FATE Core and DFRPG

[admiralducksauce]

From the comments on the kickstarter:

Is the idea of merging consequences to speed up play and make it more likely for people to concede a conflict? I presume in Fate Core social conflicts are actually just Mental conflicts with a social bent.

Most of what Fate used to consider social conflicts are really contests now - instances where people are maneuvering around each other to accomplish a goal, but no one's doing any lasting harm to one another.

Yeah, that makes sense. You can also Gain Advantage to place Aspects like "Social Pariah" on someone without the need for it to be a Consequence.
I've just been informed that Consequences were always 'officially' merged in DFRPG except the extra consequences gained from high levels of Discipline etc. so that's another example of me reading the rules incorrectly!

TBH, that actually makes a bit more sense to me given the weird "mental is who you are/social is how other people see you" divide from the default mental/social breakdown.

[Richard_Chilton]

If you go through the book you'll find scattered references to Social combat - which seem to have survived the editing process.

Richard

[Skimble]

I've just realised Barriers are gone too. They've been replaced with Scene Aspects. Not a big problem as they can be functionally identical, but actually being Aspects makes them better as they can be riffed off more easily.

[lordoracle]

Well, will have to head over there make a donation.

No way. The kickstarter hasn't been live for a day yet and it's already well on its way through some amazing stretch goals. Any pledge amount will get you the preview rules immediately, and I honestly don't see any reason NOT to pledge, unless you're somehow blocked by locale or are truly more broke than Harry Dresden.

I'm still reading through it and it's definitely still FATE, but it's definitely different in some ways too. I could probably convert my campaign about mostly-mortal monster-hunting bikers without too much trouble. If I had a party of wizards, I might be less gung-ho about trying to convert things myself, but then that's why this thread is here. Hell, we've already had Skimble post a method for doing barrier spells.

[Ophidimancer]

Backed and am working my way through the core.  I'm really happy we unlocked the hardcover version and am looking forward to the magic toolkit.

[Richard_Chilton]

Two things of DFRPG interest in the kickstarter:
Magic system toolkit: In one of our earlier incarnations of the Fate system, Evil Hat co-founder Rob Donoghue lost his damn mind and included a chapter of over half a dozen different magic systems for use with the game. With this stretch goal, Rob will create a new supplement doing exactly that for Fate Core to be added to our EXPANSIONS package for our backers.

- This has me wondering if a bare bones DFRPG magic system will be included in the toolkit.

Fight Fire: Fight Fire expands Fate Core's handling of objective hazards, answering the common question "the warehouse has the On Fire aspect... now what?" Not only is this answered -- literally -- but it is enhanced and expanded in the form of a mini supplement that tackles both the day-to-day operations of urban firefighters (using tactics cribbed directly from the FDNY) and their lives off the clock.

- a book that covers "the building was burning and it wasn't my fault" situations.  It (along with the rest of FATE Core) looks to be easily adaptable to the DFRPG.


Another interesting goal is:
White Picket Witches - the author is drawing on "Practical Magic, Murder She Wrote, Witches of Eastwick and, say, Fried Green Tomatoes" for a game expansion that is based around witches in suburbia.


Not funded yet - but this is still only day 2 - is:
Extras Toolbox [LOCKED]: We'll take the Magic System Toolkit and absorb it as one chapter -- then go beyond the field of magic, doubling (or maybe even tripling) the word-count, to create the Extras Toolbox, a series of collections-of-extras that will illustrate in greater depth how to construct full add-on options for your game. Each collection will be viable as a plug-and-play addition to your game, if it turns out to be a fit. We'll look into exploring ways to implement powers, vehicles, gear, and more, with a few system-tweaks and variants for extra spice.
- if they get enough backers this book will be printed and available for $15-$20 (they haven't decided yet) + shipping ($5 for US, $10 for the rest of the world.).


And if you don't want to back the project you can still get a copy of the PDF for whatever price you are willing to pay:

Wait, how do I get the final PDF? It's not listed on any of the pledge levels?

