Does the DresdenVerse default to Ultimate Good or Ultimate Evil?

[ways and means]

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

Questions are asked and the concept should be discussed what ever happens, so the only difference is whether you set your limits at the beginning or during play.

[Richard_Chilton]

Forethought and planning vs when it comes up we'll deal with it - which is the better design technique?

Richard

[ways and means]

Adaption to changing circumstances vs per-planing debatable. 

[Tedronai]

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.

I use the language I believe best and most concisely delivers the desired message.  If that language is notably beyond your comfort range, I apologize, and would expand upon at request, however please avoid the confrontational tone used above, as it is not conducive to civil debate.

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

This objection, I believe, is sufficiently addressed by w&m.  Character creation and advancement is overseen by the GM and table; if they neglect that role, with or without templates, some players will abuse the vacuum.

Forethought and planning vs when it comes up we'll deal with it - which is the better design technique?

That is a matter of opinion and context.


The objection I had been referring to was the one of 'copying the first player's choices', which is still unaddressed.

[Richard_Chilton]

I use the language I believe best and most concisely delivers the desired message.

You may have noticed that this is not a debate.  The lack of a moderator, etc would be the giveaway.  Why do you continue to treat these discussions as debates?

This objection, I believe, is sufficiently addressed by w&m.

We differ on that.

Character creation and advancement is overseen by the GM and table; if they neglect that role, with or without templates, some players will abuse the vacuum.

I'm sorry - but I do not see how this ties into your central theme that templates are too limiting on players.  That templates should be discarded to give the players "freedom".

Are you saying that losing templates means that they are "free" to be watched like hawks, never knowing if the GM will allow or deny a power? That does not seem like freedom to me.

That is a matter of opinion and context.

You seem to disagree - but yet you also say that the GM's role is to oversee character creation and advancement.  That if he is in anyway negligent in his duties "some players will abuse the vacuum".

And I'm surprised that you do not believe in forethought or planning. 

The objection I had been referring to was the one of 'copying the first player's choices', which is still unaddressed.

I did address it, but I will go into greater details since you seemed to have missed it.

Billy decides to play a human scion of a Foo Cat.  There is no Template for it and (because you're the one running the game) no template will be developed for it.  Billy decides that Foo Cats have Supernatural Toughness (catch: Gold - well known, rare, total +3) and buys it.  Over the course of play, Billy picks up supernatural recovery, inhuman speed, Mana Static, Spider Walk, and Claws.  He picks these powers up as needed without giving the issue much thought.  Billy then decides to that on buying claws he had completed the Foo Cat package - in effect becoming a Human Foo Cat.

Sally decides that she is going to play a Foo Cat.  Her options for doing so are "Me too" to the powers that Billy took as needed.  How does Mana Static apply to Foo Cats? Shrug - no one took notes but Billy must have made a good case for it at the time.  Spider Walk before claws? Well, Billy's PC had to find someone way into the death trap and since the ceiling wasn't trapped we all decided that Spider Walk made sense for him to have.

Richard

[ways and means]

And I'm surprised that you do not believe in forethought or planning. 

I think character should have forethought but I don't think that is anywhere near the same as tying characters into a rigid structure which as they currently are, are neither particularly very good or balance with each other. 

Billy decides to play a human scion of a Foo Cat.  There is no Template for it and (because you're the one running the game) no template will be developed for it.  Billy decides that Foo Cats have Supernatural Toughness (catch: Gold - well known, rare, total +3) and buys it.  Over the course of play, Billy picks up supernatural recovery, inhuman speed, Mana Static, Spider Walk, and Claws.  He picks these powers up as needed without giving the issue much thought.  Billy then decides to that on buying claws he had completed the Foo Cat package - in effect becoming a Human Foo Cat.

Sally decides that she is going to play a Foo Cat.  Her options for doing so are "Me too" to the powers that Billy took as needed.  How does Mana Static apply to Foo Cats? Shrug - no one took notes but Billy must have made a good case for it at the time.  Spider Walk before claws? Well, Billy's PC had to find someone way into the death trap and since the ceiling wasn't trapped we all decided that Spider Walk made sense for him to have.

Richard

Seriously you put far to much providence on precedent, if two people want to play two different Foo Cats with two different powerset then there is no reason they can't maybe they have a different ancestor or there nature favors different traits from their ancestor.

I have never accepted this uniformity you seem to have adopted as a mantra.

[Tedronai]

You may have noticed that this is not a debate.  The lack of a moderator, etc would be the giveaway.  Why do you continue to treat these discussions as debates?

