A bit frustrated

[BumblingBear]

Combat would be maddening if a GM played every mook, tentacle monster, and wild bear as if it had a full Consequence track.

The consequence track is there to increase the dramatic tension of a given challenge. They are also a hit point sink, true, and should be taken into account when adjudicating attempts to summon or take out high-plot NPCs, but not everything should get them - the RAW recommends that mooks should generally take no Consequences, or at most Mild Consequences.

That said, yes, 10-Refresh monsters should be more than mooks unless one has a high-Refresh game.

The first sounds more like when an NPC is willing to Concede. The latter definitely sounds like a moment of dramatic tension outside of a normal combat, and/or making the players work harder to avoid a potentially more problematic complication if they let the monster escape and warn the others.

Yup.

And I would argue that regardless of the power level the game is set at, a 10 refresh NPC is not a mook.  Somebody or something with 10 refresh can usually figure out a way to hurt you.  If they can't, you're a plot device.

[Belial666]

Or you are at least 20 refresh. That does not make you all-powerful by any means but it does make you capable of blasting apart a 10-refresh PC in a single blow.

[BumblingBear]

Or you are at least 20 refresh. That does not make you all-powerful by any means but it does make you capable of blasting apart a 10-refresh PC in a single blow.

Meh.  I will concede your point.

[noclue]

Or they're a plot device without much importance to the ongoing story. If they're important, if they matter, then the GM can have them take consequences. If they're a mook, no consequences needed regardless of refresh. If it's troubling that a wizard can burn up a whole room full of high refresh RCVs with one spell, I guess negotiate for a different taken out condition that better suits your sensibilities. I don't see that the narrative is in any danger from a few mooks going poof, while thematically important opposition is more difficult. But, the nice thing is it's up to the GM and the players if the NPCs take consequences. It's customizable.

@Taran, as a player, I might want to concede and negotiate a take out where I'm captured, or knocked unconscious or the baddie escapes from my grasp. That has nothing to do with how determined I see my character as being, and much more to do with what shape I want to see in the scene and the world that is being created. If I want the scene to be one in which my Character's determination and will to succeed is rewarded, I can push through with consequences. If I want a scene where my character's determination and will to succeed is thwarted, I can concede. Maybe even work in a self-compel in there for a FP, depending on if I've earned any for the scene

I found it didn't work well when the same party was attacked by a dozen goblin-type fairies and it just became an issue of number crunching (2 left on player 1, 0 on player 2 etc.).  

That's just a poorly designed encounter. If they were taking consequences it would just have been longer.

[sinker]

Also, there's another advanced trick you can do with offensive blocks in some situations. Say you conjure a magical force to immobilize an enemy with Block 7 vs athletics, 1 more shift put to duration. The first exchange he is immobilized and takes damage from your group. The second exchange you want to finish him off instead of keeping him immobilized so you roll your Control to convert the energy of the block into an attack; suddenly your Bigby's Crushing Hand spell stops merely holding and crushes down, becoming a Weapon 7 attack without you paying extra mental energy for the spell.

As long as there's duration remaining and it would make sense to convert the energy of the spell into a new use, you can reuse any remaining Power without casting a new spell.

Technically the spell must also not have been used for it's original purpose, so if the enemy has a turn and is prevented from acting by the block then you couldn't convert the spell into an attack.

I think you're all arguing various shades of the same concept. I think we can all agree with the idea that something has access to consequences if it's relevant to the narrative, however it's possible that we have different interpretations of what should be important.

[Belial666]

Technically the spell must also not have been used for it's original purpose in that exchange

Fixed it for you.

[sinker]

Ahh, you're right I made a mistake. Thanks for bringing it to my attention in such a polite manner. Though most casters are not high on the initiative order and as such would only be able to use this kind of thing against slower enemies.

[BumblingBear]

Ahh, you're right I made a mistake. Thanks for bringing it to my attention in such a polite manner. Though most casters are not high on the initiative order and as such would only be able to use this kind of thing against slower enemies.

I had a player correct me on this same point during our last game.

[Taran]

Hey,

I'm going to refocus the thread a bit. I'll start by saying I'm less frustrated about spellcasting thanks to everyone's help.  Secondly, I got an opportunity to try some out in our game tonight.  Unfortunately, it lead to some debate...

My current character just took soul-fire, and due to some good role-playing and poor tactics, we found ourselves in a bit of a tussle with the police...OOPS!

My character, who is an ex-cop doesn't want to fight and wants everyone to stop shooting!

Spell:
Everyone, Calm the f- down!
power 9 (I tagged a few aspects and took some consequence).  7 for effect, 2 to hit the whole zone

Block against all Hostile(offfensive) actions
Defend using Discipline.

Effect:  If you want to take a hostile action against another person, you must succeed a discipline role vs the spell as a suplemental action.

I think I designed the spell correctly.  Comments?

