ParanetOnline
The Dresden Files => DFRPG => Topic started by: InFerrumVeritas on May 18, 2011, 02:54:07 PM
-
What it says on the tin.
I don't think so, but it's probably a gray area. I'm just curious what others think though.
-
Harry specifically states that putting someone to sleep is allowed.
In game mechanics, "Sleep" is a Taken Out result when imposed.
From a Law standing, putting someone to sleep is equivalent to restraining them. You aren't reading their mind, you aren't manipulating their thoughts, you aren't transforming them, and you aren't killing them. I suspect the reason wizards don't do this very often is that it's more difficult to do quickly than other methods of restraint. Wardens carry swords to use against resisters, as well as manacles. Sleeping them would be allowed, but it's extra effort to get the same result.
Now, entering people's dreams would definitely be a violation, as well as trying to manipulate those dreams.
-
I am not sure that entering a persons dreams would be breaking the laws that is entirely subjective on the dreamscape, if all dreams are conected (the collective sub-consious) then navigating them shouldn't be lore breaking as long as you don't break throught he front door.
-
Putting someone to sleep would be a taken out result, I agree. Mostly though, I think, if your goal is to put a sleeping aspect on a target, a ritual or a potion would be better suited. Or you do it like Harry, to a willing target, which, I would assume, would not break the law (see below).
As for entering someone else's dream, it should be possible. Remember the nightmare, he waited until Malone was asleep and had created his own dreamspace in the nevernever to attack, because only then was he able to get to him: through the nevernever. A wizard should be able to locate the dreamspace of someone else and enter it. What he does if he is in there is a whole different story.
And on a side note:
What about if someone invites a wizard to change something inside his mind? Like hiring an interior designer, the designer is only the one doing the work, all the decisions come from the person himself. The same thing for transforming the body of someone, would it be allowed if it is done with the targets consent?
-
if all dreams are conected (the collective sub-consious) then navigating them shouldn't be lore breaking as long as you don't break through the front door.
Ah, the Jungian collective subconscious.
If you want to establish a Jungian model for the dreamscape of a DV game, that's certainly possible, but an honest-to-goodness Jungian model in a DresdenVerse setting would be clogged with supernatural abusers.
One could theoretically establish that something similar to the Outer Gates was guarding the realms of Dream from such predators, but then there would likely be self-appointed or summoned watchmen roaming Dream, and they may have their own rules about people meddling in their realm.
It could certainly add a wonderful "Dream Quest of Unknown Kadath" element to the setting though, but that's really delving into Lovecraftian cosmology and the horrors of self-knowledge, and straying from the core DresdenVerse quality of supernatural ass-kicking in the mortal realm.
As for entering someone else's dream, it should be possible. Remember the nightmare, he waited until Malone was asleep and had created his own dreamspace in the nevernever to attack, because only then was he able to get to him: through the nevernever. A wizard should be able to locate the dreamspace of someone else and enter it. What he does if he is in there is a whole different story.
And on a side note:
What about if someone invites a wizard to change something inside his mind? Like hiring an interior designer, the designer is only the one doing the work, all the decisions come from the person himself. The same thing for transforming the body of someone, would it be allowed if it is done with the targets consent?
Edit: I think/hope the Nevernever element of dreaming is considered making one's own temporary Demesne, rather than opening up to the Nevernever in its entirety.
As for the side note, I recall that having a voluntary subject does not really excuse oneself from the Lawbreaking element of things, though circumstances always inform such decisions.
-
If a table allows for a collective Dreaming (or collective Unconsciousness), getting there while conscious should be difficult...and interpreting what you find in a dream to be VERY difficult, and requiring Scholarship and Investigation.
(My image was for a tall, pale, black haired man dressed in shifting garb, quietly inquiring as to what business you might have in His Realm...)
As for allowing someone to 'take charge' for a bit...
Hmmm. That's a VERY grey area, at best. The Council might very well rule that a mundane CAN'T give reasoned consent to such an act, any more than a minor can agree to certain acts, because the mundane simply can't understand what they are asking for, or agreeing to.
Personally, I might allow transformation, simply because it fits many stories and legends, and because free will isn't being affected (if the target consents to or wants such a transformation). There might be a great story hook in it as well; what if the target deceives the wizard and uses their new form to murder some people? Now, the wizard is being accused of being a Lawbreaker, both 1st and Fourth! "I didn't want to do it; some strange compulsion drove me to kill that guy!" The group must try and prove the wizard's innocence, and the 'victim's' guilt, before the Wardens take action...
