AM »
Instead of taking them out, have your NPC's ask for a concession, that way they are out of the fight, but not destroyed, and can come back in later scenes, if the PC's don't take the concession, let them take the consequence and keep fighting. That way if the PC's are out for blood, they will find out how tough these bad boys are, and if they just want to accomplish their goals, they don't have to slog through all of their consequences.
8
DFRPG / Re: Blocking an attack?
« on: January 05, 2011, 04:25:06 AM »
Yes you can block an action against more than one person however the guideline is as follows. If the block can effect more than one person, it can only 1 specific type of action, if it only effects one person, it can effect multiple actions (p 210)
9
DFRPG / Re: Spell Damage
« on: January 04, 2011, 05:38:01 PM »But lets please stop derailing this thread. I'd be happy to discuss some more elsewhere.
Agreed. So I will give my opinion to the OP.
Don't change the magic system. Use multiple opponents in multiple zones to prevent the one huge smackdown spell that can take out all the opponents. Spell casting takes mental stress, a wizard can't keep casting spells for long.
Also after a bit of exposure to a wizard a named NPC will start looking for magical protection.
JesterOC
10
DFRPG / Re: Adapting Rules from Other FATE Games
« on: January 04, 2011, 05:30:31 PM »1) Allowing a free tag on an aspect to be a compel instead of an invoke.Off hand this seems OK, I assume that the victim will get a FATE point for the compel. Might end up being used against the PC's more than by the PC's.
2) Limiting non-free aspect invocations to one per context (personal, scene, zone, etc).Also seems fine, it seems that it is there to prevent PC's from having several very similar aspects and then piling them on during a conflict. So far this is not an issue with my group due because many similar aspects are boring so my player's avoid it naturally.
3) The entire social combat system, which I'm going to use for a trial in my Dresden Files game.I have not tried it, but one of the things I like about pure Dresden Files Social conflict is that it can go on during a physical conflict. In fact almost all of our conflicts have involved some social attacks in the middle of a fight. I would assume the Diaspora mini game does not do that. (I don't know).
JesterOC
11
DFRPG / Re: Spell Damage
« on: January 04, 2011, 04:33:34 PM »*I'd personally make grenades Weapon:3, not 4. The benefit is that they hit an entire zone. To me, a .50 BMG round is more like Weapon:4 and assuming no concessions, I don't see any Taken Out result as reasonable other than "limb blown off" or "killed messily".
If the character shooting the .50 says something like this. "I don't want to kill the guy, just take him out of the fight, I'll aim for his firearm". On a hit you describe how the target's gun explodes in his hands and the guys hands are shattered due to the impact, and he gets minor shrapnel woulds everywhere else.
However if the shooter says "I aim for his head" and he hits, well he already decided to kill so he can't back out of it now.
JesterOC
p.s.
Oh just like you said...
To me it's about intent, and I try to discern what the player means to do with their weapon before the dice fall.
12
DFRPG / Re: Spell Damage
« on: January 04, 2011, 04:14:41 PM »Even take out results have to stay within the realm of reason. This has been discussed to death in other threads...Just because it has been discussed to death does not mean they were right. Letting the winner decide the fate of the loser is an extension of the just say yes theme of the game. If the PC's want to play a game of the A-Team then let them play it.
Ask yourself: How much is a lot? I bet you can't come up with a significant number of people who survived bad shrapnel wounds.Statistically speaking more people survive combat wounds then die from them. Just check any modern war stats.
Iraq war stats - Most of these are from bombs much bigger than grenades
US deaths ~4K
US wounded ~32K
13
DFRPG / Re: Spell Damage
« on: January 04, 2011, 03:59:18 PM »
It is pretty clear to me, the victor decides how the loser is taken out (p203).
...taken out, meaning the character has decisively lost
the conflict. His fate is in the hands of the oppo-
nent, who may decide how the character loses.
The only time the text mentions that it has to be within the realm of reason is to stress that you should not die of shame. So yes it should be within reason but it is easy to describe how someone stayed alive in the face of superior firepower.
This is trivially easy for a wizard.
If a wizard uses electricity to hit their opponents with a 1 million volt blast of electricity (Weapon 8 lets say) the victims can easily be said to live because you could say it had nearly no amps.
For standard weapons it just requires a bit of imagination, the targets ducked behind a wall just in time, and it protected them from most of the blast, the swordsman missed all the major organs etc.
As a rule of thumb, you can't force murder onto a PC.
Edit: Upon further reflection I agree that if a viable fiction can not be determined, I can see murder being forced upon a PC. EI Blowing up something huge with a bunch of people in it, I can't see how you could say that no one died. But I think the rule of thumb for normal conflicts still holds.
...taken out, meaning the character has decisively lost
the conflict. His fate is in the hands of the oppo-
nent, who may decide how the character loses.
The only time the text mentions that it has to be within the realm of reason is to stress that you should not die of shame. So yes it should be within reason but it is easy to describe how someone stayed alive in the face of superior firepower.
This is trivially easy for a wizard.
If a wizard uses electricity to hit their opponents with a 1 million volt blast of electricity (Weapon 8 lets say) the victims can easily be said to live because you could say it had nearly no amps.
For standard weapons it just requires a bit of imagination, the targets ducked behind a wall just in time, and it protected them from most of the blast, the swordsman missed all the major organs etc.
As a rule of thumb, you can't force murder onto a PC.
Edit: Upon further reflection I agree that if a viable fiction can not be determined, I can see murder being forced upon a PC. EI Blowing up something huge with a bunch of people in it, I can't see how you could say that no one died. But I think the rule of thumb for normal conflicts still holds.
14
DFRPG / Re: Spell Damage
« on: January 04, 2011, 03:41:12 AM »
Since the player dictates how he takes out his target, you should not have to worry about a wizard killing a mortal on accident.
JesterOC
JesterOC