|
Dodge Charms posted:I've always wanted a game with witty repartee as an optional component to combat. Why not just use the Create Advantage rules? Spider-man quips gets the Rhino fuming mad, so that when he charges Spidey on his next turn, Spidey Invokes that "Seeing Red" aspect and increases the shifts of the miss by 2, which triggers his Spider Sense stunt that let's him give up his next action to inflict the shifts of a missed melee attack as damage when he succeeds with style. Rhino charges, gets a face full of web, and crashes right into a brick wall, bringing the whole thing down on top of him.
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2013 10:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 12:14 |
|
|
My rules for Fate go in the other direction and nerfs the attack action. Consequences don't give a free invoke, and succeeding with style on an attack doesn't give you a boost. If you attack someone and get a single shift of success, you can Invoke to increase that to 3 shifts. Then give it a -1 penalty to Succeed With Style and get a boost. So not only do you get that Invoke right back, but if you inflicted a consequence, you actually double your money. When attacking is better at creating Invokes than Create Advantage, something is wrong. The other thing I normally do is separate the combat stats from the skills. Varies depending on the setting, but generally I like letting characters specialize in Melee or Ranged, and Offense or Defense. So everyone has a general "combat" skill rated at +3. Melee adds +1 to that for melee attacks. Ranged lets you attack anyone up to three zones away without penalty. Offense boosts your attack actions by +1, Defense boosts your defense actions by +1. So you have 4 different combinations for the same skill before applying any stunts.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2013 21:25
|
|
|
My lazy way to pump up a normal npc into boss levels is to say that for every pc it is outnumbered by, it gains a temporary fate point for that round, and those points refresh/reset at the start of each new round. So say you pit a dragon against 4 heroes. The GM starts the scene with 4 fate points, plus the 3 temp fate points each round because it's 4 vs 1. I put the monster's attack or defense at +4, with the other at +3. If I want to put in some extra work, I'll spend some of those initial fate points on stunts, with stuff like Riposte as a baseline for giving some out of turn actions. Lastly, limit it to only spending 2 points per action, so I don't burn 7 points on the first attack and seriously cripple one pc for the whole adventure. A bit more combat advice. With Create Advantage, don't make actions that affect the player or zone a +0 difficulty while actions that affect the target a resisted roll. That's boring. It encourages the fighter to always try to use Fight to apply a Master Fighting Style aspect on himself and easily succeed with style, while doing something like a Trip or Grapple aspect on the foe he's facing is much more difficult. Instead, set the difficulty of the action based on how logical and cool it is. The fighter tries to trip a schmuck? That's +0. A fellow warrior? +2. A dragon? +4. The fighter tries to apply Master Fighting Style to himself? Set boring poo poo like that at +4. They're in a one on one duel and want to use Fight to tackle the villain off the airship and create a "Falling to their doom" aspect? Set that at 0 or 8. 0 if rescuing the fighter before he dies of the fall is hard and an midair fight sounds awesome to you, 8 if the fighter knows how to fly and the villain doesn't.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2013 22:36
|
|
|
Transient People posted:This is terrible no good advice and should be ignored. Don't punish the players for trying to succeed and using their edges smartly, you'll just bore them or depress them as they can't get things done. Instead, encourage them to get creative. The chief example of this I can think of is when I was up against a bunch of mooks and a named enemy who outnumbered me four to one and had guns primed at my head, and to even things up I Created an Advantage on myself called Suppressive Fighting so that I could get to perform active interference using Fight against anyone who tried to shoot me, getting to hit them for each shot they made. Get your players thinking in terms of blocks, active opposition, interferences and the like and they'll stop trying to build pure navel-gazing advantages all day erryday since those have no payoff beyond being an invoke and can even be compelled by a wily enemy to ruin a PC's day (say that a PC creates a Spell Focus Aspect to amp his next spell. The enemy team can spend a Fate Point to compel Spell Focus and say they get an attack against the PC as if he were Surprised, since he's in such a deep trance). Don't ever punish a player for doing something smart like dropping people off the side of an airship with tackles when they can fly. Like I said, the difficulty should be set by how logical and cool whatever it is they are trying to do, rather than trying to figure out how to simulate such a contest. The same mindset that rewards a PC by letting them skip a bossfight with falling damage punishes the PCs when they try to do something that looks stylish but difficult. By being upfront with the players about this, you're encouraging them to think creatively and do what their players would do in the kind of story you're all telling together. I don't like your Suppressive Fighting example. Using Create Advantage once to get 4 extra attacks a round for the whole combat is dumb. You can take a "make up the rules as we go along" approach if you want, but that limits you because at that point it's just the gm telling you what you can and can't do, rather than playing using a consistent set of tools.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2013 00:16
|
|
|
Of course aspects are always true. Using an aspect to create active opposition is fine. quote:I Created an Advantage on myself called Suppressive Fighting so that I could get to perform active interference using Fight against anyone who tried to shoot me... quote:...getting to hit them for each shot they made. To quote from the system toolkit: quote:If you are designing a power that only some characters will use, then you It's the same deal. Why wouldn't you use Create Advantage to get free attacks while raising your defense and getting free invokes? Yes, using Create Advantage should have a payoff. The two things we disagree on are that 1. I think that Create Advantage should be reasonable in what it can and can't do, not an option that trivializes everything else and 2. the difficulty of the action should be judged by the action itself, rather than the kind of opposition you're facing. Spell Focus shouldn't be against a difficulty of +0 while Grappled is at +4. Really, it's about taking the advice on Overcoming an Obstacle they give in that article you linked and applying it to create advantage. quote:“Setting the level of passive opposition for anything is the GM’s province unless a player is making a hard statement by spending a fate point. You can talk about it, like you can talk about anything, but the GM retains the last word.” Quadratic_Wizard fucked around with this message at 11:02 on Oct 25, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2013 10:54
|
|
|
