Aspect/declarations and tags on items question

[babel2uk]

Alright, then a person with a gun should not get bonuses to his Weapon due to his having a gun without paying for it with Refresh or invoking an Aspect.

Sorry toturi, but that seems to be a deliberately obtuse reading of my post. I was talking about above and beyond the base damage score for the weapon (which I think was fairly damned obvious taking into consideration the context of the original question).  

[Papa Gruff]

Thanks for the replies, I'm thinking of going with a combination of the suggestions, the act of using the scope is maneuver with two free tags (roughly making this a declaration and maneuver in one, but only allowing one fate point to be spent later) but of course using it as a negative once a scope has become more a problem then a help (once the monsters get up in your face). Other gear might do the same.

Can you explain this a bit further? I suppose I'm not understanding it right. As I understand it this is not following any rules that I know of. Are you houseruleing this like that? Would like to understand... 

[Becq]

Can you explain this a bit further? I suppose I'm not understanding it right. As I understand it this is not following any rules that I know of. Are you houseruleing this like that? Would like to understand... 

Agreed.  Just allow the scope to be used as a justification to perform a maneuver to place the aspect "In my sights!" on a target, and maybe a second maneuver "Careful aim".  Then, if someone tried to sneak up behind them, they could tag that same "Careful aim" to make their stealth roll against the sniper more likely to succeed.  Which amounts to almost the same thing, really, but sticks with the spirit of the rules as I understand them.

[noclue]

Why so much work to craft scope benefits in the game? Is the scope a feature of the character's High Concept?

I'd just say "You have an awesome scope. That means that when you say 'I'm gonna snipe the guy from the roof" I don't get to say 'Sorry, buddy. You need a scope for that."

[toturi]

Sorry toturi, but that seems to be a deliberately obtuse reading of my post. I was talking about above and beyond the base damage score for the weapon (which I think was fairly damned obvious taking into consideration the context of the original question).  

No, I do not think so.

What makes it alright that you can get higher bonuses (Weapon values for example) due to certain equipment and not get higher bonuses due to other equipment?

If you have a handgun and load it with hollowpoints to do more damage(for example), why should you have to invoke the hollowpoints every time you fire the gun? How does a scope aid in hitting a distant target when you spent a Fate point and how does it suddenly not when you don't?

[babel2uk]

No, I do not think so.

What makes it alright that you can get higher bonuses (Weapon values for example) due to certain equipment and not get higher bonuses due to other equipment?

If you have a handgun and load it with hollowpoints to do more damage(for example), why should you have to invoke the hollowpoints every time you fire the gun? How does a scope aid in hitting a distant target when you spent a Fate point and how does it suddenly not when you don't?

*sigh* If you're really that bothered about it, house rule it - up the base damage of the weapon by one level or something similar and stop worrying about the fine details. The weapons damage ratings are hazy and not really meant to model reality, I assume because the game writers didn't really want to have people bogging down the story obsessing the finer details of one hand gun over another, and one type of ammunition over another.

Given that you don't actually hit an opponent until you've inflicted a consequence, you could probably just word the consequence appropriately to the type of ammunition used. Like I said, the weapons base damage are hazy and meant to represent an average weapon of that type. I don't see the need to complicate the system by bringing in extra rules to cover variations on each weapon.

My view is that what you're trying to put in there is a situational modifier, which in Fate is replaced by aspects. By all means do what you like, you'll never play in one of my games I'll never play in one of yours, so does it really matter? But if you're after all those juicy modifiers due purely to bits of equipment then you're probably actually wanting a different system. Fate's designed as a very basic system that puts story over intricate combat mechanics that account for every eventuality and piece of equipment. Maybe you'd be better off with something with weapons tables, accuracy modifiers and recoil penalties.

To answer how a scope aids your shot when you use a fate point and doesn't when you're not - the simple justification is that if you don't invoke the scope aspect, you're either not using it effectively, or not using it at all. Given that it's laughably simple to justify use of the sight giving you a bonus by simply using maneuvers to place the aspect 'IN MY SIGHTS' on a target - which gives you a free tag on your first shot every time you do so, I still don't see the need for adding in any extra bonuses.

[Papa Gruff]

Very nicely put babel2uk.

[Ranma1558]

My reasoning behind the two free tags is this, you are making a declaration (I have a scope, am shooting at range, the scope helps, free tag) which in my game you get 1 per exchange anyways, you already paid resources to get it so it becomes a "free" declaration, you then put a maneuver down (careful aiming, ect) there is your second tag. However, one of the two is always going to be fragile (house ruling it here) so you only have 1 more permanent aspect to pay fate points on so this doesn't over power buying equipment.

