Rules for Pets and Allies

[Sanctaphrax]

What you say is true for Claws, since Claws just adds numbers. It's not so true for Diminutive Size or for Echoes Of The Beast or for a few other powers.

Forget the dog. Let's say it's a bird, a sparrow for example. Are you seriously going to suggest statting up a sparrow without Wings? And do you really think that a pet sparrow is worth multiple stunts?

PS: Someone other than benign and I must have an opinion here. Let's hear it.

[benign]

I second the call for more input.

There are going to be problems with any implementation, things that fall through the cracks. My knee-jerk reaction to your sparrow pet is that it would have such a low impact on the game that I would allow a PC to have one without spending a stunt for it. A skilled assistant to handle your social skills, resources, and contacts rolls is worth a stunt; a bird of no real intelligence which is more likely to be scared away than ever have any meaningful contribution to a high stakes scene, not so much. You could get the occasional compel or declaration out of it but that's it.

There are winged beasties that could contribute more, like a pet bird of prey, and yeah it would suck to have to spend two stunts to get one. But our current approach is the best compromise I can think of that has the fewest glaring issues. I am of course open to other brilliant ideas, but nothing I've seen so far sounds better.

[Sanctaphrax]

A sparrow could be handy. It could carry messages, perform reconnaissance, and maneuver in combat, just off the top of my head.

Now, if you don't mind me asking, why are you so opposed to the idea of it being possible to get an assistant with refresh without multiple stunts?

[benign]

I'm actually not opposed to it, except inasmuch as I'm worried it's overpowered.

[Tedronai]

I think this 'with refresh or without refresh' question is misguided to begin with.
ALL characters (beyond mooks and those of insufficient importance to have meaningfully complete write-ups) have refresh levels.  Granted, some have enough stunts and powers to put those levels into negatives, but they're there nonetheless.

ie. an NPC with no stunts and no powers, if of meaningful importance (which a PC's purchased ally certainly is), will have a few fate points sitting around

I think the issue would be better approached by way of the expanded range of refresh tiers (Hydrophobe through Submerged and on to Deep One; the additions to which can be found in Sancta's Generic NPCs thread in the Resource Collection), or some variant thereof.

[UmbraLux]

Regarding pets & powers - remember, FATE is heavily oriented towards modifying the narrative.  Simulating a world is a distant second.

With that in mind, ask yourself what about the sparrow is important to the narrative?  As you point out Sanctaphrax, it can carry messages, potentially do some recon*, and distract opponents in combat.  Those are important to the narrative!  They're what you should be spending stunts on - it's something the character couldn't do before.

Flight and small size aren't all that important comparatively.  They don't affect the PC and aren't significantly different from any other sparrow in the world.  I'd include some form of "It is what it is." to cover such things.  It probably does need to be adjusted individually based on how useful those standard abilities are...in other words, a doberman should probably cost more than a toy poodle.

*Recon would probably require some form of supernatural training or the ability to see through the sparrow's eyes.

[benign]

Fair point, Umbra. I was trying to consider that when I was being dismissive of that sparrow. I didn't mean "useless in pivotal scenes" to mean "not a champion heavyweight boxer with an uzi". I meant that I couldn't see a sparrow as being as important to the narrative as even a single fate point.

I suppose really that's all a distraction, because it doesn't address the underlying point that Sanctaphrax was making. He's not worried about our rules being able to handle sparrows, he's worried about the rules making any companion who wants to spend even a single point of refresh cost multiple stunts. And I don't really have a good answer yet, except that I worry that a single stunt granting an ally with refresh and skill points who can operate independently might be overpowered.

In a way, Lux and Sanctaphrax, your argument that even a humble sparrow could be such a potent companion once it has wings plays right into my anxiety about that being worth more than a single stunt.

As far as all NPCs having refresh, in this case it's a balance concern, not a system homogeneity thing. I'm trying to wrap my head around whether a base stunt deserves refresh or not. If it does, then I suppose it could be left unspent, granting the ally some fate points. I'm doubtful. But if a one stunt ally really would be overpowered if you let it spend refresh, then it follows that the same ally would be overpowered once you gave it fate points available to spend. So we run into the same problem.