Wow. So it had a counter, except that you were munchkin enough to make a stunt to get rid of it, and it's entirely something you can use in every single encounter to gain a ton of free attacks. It's fine for Create Advantage to do impressive things. The article has a ton of examples of those fun and impressive things. What you did and you GM allowed was just taking it too far. I'd agree that Attacks are usually a better option than Create Advantage. My solution to that was to nerf attacks. They can't succeed with style, and consequences don't give free invokes. The current setup, where succeeding on an attack with one shift means you can spend one Invoke to succeed with style, which gives you the invoke right back and increases the shifts of damage by one. If you inflicted a consequence, you just paid one invoke to get two.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2013 15:34
|
|
|
Transient People posted:No, the stunt existed before the advantage. This is kind of obvious enough that I'd assume it'd go without saying, but apparently not! And of course you're ignoring the fact that the Aspect only allowed me to apply active opposition and punish fails only against enemies who were trying to shoot in melee, or that it only granted 'free' attacks because I was getting swarmed by enemies who were all applying the gang-up bonus against me. Trying to apply that in the context of a different fight might not go so well, since Aspects can be compelled and of course melee opponents won't care about this at all. Coupled with your talk of nerfing attacks by removing the entire point of Consequences and referencing how players should be punished for trying to generate advantages they can succeed at reliably, I'm starting to suspect you haven't played FATE all that much. The system doesn't really work the way you think it does. It was totally obvious, don't worry. Chalk up our differences to personal preference then, because the way you play the game where players make up new rules and the GM doesn't know any better or care just seems so arbitrary and encouraging the worst kind of cheesy, exploitative play to me.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2013 15:58
|
|
|
Transient People posted:What new rules? It's right there in the link I posted, give it a look. If you think making 5 attacks a round is balanced and fair and totally creative and not cheesy or exploitable, there's just too much of a gap and nothing I say is going to sink in. But for the record, here's how I would have handled it. You use Create Advantage and create Suppressive Fighting. That's fine. It's a dangerous situation and it makes sense, so the difficulty is zero. Roll +4 fighting and get a 4, so the aspect has two Invokes on it. Because you're at such close range and actively fighting, you get to use your Fighting skill to defend instead of athletics. Yay. Three of the goons attack, but with their +2 bonus only one of them hits for one shift, and one misses by a wide enough margin to give you a Boost. The boss guy hits you can inflicts a 3-shift hit. You could have spent one of the invokes of your aspect to turn the goon hit into a miss, but decide to save it. If you had a stunt like Riposte, you could have inflicted 2 stress on one of the goons when you succeed with style, but it's fine. Now on your next turn, you've got the 2 Invokes from before and that boost. So you attack the goons, roll and inflict a shift. You want to take them all out though, so you Invoke your boost and suppressive fighting twice, making that 7 shifts, which is enough to Take Out the three goons. There's still the boss to deal with though. Just using the rules as they are presented in the book and the fiction is entirely the same. edit- Are you sure you're not projecting with the freaking out? I have a hard time getting the frothing at the mouth image of you out of my head.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2013 16:47
|
|
|
Evil Mastermind posted:Hmmm, I wonder if the OP counts... Got me thinking about this, and here's what I came up with. The biggest concern with a stunt trees is that when you start stacking bonuses, the math goes off the rails. A +2 advantage on an opposed roll means that you'll win--roll higher than them, not just tie--73% of the time. +4 is 93%. With any more elaborate combat system, you need to break it down to the base parts. Attack bonus. Extremely valuable in Fate, since increasing the one stat ups your chance to hit and increases the damage you do. Damage bonus. What most weapons do. Since they only work with a hit, they’re only half as valuable as attack bonuses, so a +1 attack is roughly equal to a +2 damage bonus. Defense bonus. What you roll to defend yourself. Also super important. Armor bonus. Reduces the shifts of a successful attack. It’s value depends on just how common weapons are. Stress and Consequences. The only one that isn’t part of a roll. Tricky. Initiative. A rather minor one compared to the others...but I have something planned. See below. There is also the issue of when you can use a skill to attack and when you can use a skill to defend. In the default system, you can’t use Fight to attack someone flying twenty feet overhead or to dodge arrows. If you’re going for something more over the top with your kung fu though, might as well make both things the standard. So...my idea would be to break Fight into four different skills. Swiftness How incredibly fast you are. When those with Superb swiftness or more battle each other, normal people can have a hard time just following them with their eyes. Swiftness replaces Athletics. Overcome: Run up walls, over water, through the tree tops, or over the heads of a tightly packed mob. Create Advantage: Things like “Too Fast to See”, “Always Behind You”, or simply “At the High Ground”. Swiftness advantages mostly focus on the one creating them. Power Power is simply how much power you can put into your attacks, and how strong you are. When those with Superb power deliver a particularly strong attack, whatever is hit will be destroyed. Power replaces Physique. Overcome:Destroy and break things. Walls, floors, weapons, even people. Create Advantage: Things like “Unstable Crater”, “Collapsing Ceiling”, or “Lion’s Jaw Grapple”. Power advantages are good for powerful aspects affecting the environment, but they can be a bit indiscriminate if you’re not careful. Chi Manipulation Chi is the life force of blah blah blah. It can be used to weird things like light punches that really hurt or fire energy blasts. Who knows what those with superb chi manipulation can do? Overcome: Sense a chi user, speed the recovery process--provide justification for healing, not actually clearing consequences--do weird things like shoot a bottlecap super fast. Create Advantage: Power up yourself, or chiblock someone else. Chi advantages are subtle, especially to those who aren’t practiced in the art, but powerful. Mastery Mastery is how skilled you are at using what you have. Those with Superb mastery can beat a horde of ninjas in a ladder factory while keeping a baby in their arms. Overcome: Like Fight, not used very often to Overcome. Create Advantage: Feint, Grapple, Trip, Bull Rush, Disarm, as well as more creative things that let you use skill over muscle to gain the upperhand. All of these fall under one uber skill called Kung Fu. When you take the Kung Fu skill, you then gain the four skills, with one at a rating equal to Kung Fu, another at your Kung Fu rating -1, and so on. For example, Goku has Kung Fu 7. He also has Power 7, Swiftness 6, Technique 5, and Chi Manipulation 4. Agent Coulson has Kung Fu 3, and Technique 3, Power 2, Swiftness 1, and Chi Manipulation 0. Next, allow players to allocate these four skills to their combat stats. Who is to say that Swiftness boosts defense rather than accuracy? That chi manipulation is armor rather than damage? Four skills, so the four combat stats will be Attack. Add it to your attack roll. Defense. Roll it when you’re defending. Armor. For each point, not only do you reduce the shifts of damage you take when hit, but you also gain one stress box. Expertise. Works as a damage bonus and initiative, and you roll it