-
Edit: I think/hope the Nevernever element of dreaming is considered making one's own temporary Demesne, rather than opening up to the Nevernever in its entirety.
It kind of is both, I think. You create your own temporary demesne, but it is part of the nevernever. Not every dream creates a temporary demesne, not even very much of them, but very intense dreams or in an area, where the walls between the worlds are thin, it is possible. It is just another way of entering a dream, and I would say a much less invasive one than directly trying to get in there. And like I said, if you mess around in there, you are going to be lawbreaking. It could, however, be a way to communicate if you have some sort of sleeping beauty story. But just like in Inception, I would have the dreamworld attack the intruder after a while, even if he is friendly, and even if the resident is ok with him being there.
Personally, I might allow transformation, simply because it fits many stories and legends, and because free will isn't being affected (if the target consents to or wants such a transformation). There might be a great story hook in it as well; what if the target deceives the wizard and uses their new form to murder some people? Now, the wizard is being accused of being a Lawbreaker, both 1st and Fourth! "I didn't want to do it; some strange compulsion drove me to kill that guy!" The group must try and prove the wizard's innocence, and the 'victim's' guilt, before the Wardens take action...
I like that idea :)
-
From a more "mechanical" perspective:
I had a player who wanted to do the same thing. Except, as he envisioned it, a sleep spell would cause mental stress, with "taken out" being falling asleep. As far as I was concerned, a spell that deals mental stress (to its target) violates the laws of magic. The examples in the book show sleep spells as applied to a willing target, with the point of creating dreamless sleep. While intent is generally not important when it comes to breaking the laws, I think the actual effect in this case is different enough to make it different circumstances.
-
My take:
What Law would putting someone to sleep break? It does not cause death. It does not transform the target (or if you want to play semantics, it doesn't transform the target into something incompatable to their normal self, either physically or mentally, though one might argue that a *permanent* coma might cross the line). You are not entering their mind. You are not gaining control over their thought processes. There are no necromantic, temporal, or outsider issues.
TL;DR: I think a spell that inflicts sleep is fine from a Lawbreaker perspective, unless *maybe* its of the "Sleeping Beauty" variety.
-
Sleep is probably one of the staple tools of the Wardens. Knock em out - slit their throat. EZ- PZ.
-
So a sleep spell mental or physical stress ?
-
So a sleep spell mental or physical stress ?
Mental.
Edit: It's mental if you're using spirit to attack the mind.
It may be something else if you can figure out another way to make someone sleep - like through sponsored magic or something.
In that case, it would probably still be mental stress but defended against using endurance instead of discipline or conviction.
-
A water spell making a tranquilizer solution or venom would be physical otherwiee I agree...mental.
-
Mental.
Edit: It's mental if you're using spirit to attack the mind.
It may be something else if you can figure out another way to make someone sleep - like through sponsored magic or something.
You wouldn't need sponsored magic. Just like lightening, sleep can be produced in many way - ways not touching on the mind.
You could use a potion for an anesthesia type effect. Magic should be able to duplicate any physical effect that chloroform produces.
Or physical targeted attack using thaumaturgy - assigning someone the physical mild consequence of "asleep". Easily explained by slowing down a person's body or activating the centres in the brain that regulate sleep. If your Lore is high enough you could even craft something like that in a potion like vessel - call it the Hanky of Nighty-Nighty (based off the Sunlight in handkerchief "potion"). Unleash it on someone and get the same effect as asking "Does this rag smell like chloroform to you?*".
I can envision some wardens making stockpiles of these items - for when they have to use physical ways to make mundanes sleep.
Evocation? There's air to choke someone to unconsciousness - either through the "Dark Vader Death Grip" or keeping it out of someone's lungs. Air or earth to do a sleeper hold (maybe spirit as well). Earth to make someone's blood heavy and rush from his head. Spirit to draw the humors of the blood from his head.
As I said, a sleep spell is like lightening. All sorts of ways to do it, and if you're careful you don't have to risk breaking the law to do it.
Richard
* = yes, that was a Leverage quote. What can I said? I like Parker.
-
I disagree that a sleep spell is mental. A sleep spell is about making someone physically incapable of staying away. Mental attacks are about inflicting psychological trauma and direct attacks against the victims sense of self:
"When this kind of damage is accessible in a conflict, it marks a transition from social into mental territory and puts perhaps the direst stakes of all on the line—the individual’s mind, soul, or sense of self."
