Need some help reworking social conflicts.

[UmbraLux]

* Aspects (and consequences ARE aspects) can only be tagged, invoked, or compelled by a character who is aware of that aspect.  That's just part of the default rules of the game.

Do you have a reference for this?  Aspects are useable by the player, whether or not the character knows about them.  Fate points are a meta-game resource.  The book's statement is "...any aspect that your character is aware of or has access to can potentially be invoked."

[EdgeOfDreams]

Do you have a reference for this?  Aspects are useable by the player, whether or not the character knows about them.  Fate points are a meta-game resource.  The book's statement is "...any aspect that your character is aware of or has access to can potentially be invoked."

Your Story, Page 20:

Scenes, other characters, locations, and other things of dramatic importance can have aspects. Sometimes they’re obvious, and sometimes they’re less so. You can spend a fate point to invoke an aspect which is not on your own character sheet, if you know what the aspect is. This is covered in greater detail in Aspects on page 105.

As a rule of thumb, invoking someone or something else’s aspects requires a little more justification than invoking one of your own aspects. For scene aspects, it should be some way to really bring in the visual image or the dramatic theme that the aspect suggests. For aspects on opponents, you need to know about the aspect in the frst place, and then play to it.

Edit: Also, on page 105:

Your character also needs to have reasonable access to the aspect in question. With scene aspects, this is easy—your character usually just needs to be present in the scene to interact with the aspect. There are several ways you can gain access to an aspect that is on another character or scene:

  Š Discover it via assessment (page 115)
  Š Create it with a declaration (page 116)
  Š Establish it with a maneuver (page 207)
  Š Infict a consequence (page 203)

If your character can interact directly with the owner of the aspect in an appropriate manner and has reasonable access to the aspect in question, you may use that aspect in a number of different ways.

[UmbraLux]

Your Story, Page 20:

The entire Fate Points section from p19-20 appears to be talking about player capabilities, not character abilities.  Note the first paragraph of the section on YS19 in particular:  "Fate points are central...they are basically a measure of how much power you have to influence the story in favor of your character." And the beginning of the second paragraph: "Each player begins the first session of the game with a number of fate points..."

Rereading the text you quoted with the section's context in mind, it seems apparent the player needs to know about aspects in order to use them, not the character.

Edit: Also, on page 105:

Yes, as you quoted, the character needs "reasonable access" to the aspect...which is different from knowledge.  Also part of your quote, simple presence in a scene is usually enough to use scene aspects.  Presence, not knowledge.

Flip back to YS98 and the beginning of that section on aspects, it states: "When you can apply an aspect to the situation your character is in, is can be used to give you a bonus."  Again, it's the player applying the aspect and not the character.

Closing the book and going purely from a 'what makes sense' point of view, I'll still allow players to invoke things their character may not know about.  Consider a situation where the characters are entering a fight with someone who already has "Broken Ribs" - I think that injury is potentially relevant whether or not the characters know it.  It would certainly affect most fighters.  The same applies with less obvious scene aspects or even city aspects, and why have city aspects if you'll never use them?

[Aminar]

I understand your point of view though I don't quite agree completely.  To a point, social and mental consequences should affect how well you fight.  At best they're a distraction from combat and, at worst, they're motivations against self preservation. 

However, I don't really think they should heal at the same rate.  This alone makes me lean towards multiple tracks at times.

That said, I'll probably leave it as one consequence track purely for simplicity and game play.  No need to add more pieces to track.

See, a traditional social consequence from a conversation would affect combat, but consequences on a grander social scale really don't.  Things like "Blacklisted by the Mob" and the like.  That said, most of the traditional social consequences strike me more as mental consequences, seeing as they will almost always be an emotional reaction, which is a mental thing.  Look at incite emotion.  It does mental stress for a reason.

[UmbraLux]

See, a traditional social consequence from a conversation would affect combat, but consequences on a grander social scale really don't.  Things like "Blacklisted by the Mob" and the like.  That said, most of the traditional social consequences strike me more as mental consequences, seeing as they will almost always be an emotional reaction, which is a mental thing.  Look at incite emotion.  It does mental stress for a reason.

I suspect I'd worry if I thought the Mob had put a hit out on me.    But I do understand your point and, as I mentioned, there are other potential reason for separate consequence lists.  However, there's also the question of simply keeping game play simple.  I already find it difficult to incorporate all aspects players have, adding another list to track would simply make it more difficult. 

Edit:  Please note, these are personal reasons & conclusions.  Don't let me stop you or anyone from using multiple lists if that's what you prefer!

