ParanetOnline

The Dresden Files => DFRPG => Topic started by: ways and means on May 03, 2011, 03:28:22 PM

Title: Taken Out Result
Post by: ways and means on May 03, 2011, 03:28:22 PM
If a WCV PC took out an enemy with Incite Emotion and then said as taken out result he wanted the enemy dead from feeding (so he could heal) the correct response is too say no isn't it? 
Title: Re: Taken Out Result
Post by: luminos on May 03, 2011, 03:39:36 PM
The correct response is to say yes.  Seriously, its one of the rules.  Several of them in fact, for that particular example.  The person who takes someone out always decides what happens to the person taken out (as long as its reasonable, and killing from feeding happens enough in the books that this example is very reasonable). 

Killing someone with incite emotion gives emotional vampires an immediate free recovery.  This is also one of the rules.

Saying no is flat out, no gray area, cheating.
Title: Re: Taken Out Result
Post by: Belial666 on May 03, 2011, 03:45:17 PM
Actually, it depends.

If it was ranged incite emotion, then the target may be dead, insane, dominated or similar but the vampire cannot have fed.
if it was melee incite emotion but the vampire did not double the attack into a feeding, then the results are as above and the PC either forgot or chose not to feed.
If it was melee incite emotion and the vampire doubled up the attack into a feeding, then the target is dead and the vampire gets free recovery.
Title: Re: Taken Out Result
Post by: sandchigger on May 03, 2011, 03:45:53 PM
Yeah, that's a valid consequence of a WCV feeding.

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Taken Out Result
Post by: luminos on May 03, 2011, 04:02:52 PM
@Belial you are incorrect.  By the example, the player chose to kill the character in order to feed.  The players choice to kill is not in question, and is fully unquestionably supported by the rules.  The players choice to feed is also not presented as being in question.  The ranged/melee dichotomy could be a point of contention, yes (although its borrowing trouble to include stipulations not included in the original example) but the rules for emotional vampire (YS 189) make no such distinction in the Taste of Death entry, so even then it would be worth establishing a line on the issue before it came up rather than just handwaving the players attempts away in the middle of play.
Title: Re: Taken Out Result
Post by: WillH on May 03, 2011, 04:10:10 PM
Quote from: Belial666 on May 03, 2011, 03:45:17 PM
Actually, it depends.

If it was ranged incite emotion, then the target may be dead, insane, dominated or similar but the vampire cannot have fed.
if it was melee incite emotion but the vampire did not double the attack into a feeding, then the results are as above and the PC either forgot or chose not to feed.
If it was melee incite emotion and the vampire doubled up the attack into a feeding, then the target is dead and the vampire gets free recovery.

Even in those first two cases you could describe the taken out result as the victim being overwhelmed with emotion and made helpless allowing you to move in and feed. The only way it would really be an issue is if there was still an ongoing fight and feeding would require you to change zones, or if touching the victim was somehow impossible at the moment.
Title: Re: Taken Out Result
Post by: Belial666 on May 03, 2011, 04:14:54 PM
Quote
If a WCV PC took out an enemy with Incite Emotion and then said as taken out result he wanted the enemy dead from feeding

Emphasis mine. Incite Emotion causes mental stress but is not Feeding - that's what the player is said to have used. Emotional Vampire can also cause mental stress and is feeding - and is a separate ability that can be (but is not automatically) used at the same time. So, if the player used Incite Emotion in melee and took out the target but forgot to also use Emotional Vampire at the same time, no feeding.
Yes, it is kinda dumb to forget to use the actual feeding ability but if you first kill with just Incite you can't then declare it a feeding.


The issue is that Incite Emotion can kill. Once you kill the target, you can't then feed on it. If the target had been declared insane with lust or whatever as a takeout, then feeding would be possible. But he was killed.
Title: Re: Taken Out Result
Post by: Silverblaze on May 03, 2011, 04:26:33 PM
Target: dead regardless.

Fed on to heal: only say no if Belial was correct and the player forgot.