while Dancing. See below. Continuing the example, Goku now writes his sheet as +7: Kung Fu, Power (Attack) +6: Swiftness (Defense) +5 Technique (Expertise) +4: Chi Manipulation (Armor) With this, the order in which a player assigns their four skills becomes extremely important and lets players customize their style in a way that will be distinctive to them. Dancing In any good martial arts fight, the combatants aren’t just trading blows one at a time. It’s a constant flurry of motion that takes them all across the battlefield, a series of blocks and near misses. This is designed to try and capture that feel. When two kung fu experts engage in combat, they begin the Dance. At the start of each round, they roll their Expertise against a set DC, which starts at 1, and rises by 1 every round. Whoever rolls the highest has the initiative for that round, and acts first. If either player rolls lower than the DC, they take the difference in shifts of damage. If either player succeeds with style against either the other player or the set DC, they gain a boost. Succeeding with style against both only rewards the one boost. If the two players tie, they both reroll. Stunts When it comes to stunts, there is really one major design principle I’d be worried about. Stacking. To avoid this, I suggest Combat School stunts. Buying one Combat School stunt teaches you the ways of a certain martial art and gives you three Techniques. Like 4e attack powers, you have to declare which technique you are using and you can only use one at a time. Two examples. Crane Style You are three steps beyond graceful. When you defeat your enemies, they can become confused at your movements, thinking you yourself an untouchable illusion, or some sort of wizard. Leaf on the Wind: You move with perfect timing in step with your foe, letting them waste their energy attacking while you let yourself just barely avoid their mortal blows. Use this technique when you use Expertise to Create Advantage, and gain a +2 bonus on your next Dance roll. Unfamiliar Shadow: A single strike to disorient your foe, and then you’ve vanished. Or so they think, until they feel your hand on their back. No matter how they twist and turn, you stay one step ahead. If you use this technique with an attack and hit, you create a Behind You aspect with one free invoke. Merciful Counter: Your opponent’s attack leaves them full of openings. Using their own strength against them, you deliver a painful blow. When you succeed with style on a defense roll, you may use this Technique to forego the normal boost to instead inflict your shifts of success as damage. This counts as your next Action. Tiger Style You are the king of the jungle. Strong, powerful, and fierce, you terrify your enemies before the battle even starts. Once a battle starts, you are relentless and brutal, a monster with an artist’s precision. Tiger Claw: Your hands are lethal weapons. When you hit with this technique, inflict 2 extra stress. Tiger Maul: A blow to the throat disorients and disrupts your foe. When you hit with this technique, your opponent takes a -2 penalty to their next Dance roll. Tiger Pounce: You launch yourself at your opponent, too close for them to do anything but fight desperately for their life. When you hit with this attack technique, give them an aspect such as Grappled or CQC with one free invoke. That's about it for now.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2013 04:47
|
|
|
Transient People posted:This isn't actually correct because the usefulness of extra stress is nonlinear. One extra stress is worthless if you have to pay an equivalent price to +1 attack bonus, two extra stress is bad compared to +1 attack bonus, three extra stress against a +2 to attack rolls is again bad, and four extra stress against a +2 to attack rolls is broken because you bypass the stress track and directly jump to instantly inflicting consequences, generating action advantage, bonuses to actions and an incredibly fast death spiral. There's noe xact fix but generally, 'don't use flat stress bonuses tia' is the only sane way to handle stress I've found. No game mechanic should allow you to jump straight to consequences, ever, and flat stress has a remarkable tendency to do that. Yeah. The main thing is that when I run games, attacks can't succeed with style and consequences don't give a free invoke, which helps a lot with the death spiral. Still, a better mechanic would be good. RPZip posted:The Fate protip is to not allow passive bonuses like this. The rules are more designed for a crunchy Fate Core game with martial artists. Everyone has a Kung Fu skill rated at +4 or so, but they also have all their other stuff. For example, Jackie Chan's skill pyramid might look like: +4: Kung Fu, Mastery(Defense), Empathy +3: Swiftness (Expertise), Notice, Rapport +2: Power (Armor), Stealth, Contacts, Will +1: Chi Manipulation (Attack), Drive, Lore, Provoke, Burglary One other thing, is that in fights against less serious opponent's, rather than using the four micro-skills, Jackie can just use his full +4 Kung Fu bonus to kick their butts in a jiffy.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2013 05:15
|
|
|
Transient People posted:We do have a better mechanic, though - Weapon Dice (and Armor Dice I guess) are it. They seriously fix like two thirds of the issues with trying to crunch up FATE. Never heard of them. Link?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2013 05:43
|
|
|
Plague of Hats posted:I assume he's talking about "Red and Blue dice" from the System Toolkit. Your weapon and armor ratings are reflected by red and blue dice, respectively, replacing dice in your normal dice pool. For each of these equipment-tied dice that comes up a + on relevant rolls, you get an additional change in shifts in your favor. Randomizes the typical effect of weapons and armor. Ah, right. I really don't think those are that good. Say you have 4 weapon dice. Since you're only counting the total pluses, calculating the probability becomes easier. +0 0000 0+-0 --++ average bonus: +1 +1 000+ 0-++ average bonus: 1.5 +2 0++0 -+++ average bonus: 2.5 +3 0+++ average bonus: 3 +4 ++++ average bonus: 4 Of course, you're 19 times more likely to roll a +0 than a +4, so when you weight the probabilities, the average bonus from 4 weapon dice is 1.68 compared to the 4 of regular weapon dice. Lower, when you factor in that plenty of times you'll roll a -1 or lower and still hit an enemy, do to low defenses or +2 bonuses from Invokes. Armor has it even worse. When you get hit, that's generally because you rolled poorly. When you roll a -1 or -2, you only have a 50% chance of getting a single plus on your roll, even if you have armor 4. You have zero chance if you roll a -3 or -4. Design like this is fine if you just want to make it something everyone has, and it can add a bit of fun to the table. But when you give someone a trap option like "You can have a +1 attack bonus OR 4 weapon dice" you're giving them a really bad option that looks good.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2013 06:40
|
|
|
Transient People posted:That is the point, yes. You don't try to compare things that are not comparable, and hitchance+damage versus pure damage is incomparable because there is no situation where one is not obviously better than the other. Instead you make damage an extra. You're also forgetting the ripple effect of weapon dice, which makes the reroll option of invokes better compared to taking the flat +2, something which is useful as well. Killing two birds with one stroke is a wise move. As for the value of rerolls vs flat +2s, with the normal rules you're really only better off rerolling when you have a -2 or lower. So assuming that this boosts the value of a reroll, you would need to have it so that when you roll a -1, rerolling is a better option than taking a +1. Being able to take a flat +1 rather than a roll that averages out to 0 and might have some bonuses is objectively worse, and it only gets worse the better your roll is.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2013 08:37
