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 - Tedronai

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 152
DFRPG / Re: Dresden File RPG vs Dresden Files RPG Accelerated
« on: February 17, 2017, 05:44:47 AM »
I have not yet had a great deal of experience with DFAE, but it did strike me that several problematic points from DFrpg seem to be handled in far less cumbersome a manner (think: Feeding Dependency, Demonic Co-pilot) to the point that they actually warrant being used without severe houseruling.

DFRPG / Re: stored spells
« on: February 07, 2017, 07:22:16 AM »
I don't know.  Is this option available for 'cosmic vending machine' rituals? (ie. can my Pure Mortal walk around with a Walker in his back pocket?)

DFRPG / Re: Unseelie Accord Lawyer - idea for a character.
« on: February 02, 2017, 08:13:43 PM »
Sponsored Magic comes with Focus Item Slots so long as you do not also have them from Channeling/Evocation//Ritual/Thaumaturgy

DFRPG / Re: Unseelie Accord Lawyer - idea for a character.
« on: February 02, 2017, 06:05:52 PM »
Recommend the second clause of Winter Shield either be extended to one exchange rather than one attack, or stripped entirely.  As it stands, it's less valuable than the mere existence of a defense-invokable aspect

DFRPG / Re: does evothaum have a cost
« on: January 26, 2017, 04:30:49 AM »
Evothaum is a subject of some contention.

IMO, "Evocation's methods" means following the Evocation's steps of 'How to Do It' (save for substituting the appropriate Thaum type/descriptor in step 1), including mental stress.

DFRPG / Re: Ask a simple Question, get a simple Answer!
« on: January 08, 2017, 01:18:41 AM »
The following is nearly pure conjecture / personal opinion:

The only method I could think of would be to block all access to/from the Nevernever as a whole, since the Ways are not so special that they could be blocked specifically like that, being little more than (comparatively) safe paths within the Nevernever to (relatively) stable and known locations.
That should be able to be accomplished (in theory) by a sufficiently (read: incredibly) large and powerful magical working functionally opposite that of opening a gateway.  Instead of smashing or tearing or otherwise parting the veil between the mortal world and the Nevernever, you strengthen and reinforce it, making it difficult for others to traverse.  This may or may not be easier for communities with more well-defined borders - those borders providing something to anchor to in much the same way as a Threshold.

This will not be absolute, and a sufficiently powerful or determined traveler should be able to break through in time (and maintaining such a barrier would itself be taxing and of questionable value over the long term unless paired with similarly immense defenses of other sorts).

In terms of game mechanics, you'd simply be erecting a Thaumaturgical Block over a large area

DFRPG / Re: Building a Devil's Trap and Anti-Possession Tattoos
« on: February 25, 2015, 07:28:56 AM »
As Haru said: aspects, invokes, and compels handle this plenty well for most games.

DFRPG / Re: Dragon Shouts from Skyrim?
« on: December 07, 2014, 02:17:04 PM »
Incite Effect would do a reasonable job so long as you weren't too concerned with maintaining the arbitrary mechanical limitations of the source (ie. can't use that Flame Breath shout to set buildings on fire...because buildings can't BE set on fire).

DFRPG / Re: "Official" Perspective on Lawbreaking
« on: November 07, 2014, 06:31:50 AM »
Hard-line old-school warden gets the case?  A ten minute 'investigation, 5 minute 'trial', and a quick death.
Ramirez-era or similar warden gets the case?  A much longer investigation, an actual trial, and the potential for rehabilitation.

DFRPG / Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
« on: October 16, 2014, 04:11:49 AM »
Maneuvers don't have weapon ratings.

Enchanted weapons being used in an attack may either be treated as a mundane weapon, such as a warden sword being used as a very well made sword that is only coincidentally enchanted, or as an enchanted item that is coincidentally shaped like a weapon.  One cannot take the best of both worlds.

DFRPG / Re: Canim statting
« on: October 13, 2014, 11:41:27 PM »
Incite Effect, physical building blocks and other non-casting powers, imho, are critical for representing certain aspects of Furycrafting.

Channeling-based representations run into short-term Stress limitations.
Ritual-based representations just aren't fast enough.

DFRPG / Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
« on: October 04, 2014, 09:41:53 AM »
Compels are negotiated, and not merely to the extent that they can be refused.  They are also subject to a test of 'reasonableness' to be judged by the table.
Personally, and with the groups I have gamed alongside, 'you lose the fight' is very rarely a 'reasonable' compel.
Something to the effect 'you need to offer a Concession' might very well be acceptable, though.  For instance, an aspect might be invoked representing a dire and urgent need to address matters elsewhere, forcing an opponent to flee, or an aspect representing a fiery temper might be invoked to force a concession in a duel of words (possibly resulting in the beginning of a new physical conflict scene to replace the now-ended social conflict).
This, though, is typically the extreme end of the power of compels.  Handle with care, and remember to negotiate, negotiate, negotiate.  Everyone should come out the other side happy with the results.  If they don't, then something has gone wrong.

DFRPG / Re: Water Magic like water bending
« on: September 24, 2014, 12:13:49 AM »
Is the ability to physically manipulate water 'like a water bender' represented by one of the character's permanent aspects?
If yes, then they can do so without difficulty.
If no, then see MijRai's analysis.

Magic of this sort is outside the 'standard' for the Dresden Files, so make a story out of it.  This practitioner is special.  Why are they special?  What can they accomplish because of this that no one else can?  Who stands to gain from that?  Who stands to lose?

DFRPG / Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
« on: September 21, 2014, 08:50:07 PM »
What about any spell of the same element, or maybe any specific kind of spell (for example blocks)? This goes for Tedronai as well.

Just about the most lenient I would consider being would be to allow a rote spell that adds duration to a single spell of specific fluff description.
For instance, a spell that erects a convex wall of force.  This could be used as a personal defensive block, or could be extended to protect a group, be put to use as a zone border, or even be represented as a maneuver.  For the purpose of rotes, each of those is a distinct spell.
But it would not extend even to another spell of the same element put to the same purpose, if that spell has a different narrative description (say, a cascade of dazzling lights).

Even this I would only implement on a 'trial basis', and would periodically review with the players, and be prepared to retract or alter.

DFRPG / Re: Newbies ask the darnest things
« on: September 21, 2014, 06:44:55 PM »
1) Can supplemental actions follow the main action? Example: can I roll my Fists at -1 to attack, then move to an adjacent zone without rolling?
So long as the penalty is included in the full action, I know of nothing preventing it from being followed by a supplemental action.

2) Can counterspells and... let's call them spell-prolonging spells be rote spells? Rote counterspells probably don't make much sense, but I'm curious anyway.
My own personal opinions:
Counterspells I personally would flatly allow.
'Spell-prolonging spells' I would allow with the caveat that they would be specific to the prolongation of a single specific spell (though I would not necessarily define that spell to rote requirements).

3) Can sponsored Thaumaturgy spells (with Evocation's methods and speed) be rote spells?
This depends heavily on your group's definition of "evocation's methods".  Such issues have previously been the topic of heated debate on these boards, from which a consensus was not achieved.

4) Do you consider acceptable making a stunt that gives a skill trapping a +3 while restricting its use? Example: would you allow  a stunt that reads "you get a +3 to Craftsmanship when building weapons (or possibly even just melee weapons)"?
More restricted stunts yield greater bonuses.
Whether a particular circumstance is sufficiently restricting to warrant a particular bonus is often a matter of personal judgement.
For the example in question, I would allow the parenthetical version.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 152