Two caveats: #1 if you do not want the NPC dead : try a compel + escalation. #2  If for story purposes you think feeding would save the PC or party trouble in an upcomming encounter it is within your prerogative to allow it.
Title: Re: Taken Out Result
Post by: Tsunami on May 03, 2011, 04:44:02 PM
Quote from: Belial666 on May 03, 2011, 04:14:54 PM
The issue is that Incite Emotion can kill. Once you kill the target, you can't then feed on it. If the target had been declared insane with lust or whatever as a takeout, then feeding would be possible. But he was killed.
Actually, you were the one to say that the victim was killed by incite emotion. The original wording was " took out an enemy with Incite Emotion".

My Opinion.
A taken out victim, as long as still alive, can be fed upon without trouble.
If the conflict is over, simply go with the dead from feeding result, and narrate it as the WCV Feeding on the helpless victim after the conflict as part of the take out.
If the Conflict is not yet over, and the character want's to feed and heal mid conflict but forgot to use his feeding power when taking out the target, then i'd let him feed on the taken out victim and heal, but I'd have that take up his next action.
Title: Re: Taken Out Result
Post by: Roxy Rocket on May 03, 2011, 04:59:54 PM
Listen to the Tsunami. The Tsunami is wise.

But sometimes dead isn't dead. You might just get a new hair color and a fancy motorized chair with rockets and machine guns built into it or go around in life sustaining metal armor saying things like "I am the Law."
Title: Re: Taken Out Result
Post by: WillH on May 03, 2011, 05:01:35 PM
You know, I would not be surprised if the player in question does not even realize there is a distinction between incite and feeding. If that's the case don't play gotcha with them. Just let them feed. Heck, I would assume someone with both abilities was doing both unless they specifically said otherwise or it was not possible.
Title: Re: Taken Out Result
Post by: ways and means on May 03, 2011, 05:09:22 PM
I am a little bit wary of allowing white court vampires to attack mentally twice a turn (balance issues) and so only allow them to feed and incite when they use the manouvre part of incite emotion which for this particular white court vamp loses him his +4 weapons so he was inciting for damage maxing reasons from the same zone.
Title: Re: Taken Out Result
Post by: Tedronai on May 03, 2011, 05:30:32 PM
You don't have to allow him to attack twice in a turn.  Just let him count the incite roll, with all attendant bonuses and effects, as the feeding roll as well, with all attendant bonuses and effects.  That way, they can block and attack at the same time, or they can maneuver and attack at the same time, or they can attack with a stress bonus.
As is RAW.
Title: Re: Taken Out Result
Post by: Belial666 on May 03, 2011, 05:45:31 PM
RAW says they can use both Incite and Feed at the same time. It doesn't say that, if the Incite has the stress upgrades, you can't use lasting/potent emotion + feed at the same time (which results into double stress, effectively)
Title: Re: Taken Out Result
Post by: Tedronai on May 03, 2011, 06:37:04 PM
My interpretation, above (allowing the combination, when both are applicable, with all benefits of both, but not two instances of stress), is probably the LEAST generous interpretation supported by the RAW.
Title: Re: Taken Out Result
Post by: Blackblade on May 03, 2011, 06:57:30 PM
If the target is taken out by ranged incite emotion and the player still wants to feed, I'd say a valid Take Out result could be "The victim is drawn closer to the vampire, and offers no resistance to the feeding."   
Title: Re: Taken Out Result
Post by: Tedronai on May 03, 2011, 07:33:16 PM
Quote from: Blackblade on May 03, 2011, 06:57:30 PM
"The victim is drawn closer to the vampire, and offers no resistance to the feeding."   

If the WCV is a Raith, sure.
Title: Re: Taken Out Result
Post by: Silverblaze on May 03, 2011, 08:17:39 PM
Quote from: Tedronai on May 03, 2011, 06:37:04 PM
My interpretation, above (allowing the combination, when both are applicable, with all benefits of both, but not two instances of stress), is probably the LEAST generous interpretation supported by the RAW.

