Rules for Pets and Allies

[Sanctaphrax]

That sort of nonsense is a big part of the reason I like treating companions as NPCs.

You can't tell your dog to place Aspects on you. You can tell it to help you attack or to distract your enemies, but the dog might not do that with maneuvers. It might use Blocks and stuff. Or maybe it just won't pass the tags to you.

I guess you could always just adjust the maneuver difficulty on the fly, but that's a bit of a kludge. I like the NPC solution better.

[Orladdin]

I would have thought the most obviously broken companion would be worth 1 refresh have pretty cruddy skills and do nothing but maneuver to give a bonus to his PC.

That sort of nonsense is a big part of the reason I like treating companions as NPCs.

You can't tell your dog to place Aspects on you. You can tell it to help you attack or to distract your enemies, but the dog might not do that with maneuvers. It might use Blocks and stuff. Or maybe it just won't pass the tags to you.

I guess you could always just adjust the maneuver difficulty on the fly, but that's a bit of a kludge. I like the NPC solution better.

Why shouldn't your dog maneuver to place "Flanked" on your enemy?  Isn't that what he's doing when he harries it from behind?

But even if it did endlessly maneuver, it wouldn't be a significant enough advantage to be broken (we hope).  That's the beauty of it.
By having its skill cap significantly lower than yours, it is less likely to succeed.

Consider:
If your skill cap is 4, your dog's is 2 (or 3, if we go with Sancta's route).  If he tries to maneuver, he's only going to be successful at getting a fragile 38.3% (or 61.7% with Sancta's) of the time^*.  Consider, then, that if he's 2 less than your skill cap, he has to then use that if he wants to attack at your same effectiveness.  If he gives it to you, he then has to try and less-effectively maneuver again.  Any of his skill uses suffer from this, and most are even lower than what you would, presumably, give him as his best skill (Athletics or Fists, most likely for a dog).

If we check out a higher-end game, where your companion's got a cap of 4, he's still only sticky maneuvering 61.7% of the time (and that's only if he's maneuvering against an adversary's weak defense skills or himself (if he can justify it).  If he's actually doing something dog-like, he's going to be likely going up against a maneuver difficulty of 5 or 6, giving him only a 38.3% or 18.5% chance to apply a fragile, again.

So, that's what happens if you try to use him as a maneuver-b*tch.  What else is he good for?  All sorts of story-related stuff!  "Go tell Mr. LeValley that Scott's trapped down the well!"  "Hey, boy, go grab me that flashlight."  "Damn, it's dark in here-- do you smell him, boy?"
Awesome.



_{* FUDGE Dice probabilities}

[Sanctaphrax]

Why shouldn't your dog maneuver to place "Flanked" on your enemy?  Isn't that what he's doing when he harries it from behind?

Maybe he's maneuvering. Maybe he's attacking. It could even be a block.

Letting the GM decide which ensures that nothing too broken will ensue.

As you say, it usually won't be necessary. But it's an extra safety valve, so to speak.

PS: I'd still like to see some uber-broken companions.

[Sanctaphrax]

So, where's everyone been for the past month?

It'd be nice to have this done with.

[Locnil]

...Can someone give me a quick summary of the rules you've made so far?

[Sanctaphrax]

The most recent summary.

Changes have been proposed since I wrote that, though.

[Taran]

I'd like to offer a suggestion, but I'm still just getting up to speed.  I HAVE read the whole thread.

@ Sanctaphrax  How do most people deal with extra actions when dealing with summoned creatures?  Does the GM run them as NPC's, do the Players controle them, do they get their own action in an exchange?

Couldn't minions be represented using existing rules, like summoning/binding?

It would cost -2 refresh (for the equivalent of Ritual).

Then you use the summoning rules (you have a good set because it already includes aspects/quirks: http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,24744.msg1084269.html#msg1084269  )

The exception is you choose a different set of skills instead of conviction and discipline.

So if you're getting your minions by hiring thugs or dealing with Crime Lords you'd use your Contacts as your conviction and your Resourses as your Discipline (or vise versa).

Maybe you're a woodsman, so your minions are more like war-dogs or pets.  In that case you'd use Survival and Empathy.

You must choose the skills and the theme of the minion when you choose the power.

Then you decide the complexity of the "spell", how long it will take, make declarations etc...  This all represents making your contacts, maybe writing up a contract with hired help, training your pets etc.

The amount of time they last, how devoted they are, and how powerful they are are determined by the "ritual"(the shifts of power).  The type of minions you can "summon" would be determined by the theme of power you take.  So you couldn't hire high-tech body guards with Survival, for instance.  Any fall-out/failed rolls could be handled by taking social damage/consequences instead of mental.  Although, depending on the type/theme of minion, it could be another stress track.

