Author Topic: A bit frustrated  (Read 38108 times)

Offline Taran

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 9863
    • View Profile
    • Chip
Re: A bit frustrated
« Reply #15 on: April 19, 2011, 01:19:47 AM »

Finally the way I run it is that someone is compelled until they take steps to be no longer compelled. So if you compel someone to be "stunned" then they will stay out of the fray until they (or someone else) removes the aspect, or until an appropriate amount of time has lapsed to assume that the aspect is no longer applicable. I don't know if this is RAW, however it seems appropriate considering the value of fate points and the alternative of people running around with "blinded" or similar with no effect.


Thanks for the link.  After reading the (somewhat frustrated) posts on that thread from FRED, I feel a bit bad because my "wanna make spells thread" turned into a "how do aspects work" thread.   :-[

Anyways,

This thread has been an immense help; thanks for everyone's input.

Offline sinker

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 2115
    • View Profile
Re: A bit frustrated
« Reply #16 on: April 19, 2011, 01:20:08 AM »
Mostly I may allow a person to attempt to be un"stunned" via a high endurance or conviction(?) roll. Or someone else could run over and slap them hard (a fists maneuver) or attend to them (a scholarship maneuver). But yeah, mostly I'd say that they would be compelled until a few(4-6) rounds had passed and they had the time to recover naturally.

Offline sinker

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 2115
    • View Profile
Re: A bit frustrated
« Reply #17 on: April 19, 2011, 01:23:19 AM »
Something I forgot earlier. Most of the things you could maneuver and then compel to be "taken out" would also simply be taken out with a weapon:8 attack. For that matter they would likely be taken out with a weapon:6 attack meaning you can use those 2 extra shifts to make it a zone-wide effect and then take out all of the mooks.

Offline Taran

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 9863
    • View Profile
    • Chip
Re: A bit frustrated
« Reply #18 on: April 19, 2011, 01:31:01 AM »
Mostly I may allow a person to attempt to be un"stunned" via a high endurance or conviction(?) roll. Or someone else could run over and slap them hard (a fists maneuver) or attend to them (a scholarship maneuver). But yeah, mostly I'd say that they would be compelled until a few(4-6) rounds had passed and they had the time to recover naturally.

Well the length of time of the compel would be based on the spell and by how much it succeeded.  It needs to succeed by more than one shift to be sticky.  So I'd just let them continue to make *insert skill check here* until they succeeded or until the maneuver wore off... or wait... for spell maneuvers, do I have to put extra shifts into them to make them last more than one round???  Or do I use the rules for sticky aspects?  Or would that just be part of the discussion around the compel? If it was a burst of sound, the spell would only have to last one exchange, but the maneuver to "stun" is independant of the spell.  The spell is just flavor; to me the rules of maneuvers seems to win out.

And here I was thinking I was finished  :P


Offline Taran

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 9863
    • View Profile
    • Chip
Re: A bit frustrated
« Reply #19 on: April 19, 2011, 01:33:16 AM »
Something I forgot earlier. Most of the things you could maneuver and then compel to be "taken out" would also simply be taken out with a weapon:8 attack. For that matter they would likely be taken out with a weapon:6 attack meaning you can use those 2 extra shifts to make it a zone-wide effect and then take out all of the mooks.

Mooks?  This is gonna target the PC's  ;D

Offline noclue

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 333
    • View Profile
Re: A bit frustrated
« Reply #20 on: April 19, 2011, 01:43:56 AM »
It can be done either way.

And as for the GM not bothering with consequences, that is a slippery slope.

With a normal vanilla mortal - absolutely.  But a RCV is an 8 refresh monster at least I think.  I have a hard time believing they would just lay down and die when all they'd have to do is take a conseuence of "lightly singed"

A slippery slope to where?

Offline sinker

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 2115
    • View Profile
Re: A bit frustrated
« Reply #21 on: April 19, 2011, 01:53:32 AM »
I was thinking about it and I finally realized how I can help. When I do maneuvers with spellcasting what I like to do is broad, environmental effects. Things that a) couldn't be created by just anyone and b) are effective for many uses and make the situation interesting for everyone. Things like "Fog banks", "Whipping winds", "Burst pipes", "Rough terrain" or "Fire everywhere!" I find those are much more effective uses of my mental stress if I choose to use it for a maneuver.

So I'd just let them continue to make *insert skill check here* until they succeeded or until the maneuver wore off... or wait... for spell maneuvers, do I have to put extra shifts into them to make them last more than one round???  Or do I use the rules for sticky aspects?  Or would that just be part of the discussion around the compel?

Actually I've had this very question before, thus.... Follow me.
http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,25415.0.html

Offline BumblingBear

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 2123
  • Rawr.
    • View Profile
Re: A bit frustrated
« Reply #22 on: April 19, 2011, 05:39:39 AM »
Mostly I may allow a person to attempt to be un"stunned" via a high endurance or conviction(?) roll. Or someone else could run over and slap them hard (a fists maneuver) or attend to them (a scholarship maneuver). But yeah, mostly I'd say that they would be compelled until a few(4-6) rounds had passed and they had the time to recover naturally.