|
|
|
So, I've been thinking about using the fate fractal and applying it to dungeon crawling. Each dungeon--or floor of the dungeon for especially large ones--gets statted up as a character. Kind of. Aspects tell you what the dungeon is, what it looks like, who lives there, etc. Rather than skills and stunts, the dungeon just has an Exploration stress track. Each time the PCs explore a new part of the dungeon, they roll the dice. On a 1 or higher, the make progress and find some loot. Each stress box they check off is worth ten times its level in gold. So checking off the 3rd box means you found 30 gold coins worth of treasure. What is gold good for? Not much, really. More fun are what happens when you inflict consequences, because those are the magic items. Healing Potions, magic swords, all that good stuff. Once the dungeon has been Taken Out, the PCs have found everything worth looting. Of course, not every roll is going to be puppies and sunshine. When the PCs roll a 0, a random event triggers. That I'll need a table for, or just make something up on the spot. On a -1 or lower, monsters are encountered, and they get a number of Fate points equal tot he absolute value of the roll. So a -4 is going to be more painful than a -1. A couple more changes. Stress doesn't heal in the dungeon unless you retreat, which makes the stress you've inflicted on the dungeon heal too. Each time you inflict stress on the dungeon, you take a cumulative -1 penalty that resets after a monster encounter. As well, when you defeat some monsters, you get a bonus roll to see if those monsters had any good loot, with the bonus equal to the total number of combat encounters you've completed in the dungeon. That's the rough idea of it, needs some polish, but what do you guys think?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2013 15:21
|
|
|
Board Game and Normal Dungeon are both what I'm going for. Dungeon crawling to me is the ultimate "beer and pretzels" experience, and I was thinking of how to capture that super old school feeling with Fate. The biggest inspiration for the idea was Stonesoup Dungeoncrawl, the idea being that tweak the rules to make characters fast, level up fast, get lots of loot fast, and die fast. Could work in a more serious game, but right now the basic idea is something a bit more casual.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2013 18:24
|
|
|
The other thing is that until you say no, an aspect like rotten floorboards is true. Since aspects require either create advantage actions or fate points to take advantage of, it doesn't really matter how overboard you go with them in terms of the math, so you don't have to worry on that end.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2013 09:49
|
|
|
Tollymain posted:Speaking of superpowered people, I'm thinking of running an FAE supers game, and this is the current approach I have come up with for powers. One major conceit for the game is that powers tend to be, well, powerful. Control tends to be a problem more often than power levels. There are a few problems with that method. Say that you have a Hercules player who just wants their Super Strength as a forceful effect, and they naturally have Forceful at +3. In combat, that means that they'll roll +6 when they forcefully use their fists to punch their foes. 93% of the time, a +6 is going to get a tie or better against a +3. Not only does this kind of break the math, but you also have the weird side effect that the more powerful a super's power is, the less chance you have for it to cause collateral damage. You also have more of a "When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail" thing when the gap between their power and their +2 skill is even further off the map, so players are always going to use the one approach over and over. My suggestion is that rather than picking approaches, you simply define your superpower as two Aspects, the good and the bad, kind of like Wild Blue in Fate Worlds. You might have a Speedster with Faster than a Speeding Bullet that lets them race through the city, but have With No Bullet Time which makes their own reflexes the bottleneck on their power. A vampire might be Creature of the Night that comes in handy in a variety of situations, but All the Weaknesses which makes them have trouble with crosses, garlic, sunlight, etc. Players can use their powers with any approach that makes sense, and it works just like a normal skill roll. However, when you do use a power, you have the option of giving it a Free Invoke on that action. They might not want to do that though, because if two or more of the fate dice come up negative, then either a new aspect is created with a free invoke for the opposition, or the player/scene takes stress, starting at 1, and increasing by 1 for every instance of blowback that session/scenario, at the GM's choice. This means a few things. First, a player can use their power and not use the free Invoke. Hercules is generally going to punch/wrestle everything, but he'll also generally roll with +3. If he doesn't get the negatives, he's free to Invoke for that extra +2 without worry. If he does get the negatives--and there is a 40% chance he will--then he has a choice. Does he keep the roll and add a +2 because he really wants to succeed, or does he try to reroll and get a bonus and no blowback? Since the more you use your powers the more complications it causes for you, players are limited in how many of these free invokes they can take, so that more niche powers can be balanced against broader ones to an extent. It also makes it so that when player do push themselves, they get rewarded with powerful effects, but that the powers can get out of control.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2013 19:47
|
|
|
Yeah, but using that system, when would you ever want to take a power with three approaches? It's the choice between a minor +1 bonus and a really good chance of failing and screwing up OR you get a massive +3 bonus and you barely ever fail at anything. Someone with only one approach can paradoxically use their power way, way more than someone with the more versatile powerset. Someone with Clever telekinesis can use their power in just about every situation, while someone with Clever, Flashy, and Forceful telekinesis is better off flatout NEVER using their power, since the cost is greater than the benefit, even though they spent two stunts on it.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2013 20:20
|
|
|