[Sanctaphrax]

I still don't see the problem. If you have the severe consequence BLACKLISTED BY THE MOB, how does that affect you in combat?

So far as I can tell, it doesn't. Sure, you can't take a severe physical consequence, but your character couldn't do that anyway. Taking consequences is a player action.

[EdgeOfDreams]

I still don't see the problem. If you have the severe consequence BLACKLISTED BY THE MOB, how does that affect you in combat?

So far as I can tell, it doesn't. Sure, you can't take a severe physical consequence, but your character couldn't do that anyway. Taking consequences is a player action.

This is exactly what I mean when I say that Dresden Files puts all three types of consequence in one track for the sake of narrative.

What I think some people are afraid of is that you're gonna go into a physical combat with some monster who then tags/invokes your "Blacklisted by the Mob" consequence to improve his attack against you.  Of course, I would never let that happen, as the monster probably doesn't know about the consequence and it's a bit of a stretch to justify that invoke anyway.

As for "Now you can't take a physical severe consequence" complaint, I say "Yes, exactly, that is the price you pay for having failed in social combat."  Social consequences, at least in my mind, should have, well, consequences, they should cost you something.

Still, I understand why some people have a different view on this issue.  As always, "what works for you and your table" reigns supreme.

[UmbraLux]

I still don't see the problem.

Problem?  Not exactly sure what you're referencing.

If you have the severe consequence BLACKLISTED BY THE MOB, how does that affect you in combat?

Depends entirely on the situation.  In most it probably won't have an effect.  But, if you're chased into a Mob controlled area of town, it may...

If you're looking for game effects, I'd probably compel it to limit choices of action - if it came up.  "Do you really want to run into that Italian restaurant?"

[Aminar]

As I read through this I suppose what it comes down to is that I see little difference between mental and social attacks.  Both are aimed at disrupting the psyche(Whether through lying, flattering, sweet talking, bribery, or anything else.  They all have the same target, just different approaches.)  Thus I would rather have the social conflicts be something different, and I really like the way the other RPG works.(What are the rules for discussing other RPGS here?  Mentioning the system would possibly help a ton.)

[polkaneverdies]

Fire away with the name. I have seen many people reference other games here and it has never seemed to be an issue.

[Sanctaphrax]

Why not just make the social track into a reputation track? Then make mental attacks possible with normal social skills and use the mental track for persuasion/intimidation/seduction/etc.

PS: You can discuss other games here if they relate to DFRPG. We do it all the time.

[UmbraLux]

What Sancta said...both statements actually.  I've considered (but have not yet tried) redefining social and / or mental attacks.

As for other games, I believe the rule is 'no copy written material or other illegal use of IP'.  Names are fine.

[Aminar]

Alright.  The Mistborn RPG(based on Sanderson's novels) is frickin Great.  It works off a very similar system in a lot of ways.  There are consequences that work akin to aspects, but they are not cumulative and instead of being a complete health gauge like in Dresden they happen when a hit of enough severity happens.  The system has three health bars-Physical Health, Reputation, and Willpower.  Reputation comes from Charm and a social Status stat called influence.  It just feels like a more complete system for a group based game.  I feel like the Dresden RPG was built for solo-gameplay in a lot of ways.  Social conflicts get really weird really fast when you have enough enemies to match the party and its never felt comfortable, which is why I avoid them as DFRPG RAW works them, but the system as seen in Mistborn feels right(to my intuition at least).

Which BTW is almost exactly what Sancta said.  In the end I'll talk it through with my players, but in an odd turn I'd bet I'm the only person upset by the lack of social conflicts.  My sessions default to a pretty easy formula.
Big sign something is wrong.(Usually a small fight, a threatening note stuck to the door, or the like.  Last time it was Nicodemus walking into the church and asking the Priest(one of my PC's) for help to atone for his sins.)
Party splits up to contact the people in town that can help them find out whats going on.
Somebody tries to prevent them from figuring things out.
They track the bad guy down and stop him, or fail to do so.(hence them being at the crucifixion next session.)

[Sanctaphrax]

There are consequences that work akin to aspects, but they are not cumulative and instead of being a complete health gauge like in Dresden they happen when a hit of enough severity happens.

Could you explain further? I'm intrigued.

[Aminar]

Could you explain further? I'm intrigued.

If you take 1/4 of your current health in one hit you gain a complication that your opponents can tag for an extra dice.
There's a step up for a hit that does 1/2 you current health and then 1 more step up from there.