Does the DresdenVerse default to Ultimate Good or Ultimate Evil?

[Richard_Chilton]

I'm not the one making an assertion.    I simply recognize that seeing green leaves doesn't mean every leaf is green.

Continuing that metaphor, can you point to a single non-green leaf in the DV (i.e. anything that suggest that this isn't the case)? Because I can't think of a single thing in any story that suggests otherwise.

Richard

[UmbraLux]

For gaining things outside a template and / or switching templates late in life?  Sure. 

(click to show/hide)

Billy's regeneration.  The Archive.  Butters' use of rituals.  Charity Carpenter's move from magic to faith powers.  Fix's swap of changeling with knight.  Injun Joe's shapechanging.

Why not scions as well?

[Richard_Chilton]

Because (to quote Lady Gaga) scions are born that way.  If you're born that way then you are that way.  If you aren't born that way you can't become a scion.

Richard

[DFJunkie]

Because (to quote Lady Gaga) scions are born that way.  If you're born that way then you are that way.  If you aren't born that way you can't become a scion.

Richard

The character could be many generations removed from his or her supernatural progenitor but some mystical whatsit awakens the blood within.  Or something.  The books doesn't go in for "never" much, but nor does it go in for "always."  If the table is comfortable with a character "becoming" a scion later in life and finds the narrative justification reasonable, why not?  If the group isn't okay with it then don't do it.  Pretty simple.

[Tedronai]

The character could be many generations removed from his or her supernatural progenitor but some mystical whatsit awakens the blood within.  Or something.  The books doesn't go in for "never" much, but nor does it go in for "always."  If the table is comfortable with a character "becoming" a scion later in life and finds the narrative justification reasonable, why not?  If the group isn't okay with it then don't do it.  Pretty simple.

But that's not the One True Way...
/sarcasm

[Richard_Chilton]

The character could be many generations removed from his or her supernatural progenitor but some mystical whatsit awakens the blood within.  Or something.  The books doesn't go in for "never" much, but nor does it go in for "always."  If the table is comfortable with a character "becoming" a scion later in life and finds the narrative justification reasonable, why not?  If the group isn't okay with it then don't do it.  Pretty simple.

If the table wants to something, then that's fine.  And if they enjoy it, that's great.

And it could be interesting to work in a Bethany Sloane type PC - or her kid (who would be around 17 by now).

But in the above I'm talking about the RAW.  Find me one thing in the DV that talks about multigenerational scions and I'll be on board in a heartbeat.  Who knows? Maybe the forth coming Big Foot trilogy of short stories (set before Changes) will change things.  Maybe Big Foot is a scion, so the short story where Harry is hired by BF to track down his son might have something that shifts things around.

Or maybe the next novel will deal with former changelings who look in on their kids and grandkids.

Richard

[Sanctaphrax]

Richard, if it's not a rule then it isn't part of the RAW. And novels are not rulebooks.

[Richard_Chilton]

Richard, if it's not a rule then it isn't part of the RAW. And novels are not rulebooks.

Then you're playing Urban Fantasy FATE 2.0, not the DFRPG.

Richard.

[Sanctaphrax]

Um. No.

Look, dude. Rules are rules. Things that are not rules are not rules. The line is occasionally fuzzy, but the entire usefulness of the concept of RAW is based upon people not doing what you're doing now.

[Richard_Chilton]

So you're saying that a ritual that produces 28 steps of effect will reverse the Domination effect that creates a Renfield? Or is it 30?

Personally, if I was to abandon my stance OR was writing up some homebrew, I'd say a total takeout (like a death spell) then maybe another extreme consequence added on and assigned to rewrite the character's HC (since, when done in certain ways, Thaumaturgy allows the caster to assign the consequence).  Plus enough to deal with any thresholds... Might rule that the "cure" is an ongoing spell that the caster needs to assign a duration to - but probably not.  "Zap, you're cured" seems to fit better.

But if we aren't talking homebrew, I'd say that it was impossible to do.

At least that's my view - what's your take on the question?

Richard

[Sanctaphrax]

In we're talking pure RAW, the question is unanswerable because it is not addressed in the rules.

