+0 Catch for WCVs?

[toturi]

Sure his touch burned them a little, but even if he was a karate master, I'm not sure it would have made his punches more effective.

Given that the WCV has Recovery instead of Toughness, satisfying the Catch would not have make the WCV any more easier to damage. But the WCV would have been unable to easily recover from his blows.

[MyNinjaH8sU]

All I know is that if my players tried to make glasses that could find true love, the rest of the people at the table would slap them upside the head.

I'll say it again, because I want to know the other side of the argument, and because this was simply not addressed: How is the Wizard supposed to know how to look for something that they don't understand? That's like saying they are going to make a dowsing rod for moon-dust. Even if there's some of it around, they've never touched it or seen it, so how to they know what to key the spell to look for?

True Love (or hope or courage or what not) seem like they are the sorts of things you could look everywhere for, but won't know what you're really looking for until you have experienced it yourself. That is to say, you could find a couple that seems like they are in true love, have one of them punch a WCV, and have nothing happen, because they weren't actually experiencing True Love.

I mean, really, how in the hell can you test for that??

[BumblingBear]

All I know is that if my players tried to make glasses that could find true love, the rest of the people at the table would slap them upside the head.

I'll say it again, because I want to know the other side of the argument, and because this was simply not addressed: How is the Wizard supposed to know how to look for something that they don't understand? That's like saying they are going to make a dowsing rod for moon-dust. Even if there's some of it around, they've never touched it or seen it, so how to they know what to key the spell to look for?

True Love (or hope or courage or what not) seem like they are the sorts of things you could look everywhere for, but won't know what you're really looking for until you have experienced it yourself. That is to say, you could find a couple that seems like they are in true love, have one of them punch a WCV, and have nothing happen, because they weren't actually experiencing True Love.

I mean, really, how in the hell can you test for that??

Wizards can also summon a demon without ever having been a demon, seen a demon, experienced a demon, etc.

The point is that it's /magic/, and there are instructions for how to do popular magical things.

Since humanity has had a thing for true love since we crawled out of caves, it would be logical to assume there are documented spells and enchanting processes involving true love.

Making having known true love be a stipulation to find true love - for a wizard- who already ignores a lot of logical and physical laws with magic is silly.

Not only that, many people with true love don't even know they have it until it's gone.

[Wolfwood2]

Given that the WCV has Recovery instead of Toughness, satisfying the Catch would not have make the WCV any more easier to damage. But the WCV would have been unable to easily recover from his blows.

...or so you theorize. A GM could rule that being a kung-fu master who has found and had sex with his true love and is punching a white court vampire still is not sufficient to activate the catch and cause any increase in recovery time.  And given the Catch is +0, I might rule just that, allowing it only to be used as a Compel tool.

[MyNinjaH8sU]

Wizards can also summon a demon without ever having been a demon, seen a demon, experienced a demon, etc.

The point is that it's /magic/, and there are instructions for how to do popular magical things.

Since humanity has had a thing for true love since we crawled out of caves, it would be logical to assume there are documented spells and enchanting processes involving true love.

Making having known true love be a stipulation to find true love - for a wizard- who already ignores a lot of logical and physical laws with magic is silly.

Not only that, many people with true love don't even know they have it until it's gone.

See, I understand now. You and I are simply at a serious stylistic impasse. Where I'm coming from, your Demon example is just as far-fetched. Wizards are going to have to have some knowledge of how to do it to begin with. Now, that could be a dusty old tome, I'm fine with that. But they have to have the tome to begin with, and someone had to write it to begin with.

But really, this is all about style. You seem to want a more high-powered, magic-solves-everything kind of campaign. Which is totally-absolutely fine for you and your group.

My group, on the other hand, would see this as bull (as would I) and call foul on it. Really, assuming magic can solve everything, and always have the answer is just an easy win button to me (and, really, kind of against the spirit of the stories, if you are going to play in the Dresdenverse...).

[ways and means]

Thier also going to need the true name of true love.

[BumblingBear]

I'm of the opinion that if an (albeit powerful) wizard can drop a satellite on top of a town, making a pair of magical glasses that see the aura of love would be easy sauce.

Not only that, there's already a power in the RAW to see that which is unseen.  I don't think it'd be too terribly difficult to tap an NPC who has the power to see the aura of true love...

::shrug::

[MyNinjaH8sU]

Like I said, I'm happy to agree to disagree, so no snark necessary. 

