ParanetOnline
The Dresden Files => DFRPG => Topic started by: Watson on October 22, 2011, 11:33:39 AM
-
We are finally making characters next week, and one of the players will play a WCV. So I took a deeper look at the signature abilities of that Template - Emotional Vampire and Incite Emotion, and found them to be really powerful. So I wanted your take on how they would work in the game.
The Emotion-Touch (from Incite Emotion) and Feeding Touch (from Emotional Vampire) require touch - does the character first have to succeed with a Fists roll in order to be allowed to use the abilities or is it enough to be in the same zone? If not, the example below becomes even more powerful. If a suitable roll (not a regular Attack, though) to touch is necessary (like a Declaration of Fists against Athletics to declare that you have touched the target), I suppose that the Emotional Vampire and Incite Emotion rolls are done without any penalties.
The two powers seems very powerful. By giving an example of an attack using Emotional Vampire and Incite Emotion, I would like to see if I have understood it correctly.
Emotion-Touch (from Incite Emotion) lets the character make a Maneuver with +2 to place a suitable Aspect on the target that is in line with the emotions that the attacker can feed from. Feeding Touch (from Emotional Vampire) lets the player make a Mental attack using the same roll that was used to incite the emotion (without the +2, I hope). If the emotion is still there during the next round, the attacker gets +1 on the Feeding Touch (I suppose this is not cumulative).
Exchange 1
Let's say that the attacker gets a 2 on his Deceit roll and the defender gets a 3 on his Discipline roll during the first exchange. The Emotion-Touch allows a +2 to the Maneuver to incite the emotion (resulting in a total of 4), so the Aspect, for instance, Lustful is placed on the target. The Emotional Vampire lets the attacker do a Mental attack using the same roll (I suppose without the +2 for the Maneuver), but the attack misses as the Deceit roll was only a 2 (and the Discipline roll was a 3). I suppose that the vampire can not tag the Aspect, as it is for the same roll as the Maneuver.
Exchange 2
The vampire attacks again, this time rolling a 4 on his Deceit. The defender rolls a 3 on his Discipline. As the emotion is still in place, the vampire gets +1 on his attack (as stated under Feeding Touch), raising the attack to a 5. Then the player tags the Lustful Aspect for another +2 for a total of 7. On top of that, Feeding Touch says that Emotion-Touch can be used to incite an emotion using the same roll (another Maneuver), so the player chooses to add another Aspect. The target now gets 4 Mental stress.
Is this a correct interpretation - that the vampire can create a new Aspect every Exchange and tag the one from the previous round (if he so wishes)? All of this for a cost of 2 Refresh (without Lasting Emotion and doing all this at range)...
Please give me your thoughts on using Emotional Vampire and Incite Emotion combo.
-
I don't have access to my books ATM so take this with a grain of salt.
I would require a fists roll to successfully touch if they don't have the at range upgrade. Incite emotion gives you two options. You can attack or place a maneuver on them, but they are not the same thing. If feeding says you can use your attack roll to do it then you would need to be attacking with it to feed.
-
I don't have access to my books ATM so take this with a grain of salt.
I would require a fists roll to successfully touch if they don't have the at range upgrade. Incite emotion gives you two options. You can attack or place a maneuver on them, but they are not the same thing. If feeding says you can use your attack roll to do it then you would need to be attacking with it to feed.
The basic Emotion-Touch (from Incite Emotion, not the Lasting Emotion upgrade) allows for a Manuever or a Block, not an Attack. The Mental Attack comes from the rule under Feeding Touch (from Emotional Vampire), where the latter specifically says that inciting an emotion (using Incite Emotion) and feeding from it (using Emotional Vampire) can be done as one single roll, thus my question about the creation of an Aspect and an Attack each Exchange (which seems too powerful).
-
Ah my mistake. Is it only the 1 point upgrade that adds 2 to the weapon rating that allows you to actually attack then?