If we're talking Dresden Files canon, I'd say 70ish. The Merlin probably had 12 or so base complexity, and even for him 70 shifts would have been difficult. He'd likely fail unless he put major effort in.

If we're talking homebrew, whatever feels appropriate at the time

[Viatos]

So you're saying that a ritual that produces 28 steps of effect will reverse the Domination effect that creates a Renfield? Or is it 30?

Sanctaphrax answered you, but he probably shouldn't have, because this doesn't make any sense. The novels are not RAW and do not apply to the game. Between the front and back covers of YS and OW exists the entirety of DFRPG. Nothing Butcher has written, writes, or will write has any meaning in DFRPG unless and until it is added by either homebrew or official endorsement in the form of errata or a new book. When you need an answer for a question not addressed in the RAW, looking to the Dresdenverse is reasonable, but not necessary.

Are there multigenerational Scions? Why not? There's no reasonable cause to block them. It's a solid fantasy trope, and it's neither proven nor disproven in Dresdenverse.

[Richard_Chilton]

The novels are not RAW and do not apply to the game. Between the front and back covers of YS and OW exists the entirety of DFRPG.

The novels are not RAW and do not apply to the game.

And that is where we differ.  Oddly enough, I seem to saying that a lot recently...

This isn't Urban Fantasy FATE but the Dresden Files RPG.  That is, a game based off of the book.  One that the game designer spent years working on because he wanted to be as close to the books as possible.

That's why the Swords of  the Cross exist in the game.
That's why there aren't retractable Claws.
That's the why behind all of it.

And yes, when I was playing MERP I bought a couple of Tolkien reference books - because I was playing Middle Earth Role Playing.  It didn't matter that the MERP rules were a scaled version of Rolemaster - that game was adapted to the Middle Earth setting, just as FATE was adapted to the Dresden File setting.

Richard

[Viatos]

And that is where we differ.  Oddly enough, I seem to saying that a lot recently...

This isn't Urban Fantasy FATE but the Dresden Files RPG.  That is, a game based off of the book.  One that the game designer spent years working on because he wanted to be as close to the books as possible.

Okay, but you understand there is a difference between having an opinion, such as "I prefer green to blue", and invalidating yourself in a conversation, such as entering a discussion of chess strategy and saying "pawns can actually move four spaces"?

RAW stands for Rules As Written. Nothing in the novels is a rule in DFRPG. DFRPG is a known quantity. When you start saying the novels contain any rules text, what this reads as is "I am done talking about DFRPG. I am off that subject now.", I'm not trying to troll or upset you, but there is literally a product called the Dresden Files Roleplaying Game, which many of this forum's users have purchased, myself included. That product is self-contained; you do not need to buy the novels to play the game. You do not even need to know the novels exist. When you start basing arguments on what's in the novels, you're talking about homebrew, about personal canon specific to you. That's fine if you're arguing that such-and-such SHOULD conform to the novels, but don't claim that it MUST. A person who has never read so much as the introduction to Storm Front can own and play DFRPG.  They have all the RAW there is to have. There is no more RAW beyond that.

[devonapple]

A person who has never read so much as the introduction to Storm Front can own and play DFRPG.  They have all the RAW there is to have. There is no more RAW beyond that.

That's a fair cop: it would be a bad precedent to establish that playing DFRPG requires reading the entire series. Reading the series is a great source of inspiration, but also creative constraint, and it wouldn't really be fair to expect everyone to tack it into the price of admission for this game. Fair enough.

If a question comes up which has an answer in canon, but not in the rules, I think it is fair to differentiate between RAW feedback and canon feedback. And, of course, every group reserves the right to do what they want at their own table.

I feel that it is also a good point to distinguish between what the DFRPG rules allow, what the rules forbid, and what the rules are silent on. And, as previously, every group reserves the right to do what they want at their own table.

I would like to add a fourth designation: what the rules recommend. And I would like it to be given some weight, because even when it isn't outright forbidding or allowing a particular thing, it is still in the book and intended to inform how the game is played.