"Mental damage is the kind of damage that changes or erodes a person’s sense of self; suffering enough of these consequences over time tends to presage a trip to the mental ward, or at least to permanent counseling."
Some other systems use 'mental damage' (or variations on the term) to describe less permanent kinds of damage like stun damage. But DFRPG takes a very different approach. And with respect to this particular question, the following quote spells it out fairly clearly (my emphasis):
"The physical stress track is used for stress such as wounds and fatigue. The mental stress track represents psychological and emotional trauma."
-
Exactly. Messing with dreams is a mental effect, but the basic effort to make someone want to lay down and take a nap is physical stress.
If someone wants to resist a physical sleep attack with some sort of characteristic wariness/wakefulness, then that would be either invoking an Aspect for a defense bonus, or rolling for a Navel-Gazing Maneuver to create a comparable Aspect to tag.
-
You can't forget that DFRP uses mental stress for fatigue (well at least whilst casting) a sleep spell could easily be seen as a fatigue spell.
-
I would say that a Sleep spell is usually Physical stress, unless circumstances dictate otherwise. This is from a gameplay perspective as much as anything.
I would also negate the advantage of it being 'safe' to use on humans with the disadvantage that you can pretty easily use Discipline or Endurance to defend against it rather than Athletics. Basically, you get a spell that is Lawbreaker-safe for humans, but it's way easy to justify multiple defensive skills against it. This explains why Wardens aren't more free with the Sleep spells in the novels. It's great if you need to take out a night security guard without hurting him, but a bad choice agianst enemy spellcasters and their high Disiplines.
-
You can't forget that DFRP uses mental stress for fatigue (well at least whilst casting) a sleep spell could easily be seen as a fatigue spell.
That is, because it is a mental exercise. If you were to run a few miles, I am pretty sure that would be physical stress.
I know that phenomenon when in a high studying phase. I would learn all day and be tired as hell after that. But I didn't do anything physical, and I would be able to do a whole lot more, as long as it didn't involve thinking. And I know this the other way, too, though being physically exhausted will have more of an impact on your mental capacities than the other way around.
So if you are trying to tire someone, you could use this to your advantage (or it could be used to your disadvantage). A huge guy, made mostly of muscle might not be able to withstand much mental stress and could be worn down like that. On the other hand, he is probably not using much of his brain when he is punching you in the face, so he might be "immun" to that kind of sleep spell (which might be reflected in an aspect like "all muscle, no brain" or even a stunt).
-
I would personally give people with mythic recovery powers immunity to physical sleep spells as they are imune to exhaustion and never need to sleep. Not so sure about the mental sleep spells though.
-
I would personally give people with mythic recovery powers immunity to physical sleep spells as they are imune to exhaustion and never need to sleep. Not so sure about the mental sleep spells though.
Well they don't need to sleep, but I am sure they still can sleep. WCV and RCV don't need to feed on normal food, but they still do on occasion. They should have an advantage resisting a spell or potion like that (which is reflected in their power anyway), and the sleep might not be as deep/long as it would be on a regular person. At the latest, when the consequences are gone, that brought them down.
-
Well they don't need to sleep, but I am sure they still can sleep. WCV and RCV don't need to feed on normal food, but they still do on occasion. They should have an advantage resisting a spell or potion like that (which is reflected in their power anyway), and the sleep might not be as deep/long as it would be on a regular person. At the latest, when the consequences are gone, that brought them down.
Uh, White Court Vampires probably still need to eat real food. They do have the human body and all.
You have a point that just because they (they being the being with Mythic Recovery) never need to sleep, it doesn't mean they can't. I would say that because they never need to, it would be quite hard to force them to, via any means. They may feel an urge to sleep due to the spell, but they have the innate ability to just ignore it forever. In fact, one of the parts of Recovery is that you never need to roll for fatigue, so physical causes of sleep are pretty much moot. Also, with Recovery like that, trying to drug them would be pretty futile in my opinion as well, since they would process the sedatives or whatever you used too quickly for them to have any real effect. So no tricky mundane answer either.
-
I would personally give people with mythic recovery powers immunity to physical sleep spells as they are imune to exhaustion and never need to sleep. Not so sure about the mental sleep spells though.
I don't see there being a problem with a mental and physical version. If a thing has Mythic Toughness, and you're sure it isn't mortal, use the mental version.
-
If you just want someone/thing to fall asleep for a round or two to slit their throat, you would probably only need to do a maneuver and then tag it for effect.