[Papa Gruff]

My reasoning behind the two free tags is this, you are making a declaration (I have a scope, am shooting at range, the scope helps, free tag) which in my game you get 1 per exchange anyways, you already paid resources to get it so it becomes a "free" declaration, you then put a maneuver down (careful aiming, ect) there is your second tag. However, one of the two is always going to be fragile (house ruling it here) so you only have 1 more permanent aspect to pay fate points on so this doesn't over power buying equipment.

Ok. I understand now. This is technically valid.

At least in my game the scope declaration ("Hey GM I have a scope!") you described would be a fairly difficult Recourses declaration because it isn't interesting or funny, will not have interesting consequences if it's acted upon and generally doesn't propose a interesting course of action. It is simply a declaration to give you even more of an edge. So that would be a Recourses Declaration with a difficulty of Fantastic +6. Thats hard! Generally recourses skills tend not be that high. That said I'd be totally ok with it if it went through.

At least in my game I'd have a little problem with my player declaring he has a scope every time he tries to shoot someone over a distance. I probably wouldn't allow it more then once, saying: "Yeah we know already that your PC has a scope. Remember? He shot that BCV from over a mile away last session...".

What I want to say with this is, that IMO declarations aren't primarily designed to give the player a greater edge over the opposition, but to enable the players in changing the setting of the scene in a way that can lead to cool stuff. It is more a tool for player driven story telling then for player driven power boosting. But hey ... if it works for you, who are we to complain ...

The validity of the maneuver is out of question.

[Ranma1558]

As it stands the character knew he shouldn't be going toe to toe with a group of ghouls, he is playing a were-seagull hobo (just go with me on this). With little money he spent a few scenes begging, borrowing, and stealing every dime he could to have a resource roll high enough to afford the scope (maneuver maneuver maneuver). I'm likely going to let him have the scope if he can reasonably have it (he often files with his rifle broken up in a bag, but, before the scope, we declared it was "just" light enough to carry, the scope means two trips in seagull form).

[Papa Gruff]

As it stands the character knew he shouldn't be going toe to toe with a group of ghouls, he is playing a were-seagull hobo (just go with me on this). With little money he spent a few scenes begging, borrowing, and stealing every dime he could to have a resource roll high enough to afford the scope (maneuver maneuver maneuver). I'm likely going to let him have the scope if he can reasonably have it (he often files with his rifle broken up in a bag, but, before the scope, we declared it was "just" light enough to carry, the scope means two trips in seagull form).

Don't get me wrong. I'm with you all the way and I dig the seagull hobo. All I wanted to state is, that, in my opinion, declarations aren't (solely) supposed to give the players an extra edge. If the player makes the resources roll he simply has it, that's not the problem. The problem is getting two free tags on the shooting action all the time through the same declaration. As a GM I'd probably not even handle the availability of the scope as worthy of an extra aspect. I'd simply say: "Yeah, you have got your trusty scope with you." Then, when the PC preps his gun for action, that can be an extra maneuver that sets MY RIFLE IS PREPED or something. I simply wouldn't handle it through declaration. But if you decide to do that ... so what.

It's a technicality really. In most cases a sniper lies in ambush. Sometimes for hours. More then enough time to set up multiple taggable aspects on the shooter, the scene and the target. After all that is what makes ambushes so powerful.

[Ranma1558]

Oh no no no, he doesn't always get the two free tags on every shot, the declaration comes once AND ONLY ONCE per scene, after which he needs the fate point, and the maneuver that added the second tag is fragile so two aspects aren't dropped at the same time.

[noclue]

If you have a handgun and load it with hollowpoints to do more damage(for example), why should you have to invoke the hollowpoints every time you fire the gun? How does a scope aid in hitting a distant target when you spent a Fate point and how does it suddenly not when you don't?

The scope always aids the character in hitting the distant target. The question is does the player get to add a modifier to their die roll. If the player wants a +2 from an aspect, he needs to spend a FATE point. How you justify a miss in the fiction is up to you. Maybe a gust of wind blows his bullet off course, or his target sneezes and jerks out of his sites, or something passes in front of the target, or the sun pops out of the clouds at just the right time to ruin his shot, or he just plain missed that one. The roll is not modeling the percentage chance of the character hitting his target. It's modeling whether or not this is a story in which the player gets to have his character hit the target.

Invoking a hollowpoint bullet aspect blows. So, I'd either say it adds a +1 to the weapon or it's just nifty color and does nothing mechanically.

[Ranma1558]

You might be able to say hollowpoints satisfy the "massive damage" catch.

[craggle]

Wouldn't a more appropriate mechanic for a scope be to increase the range rather than increase the damage?  Or reduce the penalty incurred at long ranges (although I've got a sneaking suspicion I may be bringing in some Strands of Fate rules that don't exist in Dresden...)