The final version of the PDF will be made available to the whole world on a "pay what you like, including nothing" scheme. So backers will be able to download the final version themselves at no cost -- and with a clear conscience!

Getting back on topic: I'm wondering if we should look at adding a sub board for DFRPG/FATE 3.0 hacks?

Richard

[admiralducksauce]

Not funded yet - but this is still only day 2 - is:
Extras Toolbox [LOCKED]:

Not locked for long, everyone. Less than $1500 before the Extras Toolkit is ours for the plundering.

I just noticed the supplemental action penalty for a single-zone move is gone. I am rejoicing right now, because that was probably the one single thing my group forgot the most.

Getting back on topic: I'm wondering if we should look at adding a sub board for DFRPG/FATE 3.0 hacks

Maybe? I guess there's only this one thread now, but I'm sure there'll be more discussion as things progress.

[Richard_Chilton]

I'm assuming that once the rules (including the toolbox) are out that people will want to discuss how various DFRPG rules can be hacked to turn them into FATE Core compatible and we'll need a separate area for those discussions.  Then again, all of the DFPRG books (paranet etc) that were supposed to be out this year are "late" so maybe we will see an official "DFRPG to FATE Core conversion book" sometime in the future.

Then we too can have edition wars... er... I mean discuss why going with this version of the rules is the only logical way to go .


Also, just in - a new stretch goal:
"$101,000, all of the stretch goal expansions up to Camelot Trigger that aren't going in the Toolbox will go into a "Fate Worlds" compilation book."
- for $30
- coming in at the 300 - 400 range

Richard

[Blackblade]

I'm interested in the TimeWorks expansion:

"Want to have developed the iPhone? We can make it so that your firm had the idea before Apple. Want to get rid of a tricky rival? We'll make sure his parents never met. After all, it's only murder if someone gets killed. Not getting born doesn't count. Our time technicians are experts at moving the timestream in revenue generating directions. We're discreet, careful, and always on time. After all, we know you expect the best. Timeworks. Making time work for you."

This sounds like it would be incredibly useful if you wanted to have a campaign focusing around the Gatekeeper's Sixth Law enforcement squad.

Also, two quotes from Fred about updating DFRPG to Fate Core:

Read about the Paranet Papers here: http://www.evilhat.com/home/state-of-the-hat-2012-nov/ It's not going to include any kind of Fate Core update in it, though.

A Dresden Files Fate Core conversion would be of minimal use because there's so much legacy stuff in there that'll "corrupt" the mix, if that makes sense.

[Shadowman17]

Sorry if this is a dumb, but I'm still a little confused how something like a shield would work. Is it:

1) I create the shield, creating an Energy Shield scene aspect, then on a defense roll, I can tag it for a free +2 (or reroll) like any other aspect, no matter how many shifts I put in it.

Or...

2) Do the shifts matter, and every time I use the aspect, my attacker has to Overcome an n-shift obstacle.

Or is it something else entirely?

[Skimble]

Under the system proposed by Lenny:

The Evocation for the shield is a Create Advantage action that makes an Aspect (of Force Shield or whatever) which lasts for the scene or until its power has run out.

He says:

"I probably would extend the success with style rules to say that there's another free invocation to stack on at 5 shifts, then again at 7, etc."

He then says the caster would have the choice as to how these are ablated. Each shift can either:

1) Be used to give a +2 passive obstacle that must be overcome by the attacker before he can hurt you, with multiple shifts being burnable this way at the same time. This would let you burn off 3 shifts to put a +6 obstacle in your opponent's way for a turn.

2) Checking them off one at a time to give a bonus on an active defence roll.

So to give a concrete example Harry decides to throw up a shield around himself to defend from bullets being fired by a Renfield. He channels 5 shifts of power and succeeds on the control roll, thus gaining 3 (edited from 2 - he gets an invocation at 1, and another at 3, then another at 5 shifts) free invocations on the shield.

On the renfield's action he tries to shoot Harry. Because Harry's using a magical shield he can use it to actively defend. Harry rolls Discipline as his active defence and rolls a Good. The Renfield rolls his Shooting and gets a Good too, so Harry burns his first free invocation to get his defence up to Superb, ablating the bullet against his shield.