That's pretty much how I do it.

I really dig maneuvering for effect.

I put a little bit of a twist on what Fred said, because otherwise it doesn't make sense to me how a RCV could go down with 1 rote spell evocation shot.
Myself: If I were in her(Murphy's) position, I would have studied my ass off on the supernatural and rigged up special weapons to deal with them.  Murphy on the other hand just plans to overpower bad guys with the angst of her short woman's syndrome and blame all resulting failures on Harry.

Offline Taran

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 9863
    • View Profile
    • Chip
Re: A bit frustrated
« Reply #23 on: April 19, 2011, 12:23:40 PM »
That's pretty much how I do it.

I really dig maneuvering for effect.

I put a little bit of a twist on what Fred said, because otherwise it doesn't make sense to me how a RCV could go down with 1 rote spell evocation shot.

Environmental effects aside, if I can invoke for effect why would I do spell maneuvers?  Why not do piles of damage (a sonic boom) and then invoke for effect (the stun).  It seems to be a waste of a spell to do a maneuver they can potentially avoid with no effect for the cost of a fate point.  If I do damage, and invoke, it still will cost them the point.

I'm just a bit confused.  Don't I need an aspect to invoke for effect?  Can you really just say, "wow, you succeeded by a lot, let's say he's stunned as well"

Offline Belial666

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 2389
    • View Profile
Re: A bit frustrated
« Reply #24 on: April 19, 2011, 01:26:24 PM »
OK, here's a mechanical comparison;


Weapon 8 rote;
Against an enemy with "Great" defense, this does an average of 12 shifts of damage; 8 from the weapon and 4 more from a targeting roll of 8 (4 above enemy's defense). A mook with Supernatural Toughness but no consequences is blasted apart. An enemy with Inhuman Toughness and a mild consequence is, again, blasted apart. A PC with no touchness and full consequences must take a Severe and Moderate consequence just to stay in the fight. Weapon 8 rote is well above average in magical power for submerged people.

7-shift block that lasts 2 exchanges;
Again, this is really useful, depending on the block. If it is a magical grapple, it will prevent most actions and also deal one stress twice, ignoring armor. If it is a block against perception (offensive veil), you could really blind your opponent so they can't see you to target you and then get up to them and shoot them in the back for the next 2 exchanges - they'll roll mediocre defense since they won't be able to see the attack to dodge. While this type of spell won't kill an opponent, it is extremely useful when ganging up on a big enemy. Even big enemies rarely have Alertness high enough to pierce a 7-shift veil and then the entire group can hit them when they can't see to dodge for double the normal effect of their attacks.

8-shift maneuver or effect;
With 8 shifts, you can be sure to get a sticky aspect on all enemies that have less than legendary defenses and then tag for effect. Aspects can be as powerful as your GM allows you though they rarely, if ever, will take an opponent out outright. However, an 8-shift effect can. 8 shifts mean you can lift a car and land it on your enemy with a might effect. First of all, falling car would be a weapon 4-5 attack regardless of what else it would be. Secondly, a car needs might 8 to lift. If your enemy happens to have low or no Might, they simply can't lift it; unlike magical blocks and most maneuvers, being crushed under a car does not fade over time; if they don't lift it they are trapped. Third, cars are not magic and are made of metal. This may seem like an obvious statement but when you have a magic-immune Ogre running at you, a heavy metal projectile may be just what you need.
Similarly devastating effects that can do a lot more in some situations than the shifts invested in them is an 8-shift force effect that pushes an enemy over a 20-story building (splat!) or an 8-shift effect that blows the bridge under the enemy's feet (8 shifts can break strong exterior walls) or makes the ceiling or roof fall on the enemy.




summary;
Pure weapon attacks at weapon 8 will almost always take out mooks in one blow and significantly damage non-mooks; they are equivalent to direct hits from artillery. Blocks, correctly used, can both cripple opponents and make them lose the fight (ever heard of save-or-lose DnD spells?). Maneuvers and effects are usually less effective BUT in the right situations can outright finish the fight regardless of how powerful the enemy is by manipulating the environment.

Offline WillH

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 178
    • View Profile
Re: A bit frustrated
« Reply #25 on: April 19, 2011, 01:55:11 PM »
First of all, falling car would be a weapon 4-5 attack regardless of what else it would be. Secondly, a car needs might 8 to lift.

I think you're being really generous here. If someone was using an evocation maneuver that also acted like a weapon and/or block, I would be inclined to make them pay for the weapon or block with shifts of power. Although, since we are talking about an 8 shift maneuver, I suppose they are paying for it. Maybe I just think the caster should precisely break out what is being payed for with the shifts. I know you have a pretty solid grasp of the system. What are you basing your interpretation on?