I apologize for the imprecision in my choice of words.  In my experience, the two are used largely synonymously with one having the option to indicate a more formal structure.

We differ on that.
I'm sorry - but I do not see how this ties into your central theme that templates are too limiting on players.  That templates should be discarded to give the players "freedom".

That is not my 'central theme'.  If anything, my 'theme' is that the distinction is superficial and ultimately meaningless in a well-run game with a cooperative group (that is to say, a game that doesn't likely already suffer from greater underlying problems).

Are you saying that losing templates means that they are "free" to be watched like hawks, never knowing if the GM will allow or deny a power? That does not seem like freedom to me.

Again you conflate my position with that of others.
The player in question, in cooperation with the GM, is free to define the meaning of their aspects, which, for the High Concept, includes the general scope of powers to which it could foreseeably grant access.

You seem to disagree - but yet you also say that the GM's role is to oversee character creation and advancement.  That if he is in anyway negligent in his duties "some players will abuse the vacuum".

As you have pointed out in various threads, there are players in this world that will exploit any weakness in a system to further their personal goals at the expense of the shared experience.

And I'm surprised that you do not believe in forethought or planning.

 
See above re: my actual position and not your misrepresentations.

I did address it, but I will go into greater details since you seemed to have missed it.

Billy decides to play a human scion of a Foo Cat.  There is no Template for it and (because you're the one running the game) no template will be developed for it.  Billy decides that Foo Cats have Supernatural Toughness (catch: Gold - well known, rare, total +3) and buys it.  Over the course of play, Billy picks up supernatural recovery, inhuman speed, Mana Static, Spider Walk, and Claws.  He picks these powers up as needed without giving the issue much thought.  Billy then decides to that on buying claws he had completed the Foo Cat package - in effect becoming a Human Foo Cat.

Sally decides that she is going to play a Foo Cat.  Her options for doing so are "Me too" to the powers that Billy took as needed.  How does Mana Static apply to Foo Cats? Shrug - no one took notes but Billy must have made a good case for it at the time.  Spider Walk before claws? Well, Billy's PC had to find someone way into the death trap and since the ceiling wasn't trapped we all decided that Spider Walk made sense for him to have.

Richard

See above re: defining aspects.
That's something that should happen when the aspect is created/acquired, not 'on the fly', and certainly not unilaterally by a single player.

[Sanctaphrax]

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

That's just the difference I mentioned, but explained differently.

With a template, you decide what fits in advance. Without one, you decide when it comes up. That is what is happening in your example.

[Silverblaze]

Moderation.

All things are generally better in moderation.  Salt, sugar, gaming, exercise, studying, recreational drug use and so on...

I think moderation can be applicable here.

I think structure and preplanning is generally a good idea.  Here's why:  I'll use the Foo Cat example unless Richard would prefer not, in which case I'll alter my post.

If a template or semi rigid high concept binds what powers are appropriate, there is room for character growth as the game goes on into various different "paths" but precludes the Foo Cat from buying addictive saliva and modular abilities.

I'd set up a loose precedent for Foo Cats:

This set of powers must be taken (I'd say claws and decide on up to around 3 more refresh required powers that the group agrees on)

I'd set up a set of powers that any Foo Cat can buy. (supernatural speed)

I'd set up a set of powers that are uncommon or rare for Foo Cats to have but not barred. (Stuff like sponsored magic) EDIT: Improvisation must be used here certain powers must be allowed so not to stifle creativity and keep players happy.  It also allows two similar concepts to differ in ways other than stunts and aspects (personality).

I'd have a set of powers set up that are barred from Foo Cats: addictive saliva or modular abilities (unless something happens in game that allows this deviation : biomancy rituals, learning to turn into a human from Tera West, picking up a denarian coin and so on.)  EDIT: again we have need for improvisation here.  Some of these options will be planned in plot of course, but improvising and creating on the fly is required.

This preparation prevents any chance of one PC setting a precedent.  It prevents the GM from looking wishy washy by allowing one player to do something and not another.  It allows new players from other gaming groups to join a preexisting group (who may exhibit some behaviors the current group does not like).  This player then has a set of limits and may either stay and play or pass.  However, the rules are already in place.  It keeps players from going out of the GM's control with strange power combos and getting unbalanced.  With templates that loose anyone can have nearly unlimited growth, not totally no...but no one should feel horribly restricted in that way.

Please note: power examples are just examples.  If the group decides Foo Cats actually do have addictive saliva and modular abilities the powers in each category would be changed appropriately.  Please don't pick apart the spirit of the post based on examples you don't like. I can clarify if anyone needs me to. 

