Does the DresdenVerse default to Ultimate Good or Ultimate Evil?

[Viatos]

Please reread that section.  What is says is that you don't have to use these templates - not that you don't have to use templates.

It's quite specific. A template is defined as something (a pre-packaged design) and you do not need to have it.

So all custom stunts are the RAW, all custom powers are the RAW - even though they aren't in the rules and your version of X will be different from my version of X? All the custom stunts and powers on this forum are in the RAW?

No, the concept of custom stunts, powers, and templates are RAW. Just like the rulebook doesn't list an Aspect of Dragon's Ex-Girlfriend, but you can have that Aspect. You're given license to write your own Aspects. Also, your own stunts, powers, and templates. That LICENSE is RAW, not any specific result of it. When a player says "I made this custom X, what do you think?" he's acting within the license of the RAW.

[Richard_Chilton]

It's quite specific. A template is defined as something (a pre-packaged design) and you do not need to have it.

A template is a character type.  As in
"While you and your GM can work together to devise new and strange character types for your own campaign if you wish,"

That clearly says that you can design new templates - not abandon the template system.  If the rule was "templates are optional" then it would be started at all the places where RAW says that they are not optional.  Or the wording would be something like "While you and your GM can disregard character types for your own campaign if you wish".

No, the concept of custom stunts, powers, and templates are RAW. Just like the rulebook doesn't list an Aspect of Dragon's Ex-Girlfriend, but you can have that Aspect. You're given license to write your own Aspects. Also, your own stunts, powers, and templates. That LICENSE is RAW, not any specific result of it. When a player says "I made this custom X, what do you think?" he's acting within the license of the RAW.

That opinion is not that same as

1) There is no distinction between "allowed by RAW" and "within RAW".

as you are clearly making a distinction between the two.

Which still leaves us with a power you cannot take without expanding on the RAW with a custom template.  A power that therefore must be intended in the RAW as NPC only.

Richard

[Richard_Chilton]

Back to the original topic, while looking through WoJs on freewill, I came across his concept of good.

Anything that allows and promotes freewill is good.  Interfering with freewill is bad.  Reducing freewill is evil.  Oh, and the point of freewill is that you live with the results of your actions.

So by that definition (and applying it only to the DV) a God that allows mankind freewill is good.  One that subtly battles those who interfere with freewill is good.  One that lets mankind wallow in the filth that he has chosen is also good, because if He undid our bad choices then our freewill wouldn't matter.

A bit like how in Grave Peril, when Lea showed up Micheal was all "I'll stand by your side and help you fight this evil creature", then was "Um, did you really make a deal with it? Because if you did then I'll have to sit back and let it drag you away.".

So yes, there is an Ultimate Good, but if someone with freewill invites the Outsiders in then He won't be rushing in to save us from that mistake.  Which is probably why only mortals can open those gates - if the Fae (who lack freewill) tried then the Big Guy could swing them closed an instant later.  Or not allow them open at all.

In a nutshell, the Ultimate Good exists but is based on Jim's custom definition of Ultimate Good.

Richard

[Viatos]

A template is a character type.  As in
"While you and your GM can work together to devise new and strange character types for your own campaign if you wish,"

No, a template is a "pre-packaged" character type. A new and strange character type is not a template, which is a term reserved for the "pre-packaged" ones. As has been pointed out, it's a useless argument anyway: "you don't need a template" and "you can make a custom template" are for this purpose statements of identical consequence. Since we know one to be factually true...

If the rule was "templates are optional" then it would be started at all the places where RAW says that they are not optional.  Or the wording would be something like "While you and your GM can disregard character types for your own campaign if you wish".

I dunno, I'd put a rule like that in the Templates chapter, which is where it is. Clearly there's a contradiction in the Character Creation section as well, which means that any decision on templates being required or not is a houserule.

Which still leaves us with a power you cannot take without expanding on the RAW with a custom template.  A power that therefore must be intended in the RAW as NPC only.

 No expansion of the RAW is necessary. Regardless of whether or not you need a template, you can still make a custom one.

[Viatos]

Anything that allows and promotes freewill is good.  Interfering with freewill is bad.  Reducing freewill is evil.  Oh, and the point of freewill is that you live with the results of your actions.

I disagree strongly with this sentiment and the concepts that flow from it. Free will does not enforce consequence, nor ensure happiness - freedom, to me, is a neutral quality, so the White God is a neutral entity, rather then a force for good or evil. I am also not sure that the White God is the be-all and end-all of power in DFRPG. I suspect that the Outsiders could take him out, and that the combined efforts of both Faerie Mothers would be a match for his own. Depending on how cosmic, exactly, dragons are, Ferrovax might have a shot. If not, then maybe the race of dragons entire.

[Richard_Chilton]

I disagree strongly with this sentiment and the concepts that flow from it.

