Noob Questions

[computerking]

Can you ward the "Glass ceiling?" Or one's privacy? How about theological boundaries?

Hmmm, a mental Ward, that bounces magical attempts to get at your private thoughts back at the caster... That'll surprise a Third Law Breaker!

[computerking]

Time for another one... How much would a custom power based off of True Shapeshifting (But limited to Humanoids Only) be worth in Refresh?

[UmbraLux]

Time for another one... How much would a custom power based off of True Shapeshifting (But limited to Humanoids Only) be worth in Refresh?

Some questions:

• Can they copy other individuals' features?  In other words, can they look like a specific person at will?
• How much of the phenotype is under conscious control?  Only gross features?  Or all minor details?
• Is it limited to human variations only?  Or can they take any shape with two arms, two legs, and a head?
• How much size variation can they do?  Adult human range only?  (Even that is fairly large.)

[Sanctaphrax]

3 or 4 refresh. You still have unlimited skill shuffling and amazing disguise skills. That's pretty potent.

[computerking]

3 or 4 refresh. You still have unlimited skill shuffling and amazing disguise skills. That's pretty potent.

Good point.

[computerking]

I've seen a little bit of the "argument" regarding a stunt allowing Weapons skill to be used to defend against incoming magical attacks (I believe the stunt "Footwork" came from this discussion).

I was wondering if it would be more akin to a Power to be able to actually "Parry everything", when it comes to a defense against magic. The concept I'm considering is an Emissary of Ares who can literally ground out/cut through/parry incoming magic. What would such a power look like? Or should I look at it like a reskinned Footwork?

[computerking]

Hmm, Reading the entirety of Footwork, it seems to work well as what I'm thinking of, with a narrative description change to reflect my concept... I guess I'm answering my own question now.

[Sanctaphrax]

Heh.

There's actually a stunt on the master list called Parry Everything that does exactly that.

But people think it's unrealistic, so it's being renamed and reflavoured into Footwork.

[The Mighty Buzzard]

The concept I'm considering is an Emissary of Ares who can literally ground out/cut through/parry incoming magic. What would such a power look like? Or should I look at it like a reskinned Footwork?

Definitely a power rather than a stunt, unless you want PMs being able to take it too.  Should probably be on an IoP too.  Just write a power for the sword that allows it to counterspell at the wielder's Weapons roll on either offensive or defensive rolls .  If it starts seeming too powerful in testing, charge a FP for each use or bump the refresh cost for the power up.

[Silverblaze]

I honestly don't care if hte stunt is too much for  "mortal stunt".  If the game is fun and it isn't OP in the grand scheme of the game at large... whatever, your ninja parries bullets... good for you.

This still isn't better than being able to have huge athletics bonuses due to speed powers.  Or create huge blocks due to magic.

Plenty of people do care...that's ok, I'm just not one of them.

[computerking]

I've seen some people say that casting a major spell on a willing target (Like transforming yourself) has a starting complexity of the target's (usually physical) stress track +1, and others (like that rick Neal guy) do the opposite, discounting the stress track, and making the starting complexity the sum total of the target's relevant consequences +1. Is there a source of any kind that suggests which is correct one way or another?

I've seen one statement that because the player has the option not to take consequences when facing stress, so a willing target would be taken out with a complexity of Stress track +1. But it's not official, it just seems to make sense. How much credence should I give to Rick Neal's blog on this and other topics? (I notice that not only is he listed as a "Bleeder" in the book, it references him as "See: AWESOME!" in the Index)

And yes, I know ultimately it's the Players' & GM's choice.

[Sanctaphrax]

I don't like either method. The idea of tougher characters being harder to give powers to sits badly with me.

There are other problems with those methods too, but that's the main one.

So I recommend you not connect take-out difficulty and transformation difficulty at all.

[sinker]

I don't like either method. The idea of tougher characters being harder to give powers to sits badly with me.

Of note this doesn't necessarily need to be the case. One can take someone out in ways other than physically. Of course your other option is lawbreaking, and that doesn't really resolve any other issues, but it's just a thought.

What if the target is already taken out? Could a social character talk someone into being magically transformed (provided of course that a mage was standing by for the actual transformation)?

[Sanctaphrax]

I don't just mean physically tougher. What bugs me is that this system turns high stats into a disadvantage. That's bad.

[sinker]

I do wonder what you mean by not connecting take-out difficulty and transformation difficulty. How would you suggest one come up with a complexity for a transformation ritual?