Also note: I don't expect anyone to agree with this method, but I think the middle ground and moderation works better than pretty much anything in most facets of life.  game design and play included.

EDIT: I think improvising is a very important thing for a GM to be able to do.  Maybe the most important thing... but coming up with things that effect game balance as you go can lead to disaster.  These aren't magic items in D&D I can just take away.  They are the character themselves.  Though some groups may ask you to retire such a character.  ( I likely would not.)

EDIT: Note to those who think narrative needs to be separate from mechanics:  In many of the situations I mentioned above the narrative is where the powers came from.  The setting (not the Dredenverse the setting of the game - which in my games are synonymous but need not be in all games) had an effect on what powers were allowed.  They aren't mutually exclusive and often go hand in hand.

EDIT: the following is also just an example.

Unless you let a  Knight of the Cross spontaneously sprout wings and barbed tongues and breath weapons without any reason at all other than "I wanted to".  If that is indeed the case...we pretty much have little to talk about.  It may be fun in some rare cases to come up with why they gained these powers later, but if no reason ever comes up...no reason for the power at all...ever...that strikes me as simply ridiculous.  My apologies.

[ways and means]

Unless you let a  Knight of the Cross spontaneously sprout wings and barbed tongues and breath weapons without any reason at all other than "I wanted to".  If that is indeed the case...we pretty much have little to talk about.  It may be fun in some rare cases to come up with why they gained these powers later, but if no reason ever comes up...no reason for the power at all...ever...that strikes me as simply ridiculous.  My apologies.

I have not ever come a cross a maximizer who didn't come up with a perfectly decent in game reason why their character has the abilities they have, actually they usually have much better (or at least more interesting) reasons than the average player because they had to think about it more.

[Viatos]

I have not ever come a cross a maximizer who didn't come up with a perfectly decent in game reason why their character has the abilities they have, actually they usually have much better (or at least more interesting) reasons than the average player because they had to think about it more.

This. I have written, upon request, more then five pages of background to explain how a character got from point A to point B. It made so much sense that I ended up expanding it into an entire organized movement to which a considerable percentage of NPCs starting from A would subscribe to. The DM promptly adopted it and got a lot of mileage out of its use. But that doesn't matter.

I had almost no interest in what I'd developed. It was nifty, sure, but I was way more interested in my character's philosophical struggles with the nature of a reality he could partially redesign at the time. Given the choice, I wouldn't have written an explanation at all. All I cared about was being at point B and the cool things it provided me...but as a person of at least average intelligence, creativity, and motivation, I was able to summon from nothing a coherent, externally and internally consistent narrative justifying me getting what I want.

I'm the guy who wants my Knight of the Cross to sprout wings. "I wanted to" is my only reason, but if you need a better one, I can provide it. That's the thing. Just because it looks ridiculous in flat mechanics doesn't mean you can't build a narrative to support it. I mean, Evocation is ridiculous in flat mechanics. "How can normal people do magic? People don't do magic. That's not even possible." The Dresdenverse setting exists to create a structure in which they can.

[Silverblaze]

Yeah, but you both come up with reasons.  That is important to me.  I'm not saying people can't come up with reasons.  Hell, I've been that guy.  I came up with a good in-game reason to have my Knight learn the werewolf spell the Alphas cast.  In the end though, there was a reason.

It didn't happen simply due to spontaneous evolution of my mutant X gene.  (Which in some systems works fine...i just don't like it in my urban fantasy)

Just taking random powers for no reason doesn;'t sit well with me.  I don't let my players do it.  I look at the GM like he/she grew an additional head when they allow it.  That likely means you wouldn't want to game with me.  That doesn't offend me.  Style and preferrence is important to a group.

[Richard_Chilton]

See above re: my actual position and not your misrepresentations.

I based my view of your position on

Forethought and planning vs when it comes up we'll deal with it - which is the better design technique?

That is a matter of opinion and context.

If you intended to say "I believe in forethought and planning" then why were you taking aim at the statement?

At this point we seem to be talking almost for the sake of talking.  I have put forth my views on why templates (even custom template) work.  Your "sit down and based on the HC work all the foreseeable powers" option appears to be a "custom template per PC" system.  Where do we disagree on this issue?

Richard

[Tedronai]

It is my opinion that planning is desirable in some contexts, and not in others.
I recognize that others have differing opinions, and do not categorically deny their validity.

'general scope of forseeable powers', not 'all forseeable powers', but yes, as I've said several times, doing so results in a system largely indistinguishable from RAW templates where that allows for the use of custom templates.

[Richard_Chilton]

I shall use red paint on my calendar to make this a red letter day:
We agree.

Richard