Okay, maybe I'm not explaining this well. Say you have Mover, the telekinetic wunderkid. His player is trying to stat him up. His approaches are +3: Clever +2: Quick, Flashy +1: Forceful, Careful, Sneaky. He thinks about it, and decides to go with three approaches for his power: Clever, Flashy, and Forceful. Later, Mover is on patrol and sees Brick--a bruiser made entirely out of bricks--running out of a bank with a big bag of money. He decides to attack, rolling with Forceful to throw a car at Brick. Brick is a Brick, and he's going to roll to defend with +4. 73% of the time, not only is Mover going to miss Brick completely, but he's going to take stress just for trying. 12% of the time, he's going to get a tie, which will give him a boost, but there will be unintended consequences. A whopping 14% of the time is throwing that car at Brick going to work. But what if he'd been a bit more clever? Next round, he thinks to use his TK guide two small stones and strike Brick directly at his weakpoint, his eyes? He rolls with +4 this time, which means that he's only going to fail 41% of the time, he'll hit 41% of the time, and the other 18% will be ties. Hold up, what if Mover rebuilds his character. This time, he'll only apply TK to one approach, Clever. He isn't strong enough to throw a car at the villain, but he can make up for that with his mastery and precision of the power. He goes for the eyes first thing, because he doesn't really have any other options to stop Brick. With his +6 bonus, he's only going to miss 14% of the time, and even when he does, it won't be by very much. 12% of the time he'll get a tie with Brick. 73% of the time though, he's going to succeed, even succeed with style. So to compare, with one character, they have an equal chance of hitting the enemy or themselves whenever they use their power as a best case scenario. Trying to use their power in a less than optimal way is practically guaranteed to fail. With the other, you have a 12% vs 73% chance of their power working when they use it with only one approach. Do you really not see how that might be a problem?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2013 20:53
|
|
|
Tollymain posted:The entire point for choosing to have a more flexible sort of power is that it will be more applicable in scenarios where one approach might not be appropriate. Using a single scenario to attempt to prove your point doesn't help. Unless you have a boring and inattentive GM, you can't roll the same minmaxed approach for every problem you come across. Neither permutation is superior. The idea to model powers as an Aspect was a suggestion. It's definitely not an either/or situation. If you can think of something better, go for it. If you want to use the rules the way you originally propose, go for that too. I was only pointing out that 1. It's not balanced. At all. 2. It punishes players for wanting to sacrifice a little power for versatility by making them fail when they use their power in their approaches at +2 or +1. 3. It makes single approach characters nearly guaranteed success, unless you ramp up the difficulty of their actions, in which case it becomes impossible for those without a single approach power to succeed, unless you ONLY ramp up the difficulty for those rolling at +6, in which case there's really no point to giving a bonus to these power rolls. Feel free to ignore all of that though.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2013 22:25
|
|
|
Tollymain posted:Aspects tie the "super" portion of powers to fate points, which I don't particularly like. If you aren't spending FP, you're no more effective in a confrontation then somebody without powers. And if they spend FP as well, you're still even. This is valid if you want to run that game, but I don't want to run that game. In the game I want to run, having a power gives you the edge in a situation. It's expected that all player characters will have a power or powers. Ahhh...okay, here's the thing. My suggestion was two parts. One, you have a superpower aspect. Two, you can Invoke that aspect for free once per action--ie, without spending a fate point--but if you do and you rolled two negatives on the fate dice, something bad happens. So in 60% of all rolls when you're using a power, you'll have either a free reroll or a +2 bonus, and for that other 40%, you can take the bonus, but run the risk of something happening. It would always be the case that having a superpower aspect would be much better than not having one. Quadratic_Wizard fucked around with this message at 10:52 on Nov 5, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2013 10:49
|
|
|
Speaking with Jack, I realized I've sort of made a system for things like this. Part of it is from older books, part is from the system toolkit's section on barriers, and a part is from the great article on blocks here: http://www.faterpg.com/2013/richards-guide-to-blocks-and-obstacles-in-fate-core/ Multiple Skills, Multiple Opposition When a character wants to use more than one skill with a single action, they can. When they do, they roll their lowest skill. When a character faces multiple sources of opposition for an action, they only need to roll against the highest source of opposition. Some examples. Mid Air Bomb Squad posted:Batman, the Joker, and a half dozen of his goons are on a rooftop. The Joker knows his goons won't last more than a few seconds against the Batman, so he takes out a time bomb, ticking down to 0 in just a few seconds, and tosses it into the air. The Batman needs to not just catch the bomb, but disarm it before it blows up and takes out the whole block. Once the player decides that that's what they want to do, the GM considers. Disarming the bomb is a Crafts roll, while catching it in this situation is Athletics. Normally, a catch like that would be easy, like a 1. But there's also the fact that the Joker tossed it to a not-so-near rooftop, which is an obstacle with 2 difficulty. And the goons are there too, busting through them to get to the bomb would be a 3. Disarming the bomb itself isn't going to be easy, requiring a +4 difficulty. So what does the Batman do? He rolls his +4 Athletics--with all his gadgets, his Crafts is at +5--and the difficulty for the action is +4, because disarming this bomb is the hardest thing. He gets a 5! The day is saved! Important to remember, the GM can Invoke any relevant aspects to increase the difficulty, and the player can likewise Invoke aspects to increase their effort. Batman can Invoke his Peak Human or Trained in Everything aspects, while GM can Invoke Joker's Mad Tinkerer or the goon's Meatshields aspects. Charge posted:Bob the Orc Fighter sees Phil the Elf Wizard and is going to come over there and punch him. Phil doesn't want this, and since he goes first, he throws up a firewall. Bob is two zones away, has a firewall thrown up with Phil's Great (+4) Evocation skill, and with Phil's mage armor, he defends at +3. The player says "I want to punch Phil." So the GM sees the three obstacles to that--the distance, the firewall, and Phil's defense--and sees that the Fire is the highest, so that's what is rolled against. Since Bob is moving and attacking, he needs to roll his +3 athletics, because it's lower than his +4 fight skill. Bob rolls...and gets a 3. As he approaches, the flames roar, and he gets stopped in his tracks. He stops at the flame wall, because that's the logical place to stop, and on his next turn he'll be able to try again, or try something else. The basic idea is to keep it simple. In every situation, a player should only have to say, "I want to do this." and the GM can reply, "Okay, roll your X skill, and the difficulty is Y.", with a quick explanation for why it's X and Y. Quadratic_Wizard fucked around with this message at 15:35 on Nov 5, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2013 15:29
|
|
|
Interesting. The chances of rolling 4 blanks is 1/81. The chance of rolling 3 blanks or more is 5/81. Chance of getting 2 blanks or more is 15/81, or 18%. Sounds good.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2013 19:05
|
|
|
Scrape posted:So it's like "you are a trained Infiltrator. You can always roll +Infiltrate for related tasks. You carry X pieces of special gear: write them down before each run. You can always pay a FP to invoke them as if they were Aspects. If, before a run, your Intel reveals a particularly necessary piece of gear, write it down and you can invoke it once for free." For the X in "X pieces of Special Gear", I would tie it to the rank of your relevant skill. So someone with Infiltrate +3 comes along with 3 pieces of gear each run. Maybe make the breakpoints for free invokes the same as stress bonuses, at 1, 3, and 5.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2013 19:58