[UmbraLux]

As far as all NPCs having refresh, in this case it's a balance concern, not a system homogeneity thing. I'm trying to wrap my head around whether a base stunt deserves refresh or not. If it does, then I suppose it could be left unspent, granting the ally some fate points. I'm doubtful. But if a one stunt ally really would be overpowered if you let it spend refresh, then it follows that the same ally would be overpowered once you gave it fate points available to spend. So we run into the same problem.

Yep, this is one of the reasons I recommended re-flavoring the IoP rules.  Shrug, that's history.

I still think paying for what it adds to your player's ability to modify the narrative is what's needed for balance purposes.  For the most part it needn't be expensive.  A sparrow trained to carry messages to a few individuals shouldn't cost much, if anything.  (It can be replaced by a cellphone.)  When you start adding recon capability and extra maneuver actions is when it should start costing refresh. 

Expanding that to other potential companions the question remains the same - "In what ways can the player affect the narrative now that he couldn't before?"  That's what you dump refresh into...

One final comment on fate points - they're a meta-game resource as much as a character resource. 

[Sanctaphrax]

Tedronai raises an interesting point. Do allies get their own Fate Point pools? Can they get compelled?

I'd probably say no and no, a compel to the ally is actually a compel to the player. Interested in hearing other viewpoints.

Reconnaissance was too grand a word in retrospect. I was just thinking that a sparrow could fly ahead and make some noise if it saw something.

Flying is a pretty important part of the narrative role of a bird. That's why a bird needs Wings.

There's no reason why refresh without an upgrade stunt couldn't be balanced. It might be tricky, but it should be doable.

I'm thinking reducing pyramid height by 1 might be worth 2-3 refresh.

Anyway. Tedronai, you said that you thought that we could model minions as characters of a given refresh tier. What tier do you think would be appropriate for a minion granted by a single stunt? Does the associated skill matter?

Similar question for UmbraLux. How much power ought a minion to have at base?

[UmbraLux]

Tedronai raises an interesting point. Do allies get their own Fate Point pools? Can they get compelled?

I'd probably say no and no, a compel to the ally is actually a compel to the player. Interested in hearing other viewpoints.

I'd ask players for an aspect associated with any pets/minions/companions.  That's what I'd compel.

Reconnaissance was too grand a word in retrospect. I was just thinking that a sparrow could fly ahead and make some noise if it saw something.

We're talking about a game based on the supernatural - I wouldn't have anything against a Supernatural Sense type stunt which allows seeing through an animal's eyes.  A druidic type might even be capable of talking with animals.

Flying is a pretty important part of the narrative role of a bird. That's why a bird needs Wings.

It's important to the bird, I agree.  Is it important to the narrative?  Unless the narrative uses the bird as a central character, I don't think it is important.  As long as the PCs remain the protagonists, things which affect their narrative are far more important than details of a pet's abilities...except where those details add something to the PC's abilities.  Just my two cents.

There's no reason why refresh without an upgrade stunt couldn't be balanced. It might be tricky, but it should be doable.

I'm thinking reducing pyramid height by 1 might be worth 2-3 refresh.

Anyway. Tedronai, you said that you thought that we could model minions as characters of a given refresh tier. What tier do you think would be appropriate for a minion granted by a single stunt? Does the associated skill matter?

Similar question for UmbraLux. How much power ought a minion to have at base?

I suspect we differ significantly here.  My answer is "as much as the player put into it".  If a player has 6 refresh to spend and wants to dump all 6 on the pet, I'm ok with it as long as they have a reasonable justification.  It would pretty much make the pet the PC in my opinion - but that could make an interesting story.

[Sanctaphrax]

I'd ask players for an aspect associated with any pets/minions/companions.  That's what I'd compel.
We're talking about a game based on the supernatural - I wouldn't have anything against a Supernatural Sense type stunt which allows seeing through an animal's eyes.  A druidic type might even be capable of talking with animals.

That would be possible, but it'd also be outside the limits of a stunt.

important to the bird, I agree.  Is it important to the narrative?  Unless the narrative uses the bird as a central character, I don't think it is important.  As long as the PCs remain the protagonists, things which affect their narrative are far more important than details of a pet's abilities...except where those details add something to the PC's abilities.  Just my two cents.

I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. I have read it thrice and I can't find an interpretation that makes sense to me. Could you explain a bit further?