I just have a really hard time imagining that putting things to sleep is very hard for a warden ... and /most/ wardens are not 40+ refresh powerhouses like the Sr. Council.
-
If you just want someone/thing to fall asleep for a round or two to slit their throat, you would probably only need to do a maneuver and then tag it for effect.
I'm assuming that you'd then, what, make an attack with their Defense score at +0 and hope you get enough physical consequences?
-
I'm assuming that you'd then, what, make an attack with their Defense score at +0 and hope you get enough physical consequences?
If someone is unconscious they are helpless.
I would let a PC kill someone in that state without a roll.
It's not too OP either because the compel for effect can be resisted for a fate point by the NPC, and it can be rolled against (the maneuver) before the PC has another turn.
-
It's not too OP either because the compel for effect can be resisted for a fate point by the NPC, and it can be rolled against (the maneuver) before the PC has another turn.
Unless folks are acting in sequence, as all good, abusive players do. Unless it's saved for that moment when the opponent has no more fate points to resist the compel with. ;-)
Sorry, I can't see allowing someone a Taken Out result for free.
-
Unless folks are acting in sequence, as all good, abusive players do. Unless it's saved for that moment when the opponent has no more fate points to resist the compel with. ;-)
Sorry, I can't see allowing someone a Taken Out result for free.
Not taken out. Dead.
If they wanted to tie the unconscious person up or something, they'd have to roll an appropriate skill for it to place an aspect.
-
That seems awefully save or die to me, if you wanted to do that with an unconsious enemy I would consider unconsious to mean taken out and require you to do stress until all the opponents concequences are gone first.
-
That seems awefully save or die to me, if you wanted to do that with an unconsious enemy I would consider unconsious to mean taken out and require you to do stress until all the opponents concequences are gone first.
I don't think you should be able to maneuver to make an enemy helpless or unconscious. That seems like Taken Out to me. If they are taken out, then I'd say you could kill them without a roll.
-
Part of the problem may be our interpretation of "an enemy".
I am talking about humans.
Supernatural creatures - in my game - will all have some sort of catch to make them fall asleep. In fact, it would be far easier for a group to take them out.
Humans are very, very frail, though.
What if your PC carried chloroform around and did a sneak attack to apply the aspect "Chloroform'd"?
Making the NPC continue fighting after that would make no sense whatsoever.
-
It all depends on what makes a good story.
Carrying around chloroform isn't illegal, exactly; but expect a LOT of questions by the local police if you're caight. Also, chloroform leaves traces and burns in high concentrations, so it's pretty easy to identify and trace.
Personally, I don't think it makes for a very dramatic story to let the PCs (or NPCs) simply gas their opposition into slumber.
-
It all depends on what makes a good story.
Carrying around chloroform isn't illegal, exactly; but expect a LOT of questions by the local police if you're caight. Also, chloroform leaves traces and burns in high concentrations, so it's pretty easy to identify and trace.
Personally, I don't think it makes for a very dramatic story to let the PCs (or NPCs) simply gas their opposition into slumber.
It does if they do it to one opponent and it works only to try it on another and discover a RCV with a flesh mask.... :)
Gotta think outside the box.
I'm all for RAW and crunchy, but I just can't bring myself to abandon common sense.
-
Personally, I don't think it makes for a very dramatic story to let the PCs (or NPCs) simply gas their opposition into slumber.
Using chloroform on an opponent could be the most elegant way to accomplish a particular goal, but it probably shouldn't become a gaming group's modus operandi. It's all a part of the game economy, part of the plot. We see it in movies and books, so it's natural to want to replicate it.
The question - going back to the rules: is this a Concession, a Taken Out, or simply the consequences of a Compel?
Concession isn't necessarily the answer, because what if the victim (I imagine a PC in this case) opts to not accept it?
Taken Out implies that the chloroform-user could have opted to kill the target character.
Compel sounds close, but it seems pretty strong even for a Compel.
-
Using chloroform on an opponent could be the most elegant way to accomplish a particular goal, but it probably shouldn't become a gaming group's modus operandi. It's all a part of the game economy, part of the plot. We see it in movies and books, so it's natural to want to replicate it.
The question - going back to the rules: is this a Concession, a Taken Out, or simply the consequences of a Compel?
Concession isn't necessarily the answer, because what if the victim (I imagine a PC in this case) opts to not accept it?
Taken Out implies that the chloroform-user could have opted to kill the target character.
Compel sounds close, but it seems pretty strong even for a Compel.
Those were exactly my thoughts on the matter.