-
Ah my mistake. Is it only the 1 point upgrade that adds 2 to the weapon rating that allows you to actually attack then?
Correct.
-
Yes WCVs do have a very powerful first punch (especially when they start picking up upgrades to incite emotion).
As far as I can tell you're actually reading it a little less powerful than it actually is. I don't see any reason why +2 wouldn't apply to both since it is a single roll (and therefore one number). That same logic would remove the possibility of tagging the aspect on the first exchange though since the roll is resolved before the aspect is placed, so I think you're right on that one. On the second exchange however I would think that you could really only use feeding touch and not emotion touch. The emotion is already incited, from this point on I would use consequences to represent any further emotional frenzy.
-
As far as I can tell you're actually reading it a little less powerful than it actually is. I don't see any reason why +2 wouldn't apply to both since it is a single roll (and therefore one number).
The +2 is specific to the Maneuver, so I would say that it is only applicable to the Maneuver and not the attack, despite the fact that the same roll is being used (it is not applicable for the Block, that can also be done with the Emotion Touch).
On the second exchange however I would think that you could really only use feeding touch and not emotion touch. The emotion is already incited, from this point on I would use consequences to represent any further emotional frenzy.
I can't see that the Emotion Touch can't be used on a subsequent exchange, even though the emotion is already in place (i.e. the Aspect is still on the target, meaning that the Aspect was tagged and not fragile). Making a new Maneuver every exchange creates a new Aspects that it free to tag on the next exchange - it's the Maneuver (generating a free tag) every exchange, in addition to the attack, that making this combo really good. If I read the rules incorrectly, please point this out. Please note that, technically, each new Aspect needs to be described slightly differently (but still the same emotion).
So, essentially, the Emotional Vampire and Incite Emotion combo (for only 2 points of Refresh) becomes a Mental stress machine with Mental attacks at Discipline +3 (+2 from tagging the Aspect from the previous exchange and +1 from the bonus for Feeding Touch) that ignores any armor - assuming that the vampire is able to touch the victim and that the Maneuver from the previous exchange was successful.
On the other hand, I would rule that it is only working on beings able to feel emotions (no such attacks against BCV's or other "monsters").
-
The +2 is specific to the Maneuver, so I would say that it is only applicable to the Maneuver and not the attack, despite the fact that the same roll is being used (it is not applicable for the Block, that can also be done with the Emotion Touch).
The +2 is specific to the roll (check the power again) which is where I see the problem.
I can't see that the Emotion Touch can't be used on a subsequent exchange, even though the emotion is already in place (i.e. the Aspect is still on the target, meaning that the Aspect was tagged and not fragile). Making a new Maneuver every exchange creates a new Aspects that it free to tag on the next exchange - it's the Maneuver (generating a free tag) every exchange, in addition to the attack, that making this combo really good. If I read the rules incorrectly, please point this out. Please note that, technically, each new Aspect needs to be described slightly differently (but still the same emotion).
I guess this comes down to how you feel about aspects. There are two reasons why I don't like this. The first is that you are invoking the same emotion. The question I would ask to the player is "How is this different from the first aspect?" The only responses I can see are "It's more intense" which I would rather represent with consequences, or "Technically it isn't."
The second reason I don't like this is the age old argument of "Are some aspects better than others?" If you allow a person to keep throwing out aspects so long as they are different then you essentially punish players who aren't creative. I dislike this in the same way that I dislike talking out all social encounters with no rolls. It makes it so that no matter what your character is, you're still limited by your own abilities, and the whole point of role-playing is to step into the shoes of someone with different specialties than you.
Anyway I know it's a personal call (though the RAW is rather ambiguous) but it's just what I would say. No additional aspects if the first one remains.
-
Been told you can use both emotional vampire and incite emotion in one attack. Seems like too much mnetal stress to fast, especially with a few stunts and power upgrades. Could be a "one shot, one kill" scenario. Tag a aspect or two for best effect. Very powerful.
