Author Topic: A Couple of Questions from a new GM  (Read 5181 times)

Offline epios

  • Lurker
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
A Couple of Questions from a new GM
« on: October 20, 2010, 01:07:16 AM »
Hey guys,
I ran the first session of a new Dresden Files game last night, and there were a couple of things that I was confused about and wanted to get some expert advice on:

1) When you have players in a zone who are fighting NPC's can the players leave the zone at will?  Is there any sort of opportunity attack allowed on the part of the bad guys when a player moves out of melee range? 
2) I have a player who wants to be a magic user who can do things like create weapons for his hands.  I realize this is biomancy, but I couldn't find a lot of information on how to stat this up in the book, could someone point me to a reference?

Thanks in advance!

Offline Drashna

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 245
    • View Profile
Re: A Couple of Questions from a new GM
« Reply #1 on: October 20, 2010, 01:10:35 AM »
There are no AoOs. No penalty for moving from other characters. However, you do tech a -1 penalty for any "additional" action you take while moving (like shooting or the like).
[qoute='piotr1600']Sure true love will conquer all... You sponsored an instant vision of a tentacled Cthuluoid monstrosity following Elaine around, meeping piteously and making puppy dog eyes at her while she sighs loudly and gently kisses those tentacles...[/qoute]

Offline Becq

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1253
    • View Profile
Re: A Couple of Questions from a new GM
« Reply #2 on: October 20, 2010, 01:37:39 AM »
1) Yes, unless the player is grappled, they can leave the zone.  Although there is no 'attack of opportunity', a character can 'hold their action' and would be able to use it in this sort of situation.  Also, you might decide to make a house rule based on the following sentence on YS207:

"If you’re trying to put
yourself Deep in Concentration so you can
pick a lock, an opponent might “defend” against
that by rolling Guns to send some hot lead your
way, keeping you distracted."

That is to say, you might allow characters to 'defend' against an attempt to maneuver out of a zone.  I'd be careful with this, though, as it might end up being too powerful.

2) Do you mean 'create weapons for his hands' or 'create weapons out of his hands'.  The first one would be Conjuration (YS274), the second Biomancy (YS284).  You could also wreathe your hands in flames (Fire) or similar stuff.  Off-hand, I think you'd use the normal attack mechanics, but maybe allocate a few shifts to duration, so that you could use the same attack several times without recasting (and use Fists for the targeting rolls after the initial cast).

Offline epios

  • Lurker
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: A Couple of Questions from a new GM
« Reply #3 on: October 20, 2010, 01:47:49 AM »
That makes sense on the AoO

On the magic user, he wants to be able to do something along the lines of the fire attack on the hands.  So just to be clear, he could spend the shifts and then divide them between effect and duration (as per the normal casting rules) then whenever he lands (or maybe successfully blocks?) with fists, it counts like a weapon of the same number of shifts as the effect?

Offline luminos

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1234
  • Um... Hello?
    • View Profile
Re: A Couple of Questions from a new GM
« Reply #4 on: October 20, 2010, 02:24:25 AM »
You can move out of a zone when its your turn.  Doing so gives a -1 penalty on your action for the turn.  No other penalties for movement exist unless there is a zone border, or a block against your character moving. 

Creating weapons for hands is a bit weird, and has been argued over more than once before in these forums.  The first problem is that doing so will require the use of thaumaturgy for biomancy.  That means that the spell needed will take too long to execute in the middle of a fast paced combat.  The second is that the complexity for such spells can be weird.  You can't use evocation for guidelines because evocation does not allow the effect you are going for. 

If the caster of the weapons-for-hands spell wants to use such weapons fairly frequently, I'd have him buy the claws power.  This is the same workaround you would use if you wanted to use magic to semi-permanently boost your speed or strength; you purchase the appropriate skill from the powers list. 
Lawful Chaotic

Offline Arcteryx

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 357
  • "I comb my hair with a hand grenade."
    • View Profile
Re: A Couple of Questions from a new GM
« Reply #5 on: October 20, 2010, 02:39:23 PM »
Just be mindful that claws as described as always visible... "Unless you have the ability to conceal
your nature or change your shape (whether through Flesh Mask, shapeshifting powers, or the application of a Glamour), your claws are always visible."

Its your call as GM how strict you want to be about this...

Personally my view is, if the wizard wants to do a persistent weapon attack on his hands... stick to high concept and use magic to pull it off (shifts for duration, blah blah blah). For me, anytime you dip into the supernatural power pool, it should line up with your high concept.

Offline babel2uk

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 214
    • View Profile
Re: A Couple of Questions from a new GM
« Reply #6 on: October 20, 2010, 02:55:27 PM »
The simplest thing to do might be to create it as an enchanted item (a ring or something) that has multiple uses. Not exactly what the player was looking for, but there's nothing to stop you tweaking it for flavour.

Offline Haru

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 5520
  • Mentally unstable like a fox.
    • View Profile
Re: A Couple of Questions from a new GM
« Reply #7 on: October 20, 2010, 05:34:48 PM »
My idea for a fire-hand-attack would be this:
Make a rote spell for him to set his hand on fire. That way, he will not have to roll discipline to control the spell and it succeeds every time he casts it. Now normally he would still have to make a discipline roll to hit, but then you can just roll fists for that and you are good to go. Might need a stunt to switch from attacking with discipline to fists, if it is the only way he uses his magic.