A maneuver+tag for effect seems most appropriate, and if the victim pays one fate point to resist it, they will still be out, but get one exchange in which to act.
-
No way.
The same logic that lets you automatically take someone out with chloroform would let you automatically take someone out with a gun. After all, it's quite unrealistic to survive a bullet to the forehead. In fact, it's probably more unrealistic than remaining concious with chloroform over your mouth.
Personally, I'd straight-up laugh at a player who tried to knock someone out with a maneuver. If it can knock someone out, it's an attack. Because being knocked out is a form of being taken out.
Not all NPCs have Fate Points. Even really powerful ones don't always have them. So this would end a lot of interesting fights too easily.
Also, it shouldn't be that easy to drain someone's FP.
If it strains your suspension of disbelief to have people remain standing with a a CHLOROFORMED aspect, then don't allow it as a maneuver. Would you let someone create a DECAPITATED aspect with a Weapons maneuver?
-
It's taken me awhile, but I'm rediscovering the treads of my original conclusion on this matter.
Chloroforming heroes: plot-level action. Fate Point(s) should probably be awarded.
Chloroforming mooks: relatively easy, by comparison, but still not so easy.
Imagine a scene in a movie.
In one take, the spy sneaks up behind the guard, performs the Maneuver, and the guard goes down.
In another take, the spy sneaks up behind the guard, performs the Maneuver, but fails. The guard fights back. The spy has to break his neck or something.
Is the second example a failed Maneuver? Or is the first example a Concession? Because compared to the second example, it sounds like one.
In the third take, the spy approaches a tougher guard. The guard will probably take a Consequence. The spy may not be able to cause enough Stress to overcome him just with a successful Fists attack (armed with choloroform). So the spy sets up the Ambush as before, and takes the time to set up some other Aspects: Well-Timed; Distraction; Drawing a Bead. Then when the ambush happens, the spy can plausibly Take Out the tougher guard with the attack.
-
No way.
The same logic that lets you automatically take someone out with chloroform would let you automatically take someone out with a gun. After all, it's quite unrealistic to survive a bullet to the forehead. In fact, it's probably more unrealistic than remaining concious with chloroform over your mouth.
That's comparing apples and oranges. You don't have to be within arms distance, undetected, and holding a delivery system for a powerful drug to shoot someone.
That said, if a PC wanted to shoot someone in the head and did a similar set up for the "Chloroformed" aspect, I would allow it.
Why? Because with any sort of decent guns roll a shot would surpass a standard vanilla mortal's stress track and they'd be taken out anyway.
Personally, I'd straight-up laugh at a player who tried to knock someone out with a maneuver. If it can knock someone out, it's an attack. Because being knocked out is a form of being taken out.
We can agree to disagree I suppose. But keep in mind that I am not talking about knocking out a BCV. I'm talking about knocking out a regular person. Hell, it's not that hard to do. I can do it in RL - why the hell can't my souped up, supernaturally powered PCs do it?
Not all NPCs have Fate Points. Even really powerful ones don't always have them. So this would end a lot of interesting fights too easily.
I keep an NPC fate point pile in the middle of the table.
If the PCs are trying to drug and then kidnap a crime boss (for instance), he would definitely use a fate point to cry out or throw something to alert his goons before he passes out.
Also, it shouldn't be that easy to drain someone's FP.
Who said anything about easy? To sneak into a hideout, get a badguy alone and then chloroform him is not exactly buying a DVD at Best Buy.
Plus, this attack would obviously be seen in a public venue and the PC who did it would be a wanted criminal.
I am not understanding why everyone keeps calling this attack "easy".
It's far easier to just snipe someone from 400 yards away. With enough NGM and a high guns skill, that's a one shot kill on almost anything. I can do that in RL.
Sneaking into a bad guy's hideout to drug him, slit his throat, and then extricate myself without being killed - that I CAN'T do.
So where is the level of difficulty less for a chloroform attack?
If it strains your suspension of disbelief to have people remain standing with a a CHLOROFORMED aspect, then don't allow it as a maneuver.
Or, since it's my game and my word is law, I DO allow it, and I let the PC tag the aspect for effect. :)
Would you let someone create a DECAPITATED aspect with a Weapons maneuver?
Yes I would. A swordsman with a weapons skill of 4+ with anything larger than a hunting knife would get that ability in my game... VS a mook regular human.
Against a fairie warrior - hell no.
I think one has to look at what is allowed and what is not through a lens of what is thematically appropriate.