-
In my upcoming game, where we have a WCV, I would probably rule that as long as the target already have one suitable Aspect, the WCV can not incite another [similar] emotion.
The "problem" is in this case that the WCV in that case would like to make the emotion a fragile Aspect (as that removes the Aspect after tagging it, thus enables the WCV to incite it again and create a new Aspect that can be tagged...). But if the player is reading the book and wants to exploit this, YS208 says "Obviously, if you established the maneuver aspect, you can end it whenever you want without a roll" which means that the player can end it at the end of every exchange, which ought to let the player incite the emotion again the next turn... The fact that it would be considered abusing the system is a different thing...
On the other hand, I suppose that the use of this combo is somewhat limited based on that the target must be able to feel the type of emotion that the WCV is trying to incite - trying to affect a BCV or a Denarian should not be possible.
-
I would imagine a BCV could feel fear, despair, rage etc pretty easily as for Denarian's well angels can clearly feel anger pride, despair and the people they inhabit could feel all emotions so incite emotion could probably be used freely on them (Thomas used it on a possessed women without a problem). Any thing that is cable of feeling is probably capable of having there feelings incited.
-
In my upcoming game, where we have a WCV, I would probably rule that as long as the target already have one suitable Aspect, the WCV can not incite another [similar] emotion.
What about the block function of Incite?
-
What about the block function of Incite?
I think that the Block ability as part of the Incite Emotion is OK, as it does not get +2 to the roll (YS173 says "... do maneuvers at +2 to your roll"...) and I interpret 'Feeding Touch' to allow an Attack at the same time as doing the actual inciting (I read that as doing the Maneuver to add the Aspect - not the Block part of Incite Emotion).
So, as I see it, the Block part of Incite Emotion can not be abused in the same extreme manner as the Maneuver part (in combination with Emotional Vampire).
-
Huh. I would simply not allow a maneuver and an attack as a single action. Compare, for example, Blood Drinker - it's basically the same power, just physical instead of mental. And it opens up with a maneuver to "draw blood", followed by allowing subsequent attacks at +1. So I'd read the "inciting and feeding on it may be done as a single action..." part as being an example of "As a baseline, whenever you're near an 'eligible' strong emotion, you may draw in mild sustenance from it. This... doesn't have much of an immediate effect."
In other words, IC, you're starting to feed. OOC, you've made a maneuver, but have not yet attacked. Any other interpretation runs into the game balance problems that have been discussed in this thread.
-
Yeah except incite emotions by itself can inflict emotional stress with upgrades. So you are saying once they have the upgrade they can do both then?
-
Not as one action. But they would get the +1 on attacks (from emotional vampire - though only when operating at a range of touch), once they had an appropriate aspect in place, either as a maneuver, or potentially as a consequence from incite attacks. (Though note that a consequence has to be chosen by the target, and may not be appropriate.)
-
Yeah except incite emotions by itself can inflict emotional stress with upgrades. So you are saying once they have the upgrade they can do both then?
Yes, the Incite Emotion can be used to Attack, but only after buying the Lasting Emotion upgrade. The Emotional Vampire power allows for an Attack as well - and the rules say that using the Incite Emotion, the character can incite the emotion and feed using the same roll.
-
Huh. I would simply not allow a maneuver and an attack as a single action. Compare, for example, Blood Drinker - it's basically the same power, just physical instead of mental. And it opens up with a maneuver to "draw blood", followed by allowing subsequent attacks at +1. So I'd read the "inciting and feeding on it may be done as a single action..." part as being an example of "As a baseline, whenever you're near an 'eligible' strong emotion, you may draw in mild sustenance from it. This... doesn't have much of an immediate effect."
In other words, IC, you're starting to feed. OOC, you've made a maneuver, but have not yet attacked. Any other interpretation runs into the game balance problems that have been discussed in this thread.
I completely agree in that the combo (Maneuver + Feeding Touch) is really powerful - too powerful for my taste. I think that this combo might have slipped through, or have not been found, during playtesting (or it could be that I have misunderstood the rules).