Then take it with Jim Butcher.

Richard

[Richard_Chilton]

No, a template is a "pre-packaged" character type. A new and strange character type is not a template, which is a term reserved for the "pre-packaged" ones. As has been pointed out, it's a useless argument anyway: "you don't need a template" and "you can make a custom template" are for this purpose statements of identical consequence. Since we know one to be factually true...

No, they are not.

Saying that you can expand the RAW by adding custom powers, stunts, and templates does not mean that there exists in the RAW a template that allow someone to take Greater Glamour.

I would urge you to re-read the rules.  Not just the sections you agree with but all of them.

Richard

[Sanctaphrax]

I honestly cannot tell a difference between using custom templates and not using templates, except that with custom templates you make the decision of what powers fit the concept in advance whereas when not using templates you make the decision when it comes up.

Are there any other differences?

Really, I'd like an answer to this.

[Richard_Chilton]

Really, I'd like an answer to this.

One (a template) maps out a character type and once established other players can use it.  Usually a bit of forethought gets included as it is mapped out - with the musts and options worked out.

The other (no template) all comes down to "let's do this now".  Other players can't really play that type without imitating the first one.

Example: Someone does up a template for Buffy Style Vampires (BSV).  After the template is written out, anyone who wants to can play a BSV.
As opposed to someone taking this power, then that power, and so on until he ends up with a BSV.  Any other player who wants to wants to play it is effectively copying the first player's choices.

Richard

[Tedronai]

How about restating that comparison between the person who takes the Changeling template and specifies that their fae parent happens to be a troll, and the person who includes some form of 'child of a Troll' in their High Concept but whose table abstains from the use of templates?

[Richard_Chilton]

For starters, at your table, the PC would gain +2 refresh until he took a power.  At another table he probably wouldn't.

Other differences:
Would that character ever have to make the Choice?
Could he buy the entire Troll power set without becoming Fae?
Would he need to be the child (as opposed to the great grand child of the Troll)?

I have no idea how you would handle those issues.  Normally they are defined by the template, but if you're not using the Changeling template maybe one character would have to make the Choice and another wouldn't - depending on how the GM and the table saw things.

Richard

[Tedronai]

I take it, by your lack of the restatement that was expressly requested, that your previous objections would not apply in this case? (ie. a second player choosing to play a 'child of a Troll' character would be copying the first no more so than a second player choosing to play a Changeling with a Troll parent)

Once you confirm or correct this, I will address your new objections.

[Richard_Chilton]

I take it, by your lack of the restatement that was expressly requested, that your previous objections would not apply in this case? (ie. a second player choosing to play a 'child of a Troll' character would be copying the first no more so than a second player choosing to play a Changeling with a Troll parent)

I'm sorry, but it took me a few minutes to figure out what you are trying to say here.  After checking back on a previous message I believe I know what you are trying to communicate - but I could be wrong.  Completely and utterly wrong.

Next time this happens, could you just say something along the lines of "I think you missed the point of my question, which was...."?

Unless, of course, you enjoy obfuscating your meaning by using debate jargon.

Once you confirm or correct this, I will address your new objections.

Bob says: I want to play a guy who's the son a troll.

Bob then begins taking powers.  Since he isn't using the Changeling template and he has a connection to the Fae he decides that his first power will be Glamours.  Bob then loads up on Deceit and Deceit stunts.

Bob has now defined for that group what it means to be the son of a Troll.  He has done so without much input from the GM or the rest of the table.

Richard

[ways and means]

I'm sorry, but it took me a few minutes to figure out what you are trying to say here.  After checking back on a previous message I believe I know what you are trying to communicate - but I could be wrong.  Completely and utterly wrong.

Next time this happens, could you just say something along the lines of "I think you missed the point of my question, which was...."?

Unless, of course, you enjoy obfuscating your meaning by using debate jargon.

Bob says: I want to play a guy who's the son a troll.

Bob then begins taking powers.  Since he isn't using the Changeling template and he has a connection to the Fae he decides that his first power will be Glamours.  Bob then loads up on Deceit and Deceit stunts.

Bob has now defined for that group what it means to be the son of a Troll.  He has done so without much input from the GM or the rest of the table.

Richard

No he hasn't all he has defined is what being the son of a unusually stealthy troll is, not all trolls are the same and neither are all troll scions, also the gm gets final veto on character sheets so your point about without the gm's input is invalid in my opinion. 

[Richard_Chilton]

Please read what I wrote.

without much input != no input

When someone decides to create a custom template, generally speaking a lot of thought is put into it by the player, the GM, and often the rest of the table.

Someone saying "Hey, can I buy blah" as everyone is applying a milestone is different than "I'm interested in playing X - can we work out a custom template for it?".

Richard