I just see those two things as totally different animals. One is really nasty evocation (maybe straight killin thaumaturgy, but still basically just earth magic - as in gravity) whereas the other is like healing someone: you can't do it without understanding it. Even a relative novice can make something float, or be heavier, but that's because everyone has experienced gravity.

As to the use of an NPC... if one exists in your game, feel free to use them, provided you are friends with them and can convince them. Honestly, that sounds like it would be one of the most bitter, angry and uncooperative characters ever, if someone could even find them to begin with.

[ways and means]

Mcoy's probably the most powerful killer in the entire white council, besides perhaps the merlin and doing what he did with the sattelite though complex when considering velocity and aiming is more an act of power than finesse all it was, was a big pull spell whereas finding true love a conceptual concept would be divination and divination either needs a complete understanding of what you are looking for which is encapsulated in the true name  or a sample of the thing you are looking for.   

[MyNinjaH8sU]

Mcoy's probably the most powerful killer in the entire white council, besides perhaps the merlin and doing what he did with the sattelite though complex when considering velocity and aiming is more an act of power than finesse all it was, was a big pull spell whereas finding true love a conceptual concept would be divination and divination either needs a complete understanding of what you are looking for which is encapsulated in the true name  or a sample of the thing you are looking for.   

Thank you very much for saying that better than I could! 

[BumblingBear]

But really, this is all about style. You seem to want a more high-powered, magic-solves-everything kind of campaign. Which is totally-absolutely fine for you and your group.

My group, on the other hand, would see this as bull (as would I) and call foul on it. Really, assuming magic can solve everything, and always have the answer is just an easy win button to me (and, really, kind of against the spirit of the stories, if you are going to play in the Dresdenverse...).

I believe my snark was very toned down and I was just responding in kind after reading the above post.

Heck, I didn't even make any veiled insults in my reply.  

See, my opinion is that the DFRPG rewards creativity, and both I and my players would see a GM who would not allow a fairly basic ritual to find something as piddly as true love when Harry Dresden can track a single person to hell and gone to be both narrow minded and stagnant.

Magic is not the answer to everything, but neither is making something needlessly complicated or harder than it has to be.

Hell, for a fate point, a PC should be able to make a declaration that his/her current relationship is true love while dealing with a WCV.

[Tedronai]

Not only that, there's already a power in the RAW to see that which is unseen.  I don't think it'd be too terribly difficult to tap an NPC who has the power to see the aura of true love...

::shrug::

You really think that finding an minor talent with the ability to see/smell/hear/feel the presence of True Love is going to be even meaningfully feasible?
It's not like 4400, here, with a 'Supernatural Power Registry' mandated by law.  These people aren't listed in the telephone book, and they don't generally advertise what they are capable of, if they even truly grasp its significance.

[Wolfwood2]

My take on 'Finding True Love' is that it wouldn't do you any good.  However, regarding the question of "can magic do it", the general rule seems to be that magic can do anything that mundane action can do, while ignoring things that would make it generally impossible.

Can mundane action find True Love?  Sure, we have an example in the novels.  Thomas runs the salon where he comes in contact with a great number of people every day, and occasionally he runs across True Love.  So it's possible to do with with a White Court Vampire making what I would describe as a Contacts roll.  (That is, the WCV either already knows someone with True Love or can interact with a lot of people and can find one.)

So you could do a magical ritual to find true love, but one of the necessary components is the willing cooperation of a WCV.  No vampire and you can't make the ritual work.  The shifts of the ritual are equal to the Contacts roll.

That seems a fair and equitable way to handle it.

[MyNinjaH8sU]

I believe my snark was very toned down and I was just responding in kind after reading the above post.

Heck, I didn't even make any veiled insults in my reply.  

See, my opinion is that the DFRPG rewards creativity, and both I and my players would see a GM who would not allow a fairly basic ritual to find something as piddly as true love when Harry Dresden can track a single person to hell and gone to be both narrow minded and stagnant.

Magic is not the answer to everything, but neither is making something needlessly complicated or harder than it has to be.

Hell, for a fate point, a PC should be able to make a declaration that his/her current relationship is true love while dealing with a WCV.

That's cool. I didn't mean to rub you the wrong way, if I did. We are very obviously playing very different games, as evidenced by you referring to "something as piddly as true love," so I'll leave you to it at this point. Peace out.

[Sanctaphrax]

This argument is, not to put too fine a point on it, stupid.

Both sides seem to have started with their conclusion. What's more, people are trying to use their conclusions to prove those very same conclusions.

Alright, just needed to say that. Sorry if that was rude.