Offline Belial666

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 2389
    • View Profile
Re: A bit frustrated
« Reply #26 on: April 19, 2011, 02:31:31 PM »
The spell example with the car is not a spell that tries to deal damage by hitting you with a car (i.e. using a scene aspect). That would result in a weapon 10 spell instead, as per the example grasping branches spell in the books (that one uses a tree for the extra oomph). The car spell simply does an 8-shift telekinesis acting on the car to move the car (on you). The immediate result of the spell is that the car lands on you. The secondary, and perfectly natural, effect is that you have a car crushing you with its weight; that deals damage due to the car, not the spell itself, and you have to be strong enough to push the car aside to get out of it.

Compare to using the same telekinesis rote in the following situations. The spell may do a very simple effect but depending on what you work with, it can have devastating secondary effects;

1) Throw someone off the roof of a multi-story building. The spell is a might 8 effect that throws the guy off the roof. He gets to roll any defenses he has against the spell to avoid being thrown off the roof and if he can fly or magically levitate he does not fall but if all those things fail, then he falls. And falling damage rules say 5 stress per 10 feet or so. Even if we cap that to 40 feet for max damage, a fall off a 4-story building is still 20 stress.

2) Break the bridge/floor under someone's feet. Doing the Gandalf thing is extremely effective in some situations. 8 shifts is a powerful enough spell to break through heavy exterior walls and similar things - small bridges and floors included. Not only does the enemy get to fall, but they usually get to fall into whatever the bridge was built over; an avenue full of speeding cars (that hit them), a river (which carries them away or might drown them), or a really, really deep ravine. In any case, they take lots and lots of damage and the encounter is pretty much over; they could survive but getting back at you would require a lot more effort than knocking them down did.

3) Break the roof. Just like breaking a wall, breaking the roof/ceiling not only does what the spell is supposed to do (break the ceiling with a might check) but the broken ceiling also gets to fall on whatever is standing under it. A typical ceiling for a 30x20 room weighs over 15 tons and even if you are hit only by a 2-ton piece, you still take significant damage and have to push the debris aside to escape.

4) Throw your target into high-votlage powerlines (or the powerlines into your target). This is a Holywood favorite and why not? If the fight is in the countryside near one of those 120k volt major powerlines or, even worse, in or near a power plant, use it to your advantage.




Long story short, a telekinesis rote is not very effective in combat if you have nothing to work with. But with the right declaration, assessment or existing scene aspect, it can be devastating. And it is also cooler than a pure damage effect because it encourages you to be creative and use the declaration/assessment rules and/or aspects beyond the point-and-blast rules. Besides, it is also useful out of combat. It can open paths and doors locked to you (by breaking the doors/walls), discourage pursuit (by flipping enemy cars), block the paths of enemies (by destroying the path itself) and it can even be used socially; never underestimate the persuasiveness of showing you can lift a car with your mind.

Offline WillH

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 178
    • View Profile
Re: A bit frustrated
« Reply #27 on: April 19, 2011, 02:45:17 PM »
The car spell simply does an 8-shift telekinesis acting on the car to move the car (on you). The immediate result of the spell is that the car lands on you. The secondary, and perfectly natural, effect is that you have a car crushing you with its weight; that deals damage due to the car, not the spell itself, and you have to be strong enough to push the car aside to get out of it.

OK, I don't like the free lunch of dealing damage due to the car. I would say that's just a straight telekinesis attack, colored by the fact you're using TK to throw a car at them. Your reasoning is sound. I'm just not concerned with that level of simulation.

Offline Belial666

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 2389
    • View Profile
Re: A bit frustrated
« Reply #28 on: April 19, 2011, 03:18:10 PM »
*shrugs*

Then just use the telekinesis rote to throw them off the roof or collapse the ceiling or throw them into the street to get the damage from the impact and then get run over by a speeding car. Dealing damage is not the point of telekinesis; being able to deal with a much greater variety of situations than just damage is the point. Damage is just the icing on the cake in the few circumstances that you can pull it off. After all, a blindness spell via an offensive veil is more consistently devastating than telekinesis if you are going for combat efficiency; they can't hit you or the rest of your team if they can't see you no matter how strong they are and you and your entire team can hit them when they can't see you for maximum effect. But an offensive veil will only be useful in combat whereas telekinesis can always be used to do something.



You only got 3-5 rotes and that's it. So try to have rotes that are useful in as many situations as possible. Examples of comparative usefulness;

Blindness Maneuver: can only blind for effect. Usefulnes 1
Force Blast: direct combat, can open barriers.  Usefulness 2
Fire Blast: direct combat, can open barriers, satisfies catch for many things, can put things on fire. Usefulness 3-4
Offensive Blindness Veil: prevents enemy attacks, helps your and team's attacks, prevents enemy pursuit. Usefulness 3-4
Telekinesis: direct combat, can open barriers, forced movement, terrain control, ignores magic immunity, may use items to satisfy catches. Usefulness 6


Asyou can see, telekinesis has a ridiculously large number of uses compared to other rotes you might have. There's a reason Dresden has those force rings.

Offline MorkaisChosen

  • Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 90
    • View Profile
Re: A bit frustrated
« Reply #29 on: April 19, 2011, 03:37:49 PM »
Stunned: Endurance roll to shake it off and get their brain back in order.