A debate was sparked post-game:  Does this spell break the 4th Law???  It seems to suit the theme of soulfire..being all peaceful and such

[WillH]

A debate was sparked post-game:  Does this spell break the 4th Law???  It seems to suit the theme of soulfire..being all peaceful and such

I would say that most certainly both breaks the 4th Law and is in the spirit of soulfire. And awesome

ETA OK there is the whole if you use nonmortal magic from a sponsor does it break the laws debate, so not certainly.

[Taran]

I would say that most certainly both breaks the 4th Law and is in the spirit of soulfire. And awesome

ETA OK there is the whole if you use nonmortal magic from a sponsor does it break the laws debate, so not certainly.

ETA?

It seems, then, you can't use magic for social combat...except maybe to buff yourself...give yourself a silver tongue.  Maybe you can't force someone not to lie (a block vs deceit), but you could possibly buff your empathy/rapport by defending against deceit.
Anyways...we we're all a bit sad that it might break the laws.  Technically, you're not causing mental stress or consequences...just blocking...I mean, no-one has a problem doing mental stress to cause a consequence that you compel NPC to "fall asleep". ...

As far as  sponsored magic and the Laws go, one of the PC's is a warden...and a devout Catholic 

[WillH]

ETA=Edit to add. If someone else responds while a post is being added to it lets people know why things are out of order.

As far as the 4th law goes, ask to questions. Was magic used on another person's mind? Did that magic prevent them from acting as they wished to? If the answer to both is yes, it's a law violation.

As far as  sponsored magic and the Laws go, one of the PC's is a warden...and a devout Catholic 

That just makes the situation even more awesome. My call as GM here would be as far as the universe is concerned it is not a violation (no stunt required), but as far as the White Council concerned it is. This will highlight the warden's internal conflict even more than just a full law violation to the universe and council. Enjoy the fate. Things are about to get interesting.

[BumblingBear]

Hey,

I'm going to refocus the thread a bit. I'll start by saying I'm less frustrated about spellcasting thanks to everyone's help.  Secondly, I got an opportunity to try some out in our game tonight.  Unfortunately, it lead to some debate...

My current character just took soul-fire, and due to some good role-playing and poor tactics, we found ourselves in a bit of a tussle with the police...OOPS!

My character, who is an ex-cop doesn't want to fight and wants everyone to stop shooting!

Spell:
Everyone, Calm the f- down!
power 9 (I tagged a few aspects and took some consequence).  7 for effect, 2 to hit the whole zone

Block against all Hostile(offfensive) actions
Defend using Discipline.

Effect:  If you want to take a hostile action against another person, you must succeed a discipline role vs the spell as a suplemental action.

I think I designed the spell correctly.  Comments?

A debate was sparked post-game:  Does this spell break the 4th Law???  It seems to suit the theme of soulfire..being all peaceful and such

I would call shenanigans on a spell like that.

I think a more appropriate way to model it would have been to make an area spell maneuver with soulfire like, "Receptive"

Then make an area social attack using either intimidation or conviction to calm the fuck down, and tag your "receptive" aspect on every person in the zone you laid it on.

::shrug::

[toturi]

My call as GM here would be as far as the universe is concerned it is not a violation (no stunt required), but as far as the White Council concerned it is. This will highlight the warden's internal conflict even more than just a full law violation to the universe and council. Enjoy the fate. Things are about to get interesting.

I agree partially. As far as the universe is concerned, it is not breaking the Law. But with respects to the White Council, as the Warden on the scene, he gets to decide. If Stacy (or any other more senior Warden) was there, given sufficient "rules lawyering" like what Dresden did with the zombie dino, she might let it pass.

[Belial666]

First of all, Soulfire is not mortal magic so it is technically not subject to the Laws. Secondly, Soulfire can do ANY thaumaturgy at the speed and methods of Evocation. So instead of the spell being Evocation - and thus having to be block, maneuver, attack or dispel - it can be Thaumaturgy and thus any type of effect you want. This gives us a few more options;


1) A 7-shift Ward vs agressive actions applied to the entire Zone. Any hostile actions have to contend with a block of 7 that does not break even if momentarily overcome and reflects attacks back on the attacker if the attacks don't overcome it. I think attackers are going to get the idea pretty fast.

2) A 7-shift zonewide veil vs agressive actions. Yes, it is a neuromancy spell. No, it does not affect the mind. It affects the sensory organs directly each time someone tries to attack, applying an illusion of sensory deprivation for all senses (including balance). You can't attack what you can't see, hear, smell or otherwise locate.

3) A 7-shift zonewide biomancy block vs agressive actions. It works by making you utterly calm and non-agressive, similarly to being chemically sedated only more benign and without the side-effects.

4) A 4-shift conjuration for mass, 1 shift conjuration for complexity, 4 shifts to apply the aspect "transparent". What does this do? It conjures a 3-ft-thick steel bubble around every person in the zone that happens to be transparent. Go ahead; try to shoot through 3 ft of steel. You can still talk and make funny faces through it though.

5) 7 shift zonewide block vs ignition. Sorry, firearms and explosives no longer work anymore. Feel free to use them as short clubs now.