The text on invoking Aspects as an obstacle is:

"Force someone to make a Fair (+2) overcome roll to deal with an obstacle represented by the aspect. If you do this before your target’s turn in a conflict, they have to use their turn on this action instead of the one they were going to do."

If he had wanted to do this Harry could have burned a free invocation on a passive defence, giving the grunt a +2 obstacle to overcome before he could shoot him. Burning two free invocations would have made it a +4 obstacle. If he'd done this before the Renfield's action then the Renfield would have had to spend his entire action overcoming the shield instead of shooting Harry. Otherwise, the Renfield rolls the overcome action in addition to his action to shoot Harry and then Harry gets to defend as normal. Personally if I were GMing this I would say that this defence action would have to be a normal Athletics one as the bullet has penetrated his shield.

As GM I would probably rule that once a shield has been overcome as above when being used as a static obstacle it is destroyed and needs to be re-established. If being used as an active defence it can stay around indefinitely, though this will be down to the way the narrative flows at the table.

I note also that the Caster should be open for Compels on his Force Shield Aspect because he's being distracted as a result of keeping the shield up.

This means that there's a toss-up between the two techniques, and makes the passive barrier most useful as a 'perfect defence' when you get to invoke it before the attacker has his action. On the other hand using it as an active defence is likely to keep it around for longer and lets you defend with a magical skill rather than a physical one.

[Shadowman17]

Skimble, in your example, when you say that Harry succeeds on his roll, do you mean he succeeded with style, because that's the only way that you get two free invocations. Or, do the amount of shifts you put in initially get you those extra invocations? So if I put in 7 shifts, do I get a total of four free invocations (two for 3 shifts, and then one each for 5 and 7 shifts)?

[Skimble]

Succeeding with Style doesn't apply as-written to Dresden-style magic because when you're Evoking you set out to achieve a certain number of shifts and your effect can't go beyond that except that it increases the difficulty of resistance rolls against your Evocation (i.e. if I channel five shifts of power but end up rolling 7 on my Control roll I don't get to add any extra shifts of power to the damage, but the opponent has to roll against 7 to defend... that's if I'm remembering correctly).

My example therefore assumed that he was channelling 5 shifts of power on a Gain Advantage Evocation. The first 3 to get two free invocations (you're right - I forgot about the first free invocation at one shift) of the created advantage and another two to guarantee a third free invocation. This parallels the previous rules for Manoeuvring with Evocation, which set the base difficulty at 3 and gave extra duration for additional shifts.

Whether or not he could get invocations on top of that by rolling 7, 9 etc. shifts in the end is up for the individual group (or an official adaptation of Dresden to the new Core Fate rules) to decide.

You could of course ignore Lenny's suggestion of expanding the Success With Style mechanic and indefinite duration for magically gained Advantages to say it's a flat 3 difficulty to create an advantage + an extra turn of Duration per extra shift channelled and then use the Success With Style rule as-is.

There's no right or wrong way of doing it really, until someone makes an official magic extras pack.

For my game I like the idea that the shifts of power put into the spell (for a shield at least) give its overall power level, so I wouldn't grant additional free invocations if Harry succeeded with style on the Discipline roll even if he got more shifts than he needed to reach the number of shifts of power he channelled. He's 'pre buying' the free invocations instead.

Does that make sense?

[Shadowman17]

That does. Thank you for that.

[admiralducksauce]

For my game I like the idea that the shifts of power put into the spell (for a shield at least) give its overall power level, so I wouldn't grant additional free invocations if Harry succeeded with style on the Discipline roll even if he got more shifts than he needed to reach the number of shifts of power he channelled. He's 'pre buying' the free invocations instead.

Right, pre-buying the shifts maintains the Backlash and Fallout mechanics, which I always liked. Although if you wanted to "Core" backlash/fallout, you could express them as simply minor or major costs for tied/failed rolls. What I mean is, keep doing what you've been doing, but in FATE Core I think you could explain them via the inbuilt "success at a cost" mechanics.