Powers = Tools ?

[Sanctaphrax]

Actually, the rules specifically say that you don't need the template. Read the Musts for the Sword again.

Furthermore, even if you have the template the balance problems are still there.

Also, an Item of Power having Glamours means that it gives you Glamours, not that it is glamoured.

And you can't tag those aspects. Tagging does not work that way.

[Tedronai]

Permanent aspects that you can tag are generally free on equipment?

Insofar as there is no mechanic in the RAW whatsoever that costs refresh in exchange for the mere existence of an aspect.

A fairy can't cast a Seeming on a beacon to make it look like the Holy Grail?

For a certain value of 'the Holy Grail', they could.  However, whether that 'looks like the object of a quest' or not would be in the eye of the beholder.

Which is why some of us embrace templates so closely.  Without them you have "My HC is a Guy with Claws and ACaEBG" type characters running around.

And any GM worth their salt will demand a more flavourful and sensible character concept than that.

[Richard_Chilton]

And you can't tag those aspects. Tagging does not work that way.

Then could you compel them?

Richard

[Tedronai]

Compel, invoke, or invoke-for-effect.

[Viatos]

What other faiths have Billion+ believers AND a link to something like the crucifixion (with the nails) to focus their belief?

Why would you need any of that? Items of Power need impressive stories, sure, but the devotion of a lone Sikh who tempered a blade to save his family in his own heartsblood sounds sufficient. Part of the reason the Swords have so much behind them, in my opinion, is because they're cop-outs. They don't HAVE stories. They're just normal swords with a nail forged in, and the story of the nail doesn't relate to their purpose at all. The combined mass of Abrahamic faith is necessary to compensate for how mundane they are.

Three saintly heroes in the world can use that power - which is why they are on the heavy hitter chart.  They don't have to be Christian - agnostic will do as long as they are men (or women) of Faith.

Well, an infinite number of people can use them, actually. Every PC and NPC can have an IoP which is, mechanically, a Sword - even if ACaEBG isn't costed, the entire package is. Heck, you can make an eight-armed Scion of Durga who octowields Sword-equivalent items in the shape of different weapons.

A narrative that says: "There are up to three people in the world who can use this power, only in the cause of good, and only if they've first invested 5 refresh in the Champion of God template before buying that IoP." is a sever limit on the power.

So, there's no limit on the power beyond its attachment to the Swords, and even that is negotiable given that we know the effect can exist for somewhere between 0 and 4 Refresh.

Which is why some of us embrace templates so closely.  Without them you have "My HC is a Guy with Claws and ACaEBG" type characters running around.

So doing this doesn't help, because every template can pick up an IoP, including those with access to Mythic Strength or Evocation.

[Richard_Chilton]

Why would you need any of that? Items of Power need impressive stories, sure, but the devotion of a lone Sikh who tempered a blade to save his family in his own heartsblood sounds sufficient. Part of the reason the Swords have so much behind them, in my opinion, is because they're cop-outs. They don't HAVE stories. They're just normal swords with a nail forged in, and the story of the nail doesn't relate to their purpose at all. The combined mass of Abrahamic faith is necessary to compensate for how mundane they are.

I'm not sure if you've been following the discussion.  To reiterate: The RAW say that the Swords work as focus items - focusing the faith of those who believe in the crucifixion.

And the Nail is the focus and power source of the blade.

Well, an infinite number of people can use them, actually. Every PC and NPC can have an IoP which is, mechanically, a Sword - even if ACaEBG isn't costed, the entire package is. Heck, you can make an eight-armed Scion of Durga who octowields Sword-equivalent items in the shape of different weapons.

No, not everyone can use them.  If you can't hit this mental state: "may only be swung with true selfless purpose in mind and heart; if this is not the case, the bond between the Knight and the Sword is broken and may only be restored by undergoing some sort of trial of faith."
then you can't use one.  Personally, I think that the vast majority of the world's population couldn't swing a sword without hatred (or at least revenge) in their hearts - meaning that they couldn't use it.

So, there's no limit on the power beyond its attachment to the Swords, and even that is negotiable given that we know the effect can exist for somewhere between 0 and 4 Refresh.

Do we? Personally, until/unless we see the breakout I'm of the opinion that there are prerequisites to use the blade and that the ACaEBG "power" exists only in the Swords of the Cross.  That's what makes them so special.

Richard

[Viatos]

I'm not sure if you've been following the discussion.  To reiterate: The RAW say that the Swords work as focus items - focusing the faith of those who believe in the crucifixion.

And the Nail is the focus and power source of the blade.

In my example, the sword is still the focus - focusing the extreme love and devotion and desire to protect his family possessed by our unknown Sikh; his heartsblood invigorates and empowers the blade. Why would that not be good enough? IoPs can be made at the whim of random gods or sidhe or your player character if you really work for it.

No, not everyone can use them.  If you can't hit this mental state: "may only be swung with true selfless purpose in mind and heart; if this is not the case, the bond between the Knight and the Sword is broken and may only be restored by undergoing some sort of trial of faith."
then you can't use one.  Personally, I think that the vast majority of the world's population couldn't swing a sword without hatred (or at least revenge) in their hearts - meaning that they couldn't use it.