I suspect we differ significantly here.  My answer is "as much as the player put into it".  If a player has 6 refresh to spend and wants to dump all 6 on the pet, I'm ok with it as long as they have a reasonable justification.  It would pretty much make the pet the PC in my opinion - but that could make an interesting story.

So, what you're saying is that you wouldn't offer allies any refresh at all. You'd just give players the ability to spend their refresh on powers for the ally. Is that correct?

If so, would you use the same approach for skill points?

[devonapple]

What is the narrative impact of having supernatural abilities externalized into a companion?

If having a companion with a power means that the player character has the direct narrative benefit of that power, then the companion is a special effect, and any narrative limitation is best handled by Compelling an Aspect.

I wonder if a GM will have to adjudicate this on a case-by-case basis. Three creatures may have the Wings ability, with vastly differing impacts on the plot and/or the player's agency.

Bird with Wings, Echoes of the Beast and Diminutive Size: ostensibly a 3-Refresh suite of powers, but they will rarely directly benefit from those powers. Player can't fly. Player can't fit into small spaces. At best, they can get a headsup from the bird on something out of the ordinary using its senses. The player may get some information they couldn't ordinarily get. The player could buy this as a Supernatural Sense for 1 Refresh instead, but doing so would mean that they don't have another pawn on the board able to make Maneuvers or Assessments. 1-2 Refresh, depending on the table.

Giant hawk with Wings, Echoes of the Beast, and Claws. 4 Refresh. But oh what a Refresh that is. Player can still get a headsup from the bird on something out of the ordinary using its senses, and other information they couldn't ordinarily get. Player still can't fly, of course, unless the Player and GM agrees that a roughly man-sized Hawk can use its Might score to carry a passenger. But either way, this is more than just another source of information: this is another effective combatant on the board, making Maneuvers, Assessments and credible Attacks. A combatant with a very useful (but not universally effective) maneuverability. 2-4 Refresh.

A mythical Roc, with Hulking Size, Wings and Echoes of the Beast. 4 Refresh, unless you buy Claws. Maybe not *as* useful a combatant, but it has Intimidation potential, and you can easily justify letting people ride it and gain at least communal use of the Wings power. It could still provide the player with information he couldn't gain on his own, and it can serve as a movement vector. And it can certainly have battlefield impact through Maneuvers and Assessments. Also 2-4 Refresh?

[UmbraLux]

That would be possible, but it'd also be outside the limits of a stunt.

Yep, are you avoiding giving powers to companions?

I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. I have read it thrice and I can't find an interpretation that makes sense to me. Could you explain a bit further?

• The bird (or other pet) is not a protagonist. 
• The PCs*, as protagonists, spend refresh on abilities (whether permanent or temporary) which allow them to affect the way the game resolves - the narrative. 
• Conclusion:  The PCs should pay refresh for any new abilities they gain from having a pet/companion.
• Corollary:  Abilities which have little or no affect on the PCs' ability to modify the narrative are simply scenery - an aspect.  (Don't need to be paid for.)

If that's not clear you'll need to let me know where I need to elucidate.  (Also, Devonapple's examples are relevant - though I'd treat a second action in an exchange as a power/stunt which costs fate in and of itself.)

*Or players.  Whether the character spends fate or the player does is something of a blurry area.

So, what you're saying is that you wouldn't offer allies any refresh at all. You'd just give players the ability to spend their refresh on powers for the ally. Is that correct?

If so, would you use the same approach for skill points?

Basically.  And I treat skill points similarly to the list above.  Does it grant something the character couldn't do otherwise?  If so, it needs to be paid for...

[devonapple]

(Also, Devonapple's examples are relevant - though I'd treat a second action in an exchange as a power/stunt which costs fate in and of itself.)

Thank you! And I agree about the "second action" costing Refresh. Should I refactor my estimates accordingly?  Will making an "Extra Action" power set a bad precedent?

[UmbraLux]

This is home brew right?  I wouldn't worry about precedent, people will pick and choose what to use in their games.  As for refactoring numbers to account for an extra action, that may be difficult.  I suspect varying groups will value it differently.  Personally, I think it'd be worth two to three refresh...probably three.  (Note, I try to price new powers at the point where some optimizers will decide they're too costly.  If I wanted to give it to everyone I'd just make it a house rule.  At two points I think it would be difficult to pass on taking 'extra action' or whatever you want to call it.)