|
|
|
devilmaydry posted:So, I'm working on a .hack//Fate thing. Reading through it, here's what catches my eye. First, exploits need some more guidelines. The ability to change a -4 into a +4 is ridiculously good, and the document doesn't give any guidelines into how often you can use it, whether it costs fate points, etc. When you have a mechanic, start from the bottom and go over everything, because otherwise you assume that the reader will assume what's locked up in your head. The way you balance the three types--physical, magic, balanced--might not work well with Fate. If I'm reading it right, then a physical or balanced fighter can't use any fate points or situation aspects to increase their defense when they're hit with a magic attack, and they can get a compel to lower their defense even further. That means rocket tag, and as long as a party is able to make both physical and magic attacks, the overpowered strategy would always be for everyone to CA to pump up the person with the right attack to flatten the enemy in one hit. About the roles. Tank functions identically if you just say "gain a +1 bonus to defense". DPS makes attacking even better than it already is, which is only compounded with the rules for Types. Here's a scenario. A physical DPS attacks a Balanced Tank and both get a total result of +3. A tie. The player spends a Free Invoke from a situation aspect to change that to a hit, and the Tank can't do anything because they're balanced. Now, the tank has been hit for 1 shift, and the attack gets a Boost in exchange for their free invoke. They're not done though, and they spend a fate point. Three shifts of damage now, and this tank only had 2 boxes, so a minor consequence. The total result is that they spent a free invoke and a fate point to inflict 1 stress, one consequence, AND they got a boost AND a free invoke on the consequence. For Buffer, a one shift increase on a tie is meaningless, since there is no difference between succeeding and succeeding with one shift. Same with Tactician. You might as well say "+1 to these rolls" if that's what you want to accomplish. Skipping the class section, the Inventory's ability to use AOEs is probably broken since in Fate it's super easy to pump up one attack with situation aspects, then apply that to everyone in a zone. My advice for AOE attacks is that when you do you have everyone roll and see who is hit. Then, you compare the highest defense of the one you hit with your own roll, and divide those shifts among all the targets. So if you Fire Scroll a zone and Roll a 6, and they roll 3, 1, 4, 7, then you hit the first three with a total of 2 shifts. Spend a fate point to raise that to 4 shifts, and then divide that into a 2, 1, and 1 shift hit on the three targets. But that might be a bit convoluted, I dunno. Threat Reduction is too narrow for a skill, probably works better as a stunt. Maybe if you tie it more closely to stealth. Armor is powerful, but I've got to say, adding a second parallel stress track next to the physical one is nice, really nice. Good idea. I can see what Class Tech is meant to do, but it's really a "work this out with our GM" kind of thing. Works for when you're the only one using it, but maybe add a few more guidelines? Aggro has the same issue as Threat Reduction. The reskinning of the player skills is nice for the most part.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2014 02:59
|
|
|
Zandar posted:Unless the wording's changed since, that's not true. A bonus to defence would decrease any stress taken from hits, which the Tank's ability doesn't affect. Ah, yeah, you're right. quote:That's not the best example, given that the second invoke makes the result exactly the same as in Core (assuming the defender doesn't invoke, of course, but that's nothing to do with DPS). I'd argue that Buffers get just as much relative value when using Create Advantage, since their success with style gives them a total +2 instead of +1. Tacticians and Tanks will probably get less use out of their abilities, although having Aggro would alleviate that for Tanks by drawing weak attackers to them. Well, the main thing is that when you make an attack, the defender has serious incentives to spend their resources--invokes, fate points--making sure that attack doesn't hit, because big hits are going to basically generate more value than they cost. The issue is that with the Types, defenders are unable to spend their resources defending, so it's very much a rocket tag with boost chains. quote:A tie is a separate result in Core. The Buffer's ability will give them a full aspect instead of a boost, and the Tactician's will let them succeed fully instead of partially/with a minor cost. Aspects do have a lot of uses outside of just being there for Invokes and Compels, but even so, most of the time a boost is going to be just as good as an aspect with a free invoke. In combat, Overcome rolls are already really uncommon since you're spending your turn to do something that doesn't help end the battle. Most of the time it's to get rid of a negative aspect, and it's still usually a bad call tactically. Essentially, the rules as a whole buff Attacking to a rather ridiculous degree, leave CA mostly unchanged because CA feeds the buffed attacks, but makes Overcome more of a false choice. It's better to Take Out the monster with one big hit than it is to roll Inventory to pull out an antidote and Overcome your Paralytic Poison aspect, because the monster isn't going to be able to Invoke the poison aspect against your attack anyhow.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2014 18:50
|
|
|
Transient People posted:First off, Wildshape costs you a fate point to assume. Let's get that out of the way first because I know you didn't read that. It's OK, apparently nobody else did. Everybody who bitches about Wildshape being overpowered forgot about that fact and how much of a pain in the rear end it is, even without going into the problems with playing creatures with no fine manipulators. Beats me why, considering it's spelled out in the page preceding wildshape, but there you go.  Care to highlight where the stunt says you have to pay a fate point each time you use it? And since you can shift back and forth at a whim, what exactly is the problem with the lack of thumbs? quote:Now for the rest, you're forgetting permissions. You wanna know why you use Charm instead of simple Charisma? Charm is unnatural mental influence, and can get you to do things that Charisma cannot. You can, in *all* situations, place down the Aspect I'm Your Best Friend on a Charmee, but the same does not apply to simple Charisma. This is something that comes from playing a ton of FATE - two seemingly identical abilities can be wildly different in power when you realize that one of them can do more than the other because the fiction says so. All situations? Time to fight the BBEG, wizard can simply declare "Oh, he thinks he's my best friend, so he's going to surrender." No? The stunt works entirely on gm fiat, and the ONLY time it makes a difference is when the GM wants to make it super clear that wizards are more persuasive than dashing rogues. quote:Likewise, I refuse to believe anybody would bitch about Boost Mind. I mean...so I can spend a Fate Point for a benefit that requires three actions to be better than just invoking an Aspect, or I can burn a turn (worthless), or I can take mental stress (dangerous in any situation where you might need mentals)? Gee, that sure is a deal right there over just spending the Fate Point when I actually need it to succeed! What exactly makes burning a turn worthless? GM sets the scene, wizard says, "I spend a minute with a mind ritual that boosts half the party's stats, and a few seconds casting a mass arcane shield." Does it every scene. Same way that a wizard says "I cast mage armor" at the start of scene in dnd. Look at this.  