If a 10 refresh badass wants to kill a 14 year old babysitter, it should not take 3 rounds due to bad rolls. That is just silly.
-
So, you're allowed to kill someone with a maneuver as long as you could have done it with an attack?
Then why not just use an attack?
Bad rolls will essentially never shut down a Submerged combat character's attacks on a random schmuck. And if they would, then they could do the same to maneuvers.
-
So, you're allowed to kill someone with a maneuver as long as you could have done it with an attack?
Then why not just use an attack?
I don't know that this is an accurate assessment of the issue. Chloroform is supposed to be a non-lethal option.
The question is: do we contrive a way for someone with Choloroform to:
A) subdue someone non-lethally with a Maneuver?
B) entice a Concession with the obvious use of non-lethal force?
C) Take Out the target using the existing rules, which favors doing this to low-power ordinary mortals and mooks? (ETA: with the commensurate assembly of Maneuvers to tag for the takedown, more of which will be required to take out a higher-level or more plot-important target)
-
I'd say C.
Take-outs don't have to be lethal.
-
So, you're allowed to kill someone with a maneuver as long as you could have done it with an attack?
Then why not just use an attack?
Bad rolls will essentially never shut down a Submerged combat character's attacks on a random schmuck. And if they would, then they could do the same to maneuvers.
I think the maneuvers can be more satisfying for the player.
If the result will be the same either way, why not let the player choose /how/ the result comes about?
Plus, some of my players are not good at coming up with narration or describing a death.
If an enemy is taken out, they have to describe what happens.
If an enemy has an aspect placed on them and invokes it for effect, it is my job as GM to describe what happens.
At least one of my players would rather I describe what happens because she can't come up with anything on the spot like that.
-
I just thought of something:
Could we just use the Venomous rules and tie it into requiring a successful Grapple check?
What about someone who brazenly pulls the "does this smell like chloroform to you?" maneuver?
-
I just thought of something:
Could we just use the Venomous rules and tie it into requiring a successful Grapple check?
What about someone who brazenly pulls the "does this smell like chloroform to you?" maneuver?
Meh... I think that might work, but it's just too crunchy and clunky for me.
If you slap a wet towel of chloroform over someone's face, they're out. Period.
If it were an attack on a supernatural monster (that chloroform worked on), then I think a weapon rating for the grapple from the chloroform and a grapple contest would be appropriate.
-
I'm not sure how I feel about the maneuver discussion above. On the one hand, having a system to reflect things like chloroform has utility. On the other hand, such mechanics also see risky to the realm of 'fun' in the context of the game.
Just a small nit-pick, though: to the extent that such maneuvers are allowed to knock people out of a fight, it should be noted that they are not take-outs. The aspect is being invoked to trigger a compel to conceed, in my ever-humble opinion. Which gives the victim quite a lot more influence on the narration that occurs subsequently.
-
I'm not sure how I feel about the maneuver discussion above. On the one hand, having a system to reflect things like chloroform has utility. On the other hand, such mechanics also see risky to the realm of 'fun' in the context of the game.
Just a small nit-pick, though: to the extent that such maneuvers are allowed to knock people out of a fight, it should be noted that they are not take-outs. The aspect is being invoked to trigger a compel to conceed, in my ever-humble opinion. Which gives the victim quite a lot more influence on the narration that occurs subsequently.
Exactly.
Like... if a PC were knocked out with chloroform, I would allow them to use a fate point to wake up at an opportune time to make their escape. :)
If they're taken out, they don't get that luxury.
-
Just a small nit-pick, though: to the extent that such maneuvers are allowed to knock people out of a fight, it should be noted that they are not take-outs. The aspect is being invoked to trigger a compel to conceed, in my ever-humble opinion. Which gives the victim quite a lot more influence on the narration that occurs subsequently.
I think that's a fair way to justify it, if we take that route.
-
Like... if a PC were knocked out with chloroform, I would allow them to use a fate point to wake up at an opportune time to make their escape. :)
If they're taken out, they don't get that luxury.
If someone wants a PC taken alive, that's plot territory, in my book, and if a PC is taken out of the fight this way (but not formally Taken Out), I'm inclined to treat this method as a plot Compel (not a traditional Compel) and give them a Fate Point for their trouble. They would "awaken" when the plot train arrived in the station.
But if the chloroform is simply a weapon someone is using, and not part of an engineered plot, then letting them shrug it off sooner with a Fate Point would either be a waste of a Fate Point, or a good excuse for a revelation.