I totally agree.  One can do as they please in their games, but I'd never allow it were I running the game nor would I play in a game where that system was being used.

X2 stress with proper upgrades and tagging aspects can "one shot" about anything in game. 
Title: Re: Taken Out Result
Post by: Belial666 on May 03, 2011, 08:31:39 PM
Except things that feel no emotions, like zombies or constructs or the Black Court. Or a prepared wizard under a Mind Blank spell. Or...


You get the idea.
Title: Re: Taken Out Result
Post by: Silverblaze on May 03, 2011, 08:57:46 PM
Quote from: Belial666 on May 03, 2011, 08:31:39 PM
Except things that feel no emotions, like zombies or constructs or the Black Court. Or a prepared wizard under a Mind Blank spell. Or...


You get the idea.

I do get the idea.

"about anything" denotes not everything. 
Key point.  Wizards are/can be invulnerable given enough prep time.  Most times, they're slightly more steeled mentally than humans.  I'm pretty sure black court vampires feel emotions.

However, the point is you like/allow it and I don't I see neither of us budging on that opinion.  I don't mind debating reasons, but it may be a waste of time on both counts.  I'd rather have a wizard throw a 10-15 point evocation than get double incited.
Title: Re: Taken Out Result
Post by: Becq on May 03, 2011, 10:11:40 PM
The rules for this are vaguely written, and could be interpreted to allow double damage with Incite+Feeding.  However, given the pains through which the designers went to ensure that in every other aspect of the game, there was no way of generating damage twice with one attack, or two attacks with one action, or an attack plus a maneuver with one action, etc, etc ... I think I feel comfortable in assuming they did not mean for that to happen here.

I think the core of the confusion lies in the following section in the Emotional Vampire rules:
Quote from: YS189
When a victim is in the throes of an eligible emotion (usually easy for a White Court vampire using his Incite Emotion ability, page 172), you may draw some of his life force out of him to sustain you. This is done as a psychological attack with an appropriate skill (usually Deceit or Intimidation).

The "This is done" sentence is refering to how one gets the viction into the throes of an eligible emotion (ie, by making a psychological attack); it is not saying that the feeding itself is a psychological attack.  So an Emotional Vampire without Incite Emotion could use a psychological attack (for example, a seduction attempt for lust vampires, which would be handled as mental combat complete with stress and consequences) to create the emotion, which he could then feed on.  This would take quite some time, generally, and would not be appropriate for combat (because such mental attacks are slow).

Emotional Vampires who also have Incite Emotion can use Incite to 'create the mood' in place of a normal psychological attack (not in addition to), and can gain the benefits of feeding as part of the same action.  This means that you get either the maneuver or stress from the Incite plus the benefits of feeding (which don't appear to have any mechanical benefits unless the target is taken out and killed as a result of the attack+feeding), but not 'double damage'.

At least, that's my read.  Your mileage may vary.

As to the original question, the attacking player dictates the Taken Out results within reason (ie, the GM and group should agree that the results are reasonable), and death is very specifically a reasonable result for the feeding done by an Emotional Vampire.  But the player decides whether he draws deeply enough to kill; he can choose not to do so (and wouldn't gain the benefits of feeding to death, of cours
Title: Re: Taken Out Result
Post by: Tedronai on May 04, 2011, 01:33:14 AM
Immediately followed by:
Quote from: YS189
If you have the
Incite Emotion ability, inciting the emotion
and feeding on it may be done as a single
action, based on a single roll.

