I'm definitely going to adopt at least some of the conflict resolution systems from Fate Core as I think they bring an awesome extra level of dramatic control to the hands of my players. I look forward to watching them squirm on the horns of this dilemma: Do they just fail, or do they succeed at some heavy cost? Ahhh, drama fuel!
On the subject of DFRPG interacting with Fate Core, I've been discussing with Leonard Balsera how the new system deals with what would have been Blocks in Dresden Files. Specifically Shield evocations. The new system doesn't have Blocks but instead handles 'block actions' as Gain Advantage actions that set up an Aspect that needs to be overcome in order to pursue a certain action.
Here's how our conversation went:
Leonard's comments are in
bold.
Hi hi, been pumping for answers on Twitter and Fred asked me to put them here instead. I'm liking the core contest rules but there's a bit of adjustment needed in my head from the Dresden rules (which I'm still getting to grips with anyway!)
I'd like to implement the clear, concise conflict resolution system in Fate Core in my Dresden game but I'm a little confused by the replacement for "Block". The sidebar says that to 'block' one now generally instead creates an Aspect with "Create Advantage" that must be Overcome. It then goes on to say that to Defend another person requires a full defence action. I take this to mean that one can defend someone else by setting up an obstacle (for example a book-case that can be hidden behind) that must be Overcome OR one can directly defend for someone else by taking a Full Defence action. Is this correct?
So, here's as concise as I can get it, and I'll review the draft to get it clearer.
* You can't use the normal Defend action to defend someone else from an attack, unless it's the only thing you do on your turn (aka full defense).
* You *can* put yourself between an attacker and a target, but that just means they're attacking you instead.
* You *can* create an advantage that forces the attacker to overcome an obstacle before they attack, which might disrupt the attack.Thanks Leonard: Okay, so I'd read it right; I think it was the use of - between the two clauses that made them look like one followed directly from the other.
I was giving a concrete example on Twitter because I had a similar situation come up last night in my Dresden game.
A Wizard used Force magic to set up a Manoeuvre/Block to force a spirit creature out of a trailer just as it was about to scythe a victim. He did this by channelling 3 points into an Evocation for a Manoeuvre with some extra shifts to make it more potent, applying the Forced Out aspect to the spirit. He could just as easily have set up a 5-shift Block to stop the spirit, and that's what I'll assume for the purposes of conceptualising the new rules.
Under the new rules the Block would be represented as him taking a Gain Advantage action (and an Evocation) to apply the Magic Force Field Aspect to the scene. The spirit would then have needed to Overcome that Aspect (presumably needing to get more shifts than went into setting it up?) to get through it, presuming it's reasonable for it to penetrate a magic wall of force?
What about the good old shield-bracelet magic bullet shield? I presume the player would manoeuvre to Gain Advantage, setting up an Aspect of "Magic Shield", and then apply that Aspect to defend himself from bullets etc. when making a Defend roll against firearms attacks. Alternatively is it simply assumed bullets can't hit him while the Magic Shield is in effect unless the attacker rolls to Overcome the defence? This might vary according to who's a PC and who's an NPC, if you could answer the 'core interpretation' of both situations that would be really helpful.
I guess I'm a little concerned that the flexibility of multiple possible approaches to dealing with this sort of thing might make it hard to be consistent from one encounter to another if I forget what I did last time and work it out from first principles all over again.
In the alternate quantum universe where I had Fate Core before I designed Dresden, I would likely have said that evocation blocks/wards/whatever are technically creating an advantage, and 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.
Then, the option would go to the caster as to how he wants to let those ablate - as invocations s/he checks off over time when s/he defends, or as an imposed obstacle that s/he gives a value to in the moment, using several of those at once. All the player has to worry about in the moment is "oh, something is bumping on my shield, I get to do something".
In the fiction, that would mean that the rubric for duration for that kind of thing would switch over to "as long as the spell energy lasts". Which some people would consider apropos for Dresden, in any case.
With my luck, though, that solution breaks eight other things in Dresden. 
Thanks very much. I like the idea of Duration coming down to 'available spell energy' where you get multiple 'hits' according to how much energy is in it. Extra free Invocations at higher shifts seems like a good way of doing it, and it does seem more in keeping with the way Harry uses his shields than a shield of fixed duration. He generally seems to be able to hold his shields up indefinitely with them only draining him when he actually takes hits.
This does lead me to ask: Are there plans to release a short document updating the Dresden Magic and other systems (where necessary) to work with Fate Core? In the meantime I really like what you've done with the 3, 5, 7 etc. shift shield idea and I might just implement that as is!
It seems that this is a really easy way to implement any Evocation that lasts a matter of turns; you can sustain it with Fate Points after that, but once you're outta Fate points and out of free invocations, it's gone. Would you require an invocation every time the shield's used defensively if you were using the mechanic you suggested to stop it from lingering more than a few turns? Otherwise it would last the scene like any other 'sticky' Aspect, right?
Require an invocation? Probably not - for all practical intents and purposes, it's a scene aspect like any other, as you suggest.
So I could see charging up a shield when a fight starts and saving it a while for when you really need it.That seems reasonable to me. Once you're out of Fate Points or tags it would only be a limited defence, so would represent the stage at which Harry's still just about holding up a guttering shield. I might be inclined to have an attack that went through it at that stage overcome the shield and put it out altogether, as it's on its last legs in those circumstances.