Remember though: Fire conjured with magic is still fire. Using a new spell every exchange would be no problem I think, because the fist attack would just be his way of delivering the fire magic to his opponent, and that is that. If he wants it to stay on his hand longer than that, he would suffer the damage of his fire spell every exchange.

You could argue, that he has been training for a long time and is now immune to his own fire, at least on his hands. For that I would give him an immunity to fire on his hands. I would set the cost of this immunity to [-1], because it is really restricted and easily bypassed by anything that is not fire hitting his hands. Think of it as magical oven mitts.
“Do you not know that a man is not dead while his name is still spoken?”
― Terry Pratchett, Going Postal

Offline Arcteryx

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 357
  • "I comb my hair with a hand grenade."
    • View Profile
Re: A Couple of Questions from a new GM
« Reply #8 on: October 20, 2010, 05:57:10 PM »
I like the rote spell approach. The being burned by the spell-conjured fire on your own hand ... not so much.  If it goes wild and escapes into the environment, that's one thing, but I'd say as a sticky / persistent attack on your hand, self-immolation would suck rubber duck.

Offline Haru

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 5520
  • Mentally unstable like a fox.
    • View Profile
Re: A Couple of Questions from a new GM
« Reply #9 on: October 20, 2010, 06:05:15 PM »
self-immolation would suck rubber duck.

Hence the immunity suggestion as a part of that ;)
“Do you not know that a man is not dead while his name is still spoken?”
― Terry Pratchett, Going Postal

Offline Drashna

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 245
    • View Profile
Re: A Couple of Questions from a new GM
« Reply #10 on: October 20, 2010, 06:11:56 PM »
Just be mindful that claws as described as always visible... "Unless you have the ability to conceal
your nature or change your shape
Would not "Human Guise" or "Human Form" work to conceal it?
[qoute='piotr1600']Sure true love will conquer all... You sponsored an instant vision of a tentacled Cthuluoid monstrosity following Elaine around, meeping piteously and making puppy dog eyes at her while she sighs loudly and gently kisses those tentacles...[/qoute]

Offline Ryan_Singer

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 146
    • View Profile
Re: A Couple of Questions from a new GM
« Reply #11 on: October 20, 2010, 06:13:57 PM »
Would not "Human Guise" or "Human Form" work to conceal it?

Ninja'd. I was going to say: Take Claws, take human guise, call it a result of a backstory ritual. Done.

Offline Becq

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1253
    • View Profile
Re: A Couple of Questions from a new GM
« Reply #12 on: October 20, 2010, 06:35:19 PM »
If he wants to use the ability a lot, then the Claws [-1] option is a good one.  Note that the claws power need not literally be claws, it could be used to represent hands wreathed in flames (in game terms, the damage is the same, but consequences inflicted would reflect burns rather than slashes).  Instead of using the Human Guise [-0], however, I'd use Human Form [+0].  The difference is that Guise conceals the power, whereas Form turns it off.  Having hands that burn all of the time might not be a Good Thing(tm).  Note that you do not get the [+1] refresh you'd normally get for Human Form, since it only applies to a single refresh power.

I don't have the book in front of me, but I think there was a 'poisoned' option for claws, which might allow for a lingering 'burning' effect.

As to the other options:

* I don't think the single-attack rote concept works for this.  Consider that it will cost a stress for each use; this means you won't get many uses per fight.

* For the biomancy option (suitable for spelled claws but not hand-fire), here is my take: http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,20673.msg915259.html#msg915259

* For the duration attack I'd proposed earlier, I don't think there are any specific rules that discuss this, so it would be an adaptation/house rule.  But I *think* it's reasonable, and its in line with the rules for ongoing magic defenses.  And yes, you'd split shifts between strength and duration, so a 5-shift evocation which would normally be a single w:5 attack could instead be cast as a three-exchange w:3 attack.

One last option would be to use a maneuver.  This would be (I think -- no book in front of me) a 4-shift evocation that places the aspect "Hands wreathed in magical flame" on you.  You could then tag that aspect for attacks (first tag is free!) or even for intimidation.

Offline Arcteryx

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 357
  • "I comb my hair with a hand grenade."
    • View Profile
Re: A Couple of Questions from a new GM
« Reply #13 on: October 20, 2010, 06:38:12 PM »
Hence the immunity suggestion as a part of that ;)

I probably didn't make myself clear. I'd just make him automatically immune to it because he's the caster. Once it escapes into the environment though... all bets are off.

Offline Arcteryx

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 357
  • "I comb my hair with a hand grenade."
    • View Profile
Re: A Couple of Questions from a new GM
« Reply #14 on: October 20, 2010, 06:50:17 PM »
Ninja'd. I was going to say: Take Claws, take human guise, call it a result of a backstory ritual. Done.

Meh, the aesthetics of claws + human guise + human form doesn't appeal to me. Feels like a gimmicky run-around. You might as well make it a custom power and call it "Behold! My Fiery Mittens Of Doom [-1]". AND it saves a line on your character sheet.