Which definitely does go a long way to imply that the preceding passage you quoted is, in fact, referring to the feeding as being an attack (as it can be combined in a single roll with a power that is, by default, not and attack in and of itself).
Title: Re: Taken Out Result
Post by: ways and means on May 04, 2011, 02:51:30 AM
If you are going by the RAW you can incite emotion and feed on it can be done as a single action, the incite emotion attack is still inciting an emotion so by the RAW you can make two attacks as a single action. Given this though it does seem obvious that this is probably not the way this power was intended to work and it probably should be errataed, my house rule is that a person can incite emotion (manouvre) and feed on it (attack) in the same turn but cannot incite emotion (attack) and feed (attack) in the same turn, this is still very powerful but is in my opinion how the rules where intended to be run.
Title: Re: Taken Out Result
Post by: Blackblade on May 04, 2011, 03:23:32 AM
This brings up another question: if you incite as a maneuver and feed off of it, would you get a weapon bonus to your attack if you had lasting or potent emotion? 

Additionally, does the +2 you get for inciting as a maneuver apply to just the maneuver, or to the maneuver and the attack, since they're done on the same roll?
Title: Re: Taken Out Result
Post by: ways and means on May 04, 2011, 03:26:17 AM
Quote from: Blackblade on May 04, 2011, 03:23:32 AM
This brings up another question: if you incite as a maneuver and feed off of it, would you get a weapon bonus to your attack if you had lasting or potent emotion?  

Additionally, does the +2 you get for inciting as a maneuver apply to just the maneuver, or to the maneuver and the attack, since they're done on the same roll?

I run on no for the first one as the weapons bonus only applies to the incite emotion attack and yes for the second, as the second one you are dealing with a single actions so it would make sense having only one roll result. Still though what this ends up meaning is an attack of 7 then 8 subsequent turns (deceit 5).
Title: Re: Taken Out Result
Post by: Blackblade on May 04, 2011, 03:48:43 AM
Which could get up to ten if you tag the emotion incited in the previous turn.
Title: Re: Taken Out Result
Post by: Taran on May 04, 2011, 03:50:52 AM
There needs to be an emotion to feed.

If you used incite emotion and didn't hurt the target enough to cause a consequence then you couldn't feed and therefore cause more stress.

It seems a maneuver is better if you need to immediately cause a target to be "lustful" or "fearful".

If the target is already feeling the emotion, then I wouldn't allow the player to use both the incite and the feeding because there's no need to incite MORE lust in order to feed.

If the target is not feeling a strong emotion, I'd allow an incite emotion then, if it works (through causing stress and consequences), I might allow additional damage from the feeding for that one exchange at least.  

I think the "do it in one round" thing is just so you can start feeding in one exchange, otherwise a WCV would have to go through multiple exchanges to feed: 1 to incite, 1 to feed.  I think the purpose is to make the attack smoother, not encourage double damage.
Title: Re: Taken Out Result
Post by: Becq on May 04, 2011, 08:32:49 PM
Quote from: Tedronai on May 04, 2011, 01:33:14 AM
Immediately followed by:
Which definitely does go a long way to imply that the preceding passage you quoted is, in fact, referring to the feeding as being an attack (as it can be combined in a single roll with a power that is, by default, not and attack in and of itself).
My point was that the sentence I quoted says (in my opinion) "you may gain the effects of feeding while performing a psychological attack that creates the required emotion (ie, engaging in a seduction 'conflict')", while the next sentence which you quoted says "Oh, and you can also feed as part of other types of attacks that create the require emotion, such as Incite Emotion".  The key being that the feeding (which is not an attack in and of itself) can be latched onto an actual attack (whether it's a basic 'everyman' attack using social/mental combat that might take an hour-long exchange and a bottle of expensive wine to complete, or an Incite Emotion attack which is very fast) without requiring a seperate action.
Title: Re: Taken Out Result
Post by: ways and means on May 04, 2011, 08:46:19 PM
Your Story - Emotional Vampire

Quote
When a victim is in the throes of an eligible emotion
(usually easy for a White Court vampire
using his Incite Emotion ability, page 172), you
may draw some of his life force out of him
to sustain you. This is done as a psychological
attack with an appropriate skill (usually
Deceit or Intimidation).

This states that feeding is a pyschological attack which means a mental attack.  Then again my opinion from the Novels is that the actual feeding should be physical damage.