The book is pretty clear that a wizard can keep up multiple persistent spells and there is no cost at all to doing so. Fate has numbers too. And it has a much tighter curve with the dice than dnd does, so every single number has a lot more significance to it. Boosting your defense against everything the orcs and goblins can throw at you from +2 to +5 means that an attack that was hitting you 61% of the time is now only hitting you 6% of the time. And all for the cost of 1/3rd of a stunt. And take a look at persistent. The only advice the book gives for getting around these effects...is with another wizard counterspelling it. Even so, you're now putting pressure on the GM to balance encounters around the wizard, not the party. Stealing the wizard's spellbook doesn't work in dnd, doesn't work in freeport. quote:PS: As for your point about fightman adaptations, do I need to post that sheet with two 'fighting schools' I posted way back when Freeport discussions first arose? The one that had like fifteen different abilities that used the Freeport model to cover everything from Warlord-style masterplans, to John McClane-style true-grit being used to soak blows or perform vicious counterattacks, to wuxia-style special techniques and rains of blades? It's seriously super easy to get fun 'techs' out of the Freeport system. It's just meaty enough to allow for massive variation, while being simple enough that it still feels like FAE. The problem with doing fightman spells is that you still having loving ridiculous "spells" that are all over the place in effect, because the spellcasting system is hosed and doesn't work alongside stunts.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2014 12:03
|
|
|
Evil Mastermind posted:Maybe it's just me, but this one feels pretty weak; maybe adding something like "and you automatically learn one of the target's sickness-, disease-, or injury-related aspects (if any)" would be better? Neither really seems practical in the actual game. "Mysterious illness" is a plot thing, and it's not something you can run into more than once every few campaigns without it being just House. I think it's okay if you expand the scope a bit. Enlightened Physician's Diagnostic Excellence You can diagnose most any illness with only a quick inspection, and even the most obscure take only minutes. You also know the proper treatment for any illness you diagnose, and how to procure those items, even if they are inaccessible at the time (for example, a rare flower at the world's tallest mountain, or an elixir in the king's vault). Finally, your ability to properly treat wounds can greatly speed the healing process. Moderate Consequences you personally treat heal one step more quickly. Most of the time, only the consequence related part of the stunt comes into play. Every now and then, a mysterious illness pops up and the other part comes up too. Ancient Voices Remembered "When you attempt to translate an ancient scroll in a language your First Age incarnation could reasonably have known, take a +2 to your Lore roll." This is another one that needs some work. A stunt needs to be able to be at least as useful as a fate point, and if someone can just Invoke their past life aspect for that same +2 bonus to their Lore roll--and virtually any other roll--it's not going to be useful, unless there are just going to be a ton of plot critical untranslated junk that is going to screw the PCs over if they don't translate it. Try this. Ancient Voices Remembered Once per scene, if you can describe how something relevant feels familiar to your past life aspect, you can Invoke your past life aspect to aid on a non-combat roll free. For example, you could gain a bonus to a Lore roll to translate a language your past life was able to read, or gain a bonus to your Physique roll to resist poison, because your past life tasted that same poison before and you know to spit it out.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2014 08:10
|
|
|
The problem with magic in Dresden is just that you're total shifts of a spell is basically the total of two skill rolls plus mental stress, and in Fate's math, a +9 roll is like 10x as good as three +3 hits.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2014 02:23
|
|
|
neonchameleon posted:They do. A broken wrist, for example, would prevent you using a two handed weapon - and a darkened room might mean you can't see the enemy. I think it's important to mention that aspects interact with the fiction more than the mechanics. In a dungeon and dragons game, something like a broken wrist would mean you would take X penalty for using your weapon one-handed on every swing, or they could pull out a backup one-handed weapon, basically sacrificing either damage or accuracy on every swing. Assuming, you know, they had a backup weapon and it's not 4 enchantment levels lower and unable to pierce the DR of whatever you're hitting. The loss of the hand is a concrete loss in power that affects every roll you make. Even so, it doesn't affect every outcome. Someone with a -2 penalty to attack could go on to swing 4 times and the only time they miss is when they rolled that one. The -2 penalty didn't really do anything. Aspects are different from the standard debuffs. Yes, they have mechanical weight. That broken wrist aspect can be Invoked to help the enemies dodge blows easily. It will also provide some passive opposition for tasks that normally wouldn't require a roll, like climbing up a rope. But AS LONG AS YOU CHANGE THE FICTION, it doesn't affect your attack rolls. Your wrist is broken, so you sheathe your claymore and pull out a longsword. You let your berserker rage take over and fight through the pain. You wield your massive buster blade in one hand as though it were hollow. Any of these things work, and it should be assumed that when you make your attack rolls, you aren't going to have any penalties to them. That's what the Invokes are for. Of course, there's one more way that these kind of aspects can hinder you: Compels. If the aspect is outright shutting you down, then it's a compel. From the SRD: Fate SRD posted:You have ____ aspect and are in ____ situation, so it makes sense that, unfortunately, ____ would happen to you. drat your luck. So you can say "You have broken wrist aspect and are in a deadly combat situation, so it makes sense that, unfortunately, being unable to properly wield Excaliborg and take advantage of your stunts would happen to you. drat your luck." or more simply "You have the Stunned aspect and are in a deadly combat situation, so it makes sense that, unfortunately, being unable to take an action would happen to you. drat your luck." For combat, I have two general rules of thumb for these kinds of aspects. First, you can't take more than 1 fate point from these compels with you after the combat. There's no point in farming them, it's use them or lose them. Second, when you're in danger of losing your action because of an aspect, you get an Overcome roll. Someone with the Stunned aspect for instance can roll their Physique. If they succeed, the aspect is removed, along with any free invokes it might have had. If they SWS, even better. If they fail though...that means that the aspect caused them to waste their turn doing nothing. That's a compel, and they get a fate point. That way, you don't really have any aspects that will take you out of the battle altogether. Those sort of effects should after all be reserved for when you're Taken Out. One more thing with Stunned. Even if a Fighter is Stunned, they can still use their action to Attack or Create Advantage. They'll simply do so while narrating that the action is done while confused and dazed, and Invokes will make the action a lot harder. Making sure that each action--Attack, Create Advantage, and Overcome Obstacle--have a purpose in both representing the fiction and in general tactics is important to me.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2014 12:46