We're in a fantasy gaming environment, and you're allowed to have aspects like PURE AND SELFLESS HEART. So every single PC and NPC could use one, yes. I doubt that such games are run very often (although it could be interesting: DnD's Blood War with Evil switched to Good meets Stepford Wives kind of thing?) but they're possible. I grant not likely.

But I'm illustrating the extreme of the range because it's important to understand its full scope. To use a more reasonable example, the PCs form a seven-man Blessed Scooby Gang each wielding a Sword-equivalent attuned to one of the seven holy virtues, and their antagonists include a demonic Knight Templar who dual-wields Sword-equivalents which require the same devotion to evil that regular Swords require to good.

Do we? Personally, until/unless we see the breakout I'm of the opinion that there are prerequisites to use the blade and that the ACaEBG "power" exists only in the Swords of the Cross.  That's what makes them so special.

Richard

I mean, you can hold that opinion, but it's unsubstantiated. We can't definitively say it's X Refresh, but we know what range it's in, and we know the effect is allowable and has no Musts, which provides a strong basis for argument. It wouldn't be RAW, but we'd have RAW's support. Do I think it's a good idea? Not really, but at the same time, I wouldn't be too upset if a PC asked for it. It's hardly the only questionable thing in the game; it just means I structure BBEGs differently and keep it in mind. It's a balance issue, but not a game-crippling one unless abused, at which point it becomes an OOC communication issue instead.

[ways and means]

I'm not sure if you've been following the discussion.  To reiterate: The RAW say that the Swords work as focus items - focusing the faith of those who believe in the crucifixion.

And the Nail is the focus and power source of the blade.

No, not everyone can use them.  If you can't hit this mental state: "may only be swung with true selfless purpose in mind and heart; if this is not the case, the bond between the Knight and the Sword is broken and may only be restored by undergoing some sort of trial of faith."
then you can't use one.  Personally, I think that the vast majority of the world's population couldn't swing a sword without hatred (or at least revenge) in their hearts - meaning that they couldn't use it.

Do we? Personally, until/unless we see the breakout I'm of the opinion that there are prerequisites to use the blade and that the ACaEBG "power" exists only in the Swords of the Cross.  That's what makes them so special.

Richard

Having re-read the item of power section in Your Story the raw doesn't actually say anything about the sword of the cross being a focus for mass-belief (well at least not in the IoP section). Harry uses that terminology in the book because it follows a similar methodology to the way he uses his power so he tries to make sense of its massive power in a way that makes sense to him. Harry admits he doesn't fully understand the Swords and so I would advice taking his opinion on how they work with a pinch of salt.  I suppose you can treat the novels as RAW but that comes with its own set of balance problems and makes the current set of templates pretty obsolete.   

[Sanctaphrax]

The stuff Richard is talking about is part of the side commentary on page 278. It's honestly a pretty tenuous basis for argument.

Anyway. Claws + ACaEBG is totally fine. After all, Claws does less stress than a high-quality sword. Strength + stunt + ACaEBG is the real problem. And of course Evocation + ACaEBG is just silly.

Also: using templates does not prevent someone from making Guy with Claws and ACaEBG. Nor does not using templates allow it.

You really overestimate the restrictiveness of templates. The super-powerful Evoker in my PbP game is a totally valid Emissary Of Power.

[Richard_Chilton]

In my example, the sword is still the focus - focusing the extreme love and devotion and desire to protect his family possessed by our unknown Sikh; his heartsblood invigorates and empowers the blade. Why would that not be good enough? IoPs can be made at the whim of random gods or sidhe or your player character if you really work for it.

We aren't talking about a run of the mill IoP, but one that canon has establish is one of three.  If you don't see the difference between focusing the beliefs of billions and the belief of one man, then nothing I can say will change things.

We're in a fantasy gaming environment, and you're allowed to have aspects like PURE AND SELFLESS HEART. So every single PC and NPC could use one, yes. I doubt that such games are run very often (although it could be interesting: DnD's Blood War with Evil switched to Good meets Stepford Wives kind of thing?) but they're possible. I grant not likely.

I cannot see a version of the DV were every PC and NPC has that Aspect.

Good character types fighting it out can make for some interesting stories.  In the Forgotten Realms series there was a great short story about a battle between a LG Greater Dragon and a LG Epic Elf - it was part of the Dragon Rage Anthology.  Then there was a trilogy that ended when one LG god offed another LG god, them gave up his divinity when he realised what he had done.

And Evil By Necessity was a fantastic book.  Playing the last free willed (and thereby occasionally choosing the wrong path) characters in a world that's gone totally good could be a wonderful game (as long as the system didn't allow for detect alignment spells).

But the DFRPG is set in the DV.  A place where Marcone is legally untouchable.  I can't see Marcone or any of the corrupt cops, lawyers, judges, etc that he working for him being able to use a Sword of the Cross.

But I'm illustrating the extreme of the range because it's important to understand its full scope. To use a more reasonable example, the PCs form a seven-man Blessed Scooby Gang each wielding a Sword-equivalent attuned to one of the seven holy virtues, and their antagonists include a demonic Knight Templar who dual-wields Sword-equivalents which require the same devotion to evil that regular Swords require to good.