I might actually create a house rule that prevents a Maneuver and a feeding with a single roll (single action). If one compares Emotional Vampire with Blood Drinker, they are in my opinion about the same in potency even if one removes the ability to incite and feed using the same roll. The reason is that the Emotional Vampire has the ability to create mental stress (as an Attack) - the equivalent bonus for Blood Drinker would be the additional point of stress caused during a Grapple.
-
The wording is explicitly goes against your view though
"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." Your Story
Inciting the Emotion (maneuvering) and feeding (attacking) done in the same turn using the same roll (which would be at a +2).
To deal with this problem my house rule is that the act of feeding and inciting are the same (so you choose stress or an aspect ) when they deal stress so don't stack so you just get a +1 to incite emotion on every hit on the target after the first.
I housed ruled it a bit with my group basically making the inciting and the feeding the same actions so for my friends pc with incite emotion and emotional vampire he could make a straight mental attack in the first round which represented him both inciting and feeding. If there was a consequence or an aspect is created via a maneuver he could then get a +1 to his incite/feed action every other round on the same target.
-
Inciting the Emotion (maneuvering) and feeding (attacking) done in the same turn using the same roll (which would be at a +2).
If the rules are read so that the +2 (from Emotional Vampire) is added on the Attack roll (from Feeding Touch) it gets even worse in terms of being too powerful.
In the second exchange, assuming that the Manueuver worked in the first exchange, the character can technically tag the Aspect from the first exchange for a +2, get a +2 as part of creating a new Aspect and then another +1 (from Feeding Touch).
Having it so that one can either create an Aspect or feed sounds good.
-
The wording is explicitly goes against your view though
So I'd read the "inciting and feeding on it may be done as a single action..." part as being an example of "As a baseline, whenever you're near an 'eligible' strong emotion, you may draw in mild sustenance from it. This... doesn't have much of an immediate effect."
In other words, I already addressed your point. Feeding does not automatically equate to a game-mechanical attack action.
-
Feeding does not automatically equate to a game-mechanical attack action.
The actual feeding is described as "...a psychological attack..." which interpret as a Mental Attack that causes mental stress (as stress is mentioned under "The Taste of Death").
-
The actual feeding is described as "...a psychological attack..." which interpret as a Mental Attack that causes mental stress (as stress is mentioned under "The Taste of Death").
As a baseline, whenever you're near an "eligible" strong emotion, you may draw in mild sustenance from it. This just grazes the surface of the victim's life force, maybe making them a shade less vital in the long term, but it doesn't have much of an immediate effect.
Feeding Touch. Physical contact is where it's at for a satisfying, long-term meal...
In other words, feeding-as-an-attack isn't the only form of feeding available - it's just not a particularly satisfying meal without that.
-
So one roll, double damage eh? Feed damage + incite damage . . .
No.
I'd never allow it in a game I ran. Regardless what rules as written say. Because I can make a mid level refresh character one shot kill most anything without gettign to feed and do damage also.
Too much damage for one attack or in this game breaking scenario two attacks.
People should do as they please in their games, but I know overpowered when I see it.
-
So one roll, double damage eh? Feed damage + incite damage . . .
That is not the issue here - Feed stress + Incite stress using the same roll is not possible. The most basic version of Incite Emotion does not allow for a mental attack (i.e. does not allow feeding to create stress, only to do a Maneuver and to Block).
The issue is the inciting of an emotion (thorough Incite Emotion, most basic version) and feeding (through Emotional Vampire) using the same roll.
-
I think it is best just to see incite emotion and feeding as one action so when you make an emotion attack with potent emotion you are also feeding at the same time (a psychological attack is happening either ways so why quibble over where the stress is coming from) which means you probably get a +1 to incite emotion roles after the first hit but not another actions. As for the basic power I just assume that means you can feed without creating an aspect in advance by (inciting as you feed) which just works out as a flat mental attack.