|
|
|
Wow, when I first read VC stories, I totally missed that. I guess it's really because when you look at the book, you think "Oh wow, rules for playing superheroes!" So I devoured the rules for making superheroes, but only glanced at the rules for running a game for them. Players aren't going to be concerned with that, and Fate GM's I think all have their own style of how to handle adventures and games so that they aren't really looking for too much advice. That's what happened with me at least.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2014 04:35
|
|
|
If you're going off One Piece, just look at some of the things Oda did to hamstring the monster trio. Zoro is at a fraction of his power without a good weapon, and half the time he just doesn't know how to get to the fight. Luffy is vulnerable to pretty much anything that isn't blunt force. He's been beaten by hypnosis, sleeping gas, surprise attacks (getting nabbed on Thriller Bark), and chilidishly simple tricks. And Sanji is weak against women, to the point that not only can he not attack them, but he nearly died from the sight of the mermaids. Basically, target the players in a way that takes full advantage of their Troubles. That said, those mega stunts are pretty ridiculous, so I wouldn't feel too bad about making the opposition ridiculous too. For the swordperson, you could have. Swordbadguy +4 Combat Megastunt: Nothing At All: Gain a +1 Defense bonus for each Consequence taken, and Consequences can't be Invoked/Compelled the scene they are taken. Gain an extra 8-shift consequence. Papercutter could have Firefoot +4 Fire Stuff Megastunt: Mera Mera no Mi: Automatically succeed on Overcome checks to burn nonliving, flammable things. Inflict a one-shift hit when hit by a melee attack.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2015 05:35
|
|
|
deadly_pudding posted:And, if you are playing the version of FATE where Son of Krypton is all it takes for Superman to automatically have all those abilities without investing other character sheet resources, then it stands to reason that An Arrow For Every Occasion includes the "occasion" where Green Arrow snipes Doomsday through the eye from 3 blocks away with an antimatter-tipped arrow, vaporizing his head and single-handedly saving the world. Just going to point out to everyone who might not be aware, Green Arrow (Connor, his half-asian son who was more well-known for his martial arts hax) once did snipe Darkseid--a much bigger threat than Doomsday--from less than 3 blocks away with a flare arrow.  
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2015 16:01
|
|
|
Loki_XLII posted:I'm running an Atomic Robo game set in the Feng Shui universe, and my players are gearing up for a ship to ship battle in the Ancient juncture. I'm having a bit of trouble on how to conceptualize it. I know it has to be a big set piece thing, a full on conflict and not just a challenge or whatever. I've got a pretty good set-up for car chases, where each car is basically a zone on its own, with a second "zone" for each car representing relative distance, but I think ships should probably be different, especially because of the difference in speeds between ships and cars. I think you're overthinking it a lot. This is a massive battle between armies. But it's not the PCs battle. This is the PCs on a small ship, and "winning" for them isn't one side or the other losing, it's getting through the blockade. Narrow your focus down to where the meat of the story is. You don't need to stat up every single ship. Instead, I would stat up one or two ships and its crews. These are the ones that will be focused on making trouble for the PCs. At the same time, I'd use the fractal to stat up the whole blockade. Ocean Blockade Aspects: Too Many Ships, Fog of War, Bombs Ahoy +4 Cannon Blasts +3 Block Stres: [ ][ ][ ] Stunts: Oh poo poo, There's More: Once per year increase the result of your block roll to being 1 higher than the check against it. One Minor Consequence Slot Once per turn, the Ocean Blockade makes an attack against one member of the party and one against the opposition. Once per turn, you can make a check to try and navigate through the blockade. The Blockade defends with Block. Once you Take Out the blockade, the PCs have then broken through while the battle rages on, though they might still have some named NPCs with an axe to grind after them.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2015 06:24
|
|
|
A more roundabout solution is to run a group of mooks as a single character called a Mob, then give his attack +2 attack vs mobs.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2015 03:39
|
|
|
oriongates posted:So, working on a FATE game titled "Wizard Wars" and the premise is ridiculously themed "wizards" engaged in struggles for supremacy with one another. Most of their magic takes the form of normal skills taken to extraordinary levels with each class of wizard specializing in a single skill. Currently I'm putting together a list of Extras purchasable for each type of Wizard and I thought I'd throw a few out to see what people thing of the concepts/balance. These are meant to be "big" stunts that cost at least two Refresh per ability. Obviously this list is incomplete. A car wizard is going to be pretty useless in a game about wizards and not about racing. Ask yourself, just how often are the PCs going to be in chases? If the answer is less than two or three times a session, reconsider. quote:Muscle Wizard (Physique) Smash! is a one-shot kill for encounters. Party spends one round creating advantages, then blow them all on one Smash attack with like a dozen shifts against every enemy. Flying Fist shouldn't cost a fate point. quote:Gun Wizard (Shooting) Walking Arsenal sounds more like an aspect than a stunt. BFG translates mechanically to "Spend a fate point, your next attack does 4 extra shifts of damage if it hits." Trading accuracy for power isn't too bad on the balance, especially since it can only be fueled by fate points. Be sure to not let them use it with regular Invokes though. Special Delivery seems awfully murder hobo, but maybe that fits the tone.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2015 05:28
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 12:14 |
|
|
oriongates posted:That's definitely going on the list, although probably just as a standard stunt. Consider this. If the GM tells the player that they can't go inside because there is nowhere to park, that's a Compel. The player can then find a place to park by spending a fate point to ignore/resist the compel. So what your stunt does is make is so that players lose a stunt slot and lose a fate point when they don't spend a fate point to resist traffic related compels. Really, if this is a game about wizards, a lot of it is going to boil down to permissions. Say two wizards are tracking another wizard. One is flying high in the sky like Superman, because they're a wizard. The other is driving a car, because they're also a wizard. They want to roll Stealth to make sure that they aren't noticed. The flying wizard can do so no problem, so you should also let the driving wizard do the same without a problem as well. Let the skills do the heavy lifting for you, save Stunts for the big things, the concrete mechanical advantages, rather than the flavorful stuff that boils down to "make a skill check to do something one way with magic when it's normally done another way".
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2015 07:56
|
|