All About Stunts!!

[ImpishMortal]

Given that we have threads for Powers and IoPs, I didn't think it to be unreasonable to have a thread dealing specifically with building/refining custom mortal stunts.

That being said, I wanted to toss out a few stunts that some of my players are working on and get a little feedback.

Get Behind Me!
When an ally in the same zone is targeted by an attack, this character may choose to step in the way and defends against the attack with their Presence skill. This may not be used more than once per round.
When an ally in the same zone would receive damage from a successful attack, this character may spend a Fate Point, to be struck by the attack instead of the original target. This may be activated as often as this character can spend a Fate Point.
 
Let's Rethink This...
Any time an ally intends to make an action that would endanger themselves or others, this character may make a social block with Rapport in an attempt to talk them out of it and gains a +2 to their roll. 

[InFerrumVeritas]

http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,21952.0.html

[ImpishMortal]

That's just a master list, not a thread for discussion, hence I made this thread.

[Locnil]

Personally, I would make Get Behind Me give one free use per scene.

[Taran]

You have to spend a FP on it.  Why only once per scene?

[Tedronai]

I think he meant 'first use in a scene is free', but I could be wrong.

[UmbraLux]

That being said, I wanted to toss out a few stunts that some of my players are working on and get a little feedback.

Get Behind Me!
When an ally in the same zone is targeted by an attack, this character may choose to step in the way and defends against the attack with their Presence skill. This may not be used more than once per round.
When an ally in the same zone would receive damage from a successful attack, this character may spend a Fate Point, to be struck by the attack instead of the original target. This may be activated as often as this character can spend a Fate Point.

I do see some potential problems here - as currently written an invulnerable type could negate one attack per exchange and, using fate, negate even successful attacks.  I'd suggest something less 'all or nothing' in effect.  Utilizing Locnil's suggestion might look something like:

Get Behind Me!
 - Once per scene you may step in front of another character in the same zone taking an attack targeted at that individual.
 - When another character in the same zone is physically damaged, you may intercept part of it by spending a fate point.  When you do so you take a consequence which would otherwise have hit the intended target.
 

Let's Rethink This...
Any time an ally intends to make an action that would endanger themselves or others, this character may make a social block with Rapport in an attempt to talk them out of it and gains a +2 to their roll.

Have to say I don't like this much.  It's too easy to turn into a stick forcing other players to do what you want.  "You can't do that, you didn't beat the Rapport +2 roll!"    Unless PvP is planned up front I'd avoid using mechanics to control other players.

What's your intent here?  Is there a way to rephrase it so you can't accidentally become "that" player? 

[Locnil]

I think he meant 'first use in a scene is free', but I could be wrong.

Yup, that was it.

[ImpishMortal]

Hey hey, thanks for the input.

Get Behind Me!! was crafted by a guy playing a mortal hunter who has seen a few battles and dealt with the supernatural.

UmbraLux, the rewrite is interesting. A few questions, though. How would the character know that the damage would be enough to inflict a consequence? Or should I be reading that as any damage that is intercepted is taken as a consequence?

As far as the second stunt is concerned, my group has been doing some fairly unlawful activities: attacking police officers, arson, and trying to kidnap babies to finish a deal with the Sidhe, to name a few. They received a major dressing down by another character and one of my players wanted to take a stunt reflecting the change her character was inspired to make.

Basically, if someone goes to steal a baby, she could be like, "Hey dude, that's a bad idea." If he can't beat the block he'll give up for the time being. I wouldn't be allowing her to use it more than once per scene, which I should've added to the write-up.

[Mr. Death]

There already is a thread for suggesting and working out new stunts: http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,21213.0.html

[UmbraLux]

UmbraLux, the rewrite is interesting. A few questions, though. How would the character know that the damage would be enough to inflict a consequence?

Same as always...just that the stunt user can take a consequence on himself which would otherwise be applied to the target.  No new resistance rolls, just the choice of taking the victim's place for said consequence.

[Sanctaphrax]

I agree with UmbraLux about Get Behind Me! and Let's Rethink This...

Your example of Let's Rethink This... being used sounds like an attack, not a block.

[Silverblaze]

I do see some potential problems here - as currently written an invulnerable type could negate one attack per exchange and, using fate, negate even successful attacks.  I'd suggest something less 'all or nothing' in effect.  Utilizing Locnil's suggestion might look something like:

Get Behind Me!
 - Once per scene you may step in front of another character in the same zone taking an attack targeted at that individual.
 - When another character in the same zone is physically damaged, you may intercept part of it by spending a fate point.  When you do so you take a consequence which would otherwise have hit the intended target.
  Have to say I don't like this much. It's too easy to turn into a stick forcing other players to do what you want.  "You can't do that, you didn't beat the Rapport +2 roll!"    Unless PvP is planned up front I'd avoid using mechanics to control other players.

What's your intent here?  Is there a way to rephrase it so you can't accidentally become "that" player?

This is dangerous territory and if abused can create hard feelings IRL.

Plenty of games ahve a power or ability that works this way...many times it makes for pissed off players.

I'd just make a stunt that grants bonuses when using logic to talk someone out of something.  Those are easy to make and aren't as ham-handed/forceful.

The social combat can resolve as normal and then the loser (lets just say the one being talked out of something)... can still interpret his take out.  (he might still continue with his bad idea, but he might do it smarter.)

[Lamech]

Let's Rethink This...
Any time an ally intends to make an action that would endanger themselves or others, this character may make a social block with Rapport in an attempt to talk them out of it and gains a +2 to their roll. 

A stunt that lets you block actions with rapport is fine. Another stunt that gives you +2 to that block would be fine. A third stunt that lets you spend an action ahead of time in certain circumstances would be questionable, but still okay IMO. However, I think the problem with the stunt as listed is its about three stunts in one. In addition is a stunt that pretty actively encourages PvP, you are effectively attacking other PC's. Just because you are using rapport to do it doesn't really make it much different having your character hold them down with might. (Although it would be a hilarious way to stop bad guys.)

[Taran]

My question is why do you need a stunt to block someone?  You can create a block with pretty much any skill as long as you can justify it.  It makes sense to me, that if your buddy is going to go pick a fight with someone and you want to talk him out of it, using rapport as a block (read as "delay tactic") is a reasonable thing.

It's not going to change their mind - just prevent them from doing the specified action until they overcome the block.  If you want to convince your ally to change his mind - that's social combat, which might involve maneuvers or consequences that you can tag for effect.  It's way less annoying to have the face in your party dictating people's actions if he has to shell out FP's to do it.

My point, I guess, is a stunt gives a +2 for very specific circumstances seems fine to me.