Any stunts related to the chosen skills would increase your chances.

I just suggest this because what is already presented seems, to me, overly complicated especially when there are already rules to cover something like this.

[Sanctaphrax]

I'm afraid that that won't work as a replacement for what we've done so far.

You see, the summoning guidelines are designed to provide a system for acquiring help. Not for having it.

The difference is important. If I have a pack of hunting hounds, then why should I have to attempt a ritual (which I might fail) to gain their help?

Also: your suggestion is, in play, actually more complicated than what we have here. It's simpler to read because it piggybacks off of previous work, but it requires time and thought to actually use whereas what we have here is effortless once the character sheets are done.

Plus, in order to be balanced against summoning such an ability would have to offer access to a broad variety of characters. Which prevents it from being useful for the guy with one faithful helper.

None of the above makes your suggestion unworkable as its own Power, but collectively those issues make it a bad replacement for what we have here.

That being said, I could see some merit in using the summoning shift calculation to determine the value of a Companion and the cost in Stunts that it should have. We'd lose the ability to account for optimization, but that might be worth it.

[Taran]

I just think that you could make any of your examples (jeeves, tweety bird, super robot) using the summoning rules.  Especially the ones you've posted. 

What I like is that it makes a "follower" more plausible.  Sure, I have faithful friends, but if I need help hauling a truck-load of dirt around my yard, I still have to take time, check with their scheduals, provide them beer and, in the end, I probably owe them a favour in return.  All this can be reflected using the summoning rules.

I think it also offers for a broad variety of players:  the guy with one faithful helper would pump more shifts into that one follower.  That's the point - you can customize as much as you want - but it takes time and energy.

Of course, I see your point:  it's hard to justify the "less than average child PC that owns a gollum".  Ideally, they would start with it, and always have it.

Anyways, I thought I'd throw it out there.

[Locnil]

Maybe allow players to perform such a "ritual" uing Character Creation, so they can begin having their allies at hand?

[Sanctaphrax]

What I like is that it makes a "follower" more plausible.  Sure, I have faithful friends, but if I need help hauling a truck-load of dirt around my yard, I still have to take time, check with their scheduals, provide them beer and, in the end, I probably owe them a favour in return.  All this can be reflected using the summoning rules.

For a guy who borrows favours from faithful friends, your idea could work.

But the companion rules aren't just for that kind of thing.

I think it also offers for a broad variety of players:  the guy with one faithful helper would pump more shifts into that one follower.  That's the point - you can customize as much as you want - but it takes time and energy.

No, unfortunately not.

If this is going to be analogous to summoning, then you can summon all kinds of things. The guy with one faithful helper can summon a gang too, which he really shouldn't be able to do.

And investing time and energy isn't really appropriate for most characters. You already have your companions, they're there and that's it. If I've got a bodyguard employed 24/7, he's there all the time. And a 24/7 bodyguard is one of the things that these rules are for.

I just think that you could make any of your examples (jeeves, tweety bird, super robot) using the summoning rules.

I should hope so.

You should be able to make any character using the summoning rules.

Maybe allow players to perform such a "ritual" uing Character Creation, so they can begin having their allies at hand?

I don't follow.

PS: This has been bugging me, so please forgive a bit of nitpickery. You can't do rituals with just Conviction and Discipline. Lore is necessary.

[Locnil]

I don't follow.

PS: This has been bugging me, so please forgive a bit of nitpickery. You can't do rituals with just Conviction and Discipline. Lore is necessary.

I meant, since the first session of a DFRPG game would be city and character creation, you could pull off such a "summoning ritual" during the first session in order to represent the companions you'll have with you with the game begins proper.

You would, of course, be limited to only one such ritual, giving you the choice of a loyal, powerful comapnion or a few weak, "punch-clock employees" ones.

Also, what did I say to give you the impression I thought Discipline & Conviction were the only skills needed for rituals? Or was that aimed at someone else?

[Taran]

Also, what did I say to give you the impression I thought Discipline & Conviction were the only skills needed for rituals? Or was that aimed at someone else?

That was aimed at me and was an over-sight on my part, mostly because I was just offering a suggestion and hadn't really hammered out any details.

There's a couple of points that you've misunderstood, but I won't push the subject since it's not the kind of solution you're looking for. 

[Sanctaphrax]

I meant, since the first session of a DFRPG game would be city and character creation, you could pull off such a "summoning ritual" during the first session in order to represent the companions you'll have with you with the game begins proper.

That sounds rather a lot like what we have here, except with a different method of calculating ally value.

There's a couple of points that you've misunderstood, but I won't push the subject since it's not the kind of solution you're looking for.

Go on.

Because honestly, I can't see how it's a solution at all. It just doesn't apply to the type of problem we're working with here.

[Sanctaphrax]

Bump.