Which departs from the setting that has established Three Swords of the Cross - but if you like it then no one's stopping you.

I mean, you can hold that opinion, but it's unsubstantiated. We can't definitively say it's X Refresh, but we know what range it's in, and we know the effect is allowable and has no Musts, which provides a strong basis for argument.

We don't know that the effect has no Musts or in what circumstances it is allowable.  I think it could be the case of assuming that everyone will know what a Knight of the Cross is and trying to save on the word count.

In either case - I could be wrong and you could be wrong.  I know who I think is wrong and I know who you believe is wrong.  I strongly doubt that there is anything either of could say at this point that would change either of our opinions.

Having re-read the item of power section in Your Story the raw doesn't actually say anything about the sword of the cross being a focus for mass-belief (well at least not in the IoP section).

YS page 278
Bob:This is a good cursory breakdown, William, and it’s probably good enough for the layman, but there are things that fall between the cracks. My skull, for example, is technically an enchanted item—it’s just meant to store my energy, instead of a spell. And then there are the Swords of the Cross, which are—conceptually speaking—just very powerful foci.

Billy: I thought the Swords were like an artifact or something?

Bob: Well, consider what you can channel when your power source is the faith of all Christians—and possibly other faiths as well—on the face of the earth.

Billy: Uh… I think you just broke my brain.

Richard

[ways and means]

YS page 278
Bob:This is a good cursory breakdown, William, and it’s probably good enough for the layman, but there are things that fall between the cracks. My skull, for example, is technically an enchanted item—it’s just meant to store my energy, instead of a spell. And then there are the Swords of the Cross, which are—conceptually speaking—just very powerful foci.

Billy: I thought the Swords were like an artifact or something?

Bob: Well, consider what you can channel when your power source is the faith of all Christians—and possibly other faiths as well—on the face of the earth.

Billy: Uh… I think you just broke my brain.

Richard

You would think if this was supposed to affect the IoP in any mechanical way it would be in the IoP section rather than another section entirely in an easily missed side box. The fact that the current write up of the sword fails to include this pretty important fact in the Item of Power description seems to apply they don't think it is important to the mechanics of the power at all. 

Actually it kind of sides with my argument in the begging of this post that the fluff of power and the mechanics are separate in that the mechanics of the sword of the cross can be found in the IoP section and some of the fluff can be found half the book later in a completely different section relegated to a side-bar.

[Richard_Chilton]

You would think if this was supposed to affect the IoP in any mechanical way it would be in the IoP section rather than another section entirely in an easily missed side box.

You'd think that if ACaEBG was mean to be a power that anyone could take (as opposed to something specific for the Swords) they would have written it as a power - complete with costs and the rest.

Actually it kind of sides with my argument in the begging of this post that the fluff of power and the mechanics

We are back to the "fluff" vs "mechanics".  I maintain that since DFRPG was written to model the DV that the "Fluff" is either equally or more important than the mechanics.  That the entire two books are the RAW, not isolated portions of them. You hold the opposing view.

I've explained my position and I understand yours.  Is there anything more to say on this subject?

Richard

[ways and means]

You'd think that if ACaEBG was mean to be a power that anyone could take (as opposed to something specific for the Swords) they would have written it as a power - complete with costs and the rest.

We are back to the "fluff" vs "mechanics".  I maintain that since DFRPG was written to model the DV that the "Fluff" is either equally or more important than the mechanics.  That the entire two books are the RAW, not isolated portions of them. You hold the opposing view.

I've explained my position and I understand yours.  Is there anything more to say on this subject?

Richard

I agree these threads do seem an exercise in futility as you cannot persuade someone who believes themselves right and isn't willing to compromise as a point of principal.

Adam

[Richard_Chilton]

I agree these threads do seem an exercise in futility as you cannot persuade someone who believes themselves right and isn't willing to compromise as a point of principal.

Adam

Show me something I've missed and I'll admit that I was wrong.  I've done it before and I'll do it again.  Most recently, I missed the margin note that allows were form to include mythic animals.

Of course since it was in a margin note, there are people who would argue that in the RAW you cannot take mythic animals as your were form, but that's a different topic.

The "the DFRPG is tied intrinsically to the DV" vs "the DFRPG is a game that can be set in the DV" debate is a philosophical one - and I don't see anyone shifting their positions anytime soon.

Richard

[Sanctaphrax]

Here are your problems, Richard:

1. You seem to think that the problems with ACaEBG come from taking it out of the Sword. They don't. Even if you make ACaEBG require all the other powers and narrative elements of the Sword, the balance problems are still there.

2. You have conflated a passing mention of the Swords being faith-powered into a rule stating that all Sword-like items must be powered by massive Faith.

3. You seem to believe that the Rules As Written includes things that are not rules.

4. You seem to believe that anything that does not exist within the canon of the Dresden Files is contrary to the RAW. Which is preposterous, since that makes following the RAW into an impossibility. After all, your PCs probably aren't going to be canon characters. And if they are, then they won't re-enact the canon stories.