-
My read on the "as one roll" was a lot less dangerous...
1) it allows you to fulfill the eligible emotion clause of Emotional Vampire without the need for a second roll on a prior round (skipping the need to declare, assess or maneuver it into play, which if required all the time would get to be a lot of hassle)
2) it allows you to use the more powerful of your Emotional Vampire roll or Incite Emotion roll to do a single damage effect (no double-dipping on dealing damage... just one attack with one damage effect, at the better of the two... after all, even Lasting Emotion carries a higher Mental Stress potential than Emotional Vampire does by itself).
You're more or less getting the chance to roll the two powers into eachother- gaining a single power with all the trappings of both... not the chance to do massively more damage.
-
If it doesn't do double damage, I have no issue with the concept of two effects with the one roll.
-
As I read it, Incite Emotion together with Emotional Vampire allows the character to inflict stress with the bonus from Incite Emotion as a single action. It may be a powerful combination, but to my view, Incite Emo + Emo Vamp is an alternate version of Incite Emo + Lasting Emo. For 2 Refresh, you can either get a +2 to the attack or a Weapon 2.
-
My read on the "as one roll" was a lot less dangerous...
1) it allows you to fulfill the eligible emotion clause of Emotional Vampire without the need for a second roll on a prior round (skipping the need to declare, assess or maneuver it into play, which if required all the time would get to be a lot of hassle)
2) it allows you to use the more powerful of your Emotional Vampire roll or Incite Emotion roll to do a single damage effect (no double-dipping on dealing damage... just one attack with one damage effect, at the better of the two... after all, even Lasting Emotion carries a higher Mental Stress potential than Emotional Vampire does by itself).
You're more or less getting the chance to roll the two powers into eachother- gaining a single power with all the trappings of both... not the chance to do massively more damage.
This is how I see it two, a merging of the powers so that both powers gain the benefits of the others (taste of death +1 bonus, +x weapons rating + range etc) but only one attack happens.
-
This is how I see it two, a merging of the powers so that both powers gain the benefits of the others (taste of death +1 bonus, +x weapons rating + range etc) but only one attack happens.
Except that Emotional Vampire makes no mention of having to be used in combination with an Incite Emotion attack, so what happens when the Incite Emotion is blocking?
RAW still says that you get the Emotional Vampire attack as part of the same roll.
-
Emotional Vampire DOES, however, state that it only works on someone feeling an eligible emotion... So if the target was already feeling said emotion, Emotional Vampire succeeds.
Otherwise, it fails by default.
You can take a separate action to make a declaration (spend a FP), or an assessment or maneuver (roll)... but then it takes you 2 rounds to be able to start feeding at all... in this instance, all Incite Emotion does is provide a shortcut past that extra action.
Lasting Emotion/Potent Emotion just increase the total damage of either.
-
So, you're fine with allowing the combination to grant dual actions so long as one of them is a block? I don't see where that is so much more preferable.
-
...in this instance, all Incite Emotion does is provide a shortcut past that extra action.
Yes, but doing that as a Maneuver to place an Aspect on the target as well as attacking (that is how I interpret the phrase "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" from YS189).
Being able to place an Aspect through a Maneuver and to Attack is really powerful (especially if it can be done every exchange in addition to tagging the Aspect created to further increase the stress caused).
-
Not quite as bad as two full attacks though.
Honestly i think Evil Hat was referring to base incite emotion not with upgreades and the play testers never had someone try hitting someone with lasting emotion and feeding atteh same time. Double Whammy!
Hopefully the devs read the forums and address teh situation in an errata section in an upcoming source book.
-
I don't have it function as an aspect, either. Let me see if I can rephrase this.
It's like Emotional Vampire has a Catch (for lack of a better way of putting it).
Tacking Incite Emotion on to that doesn't add an extra affect. It doesn't add a maneuver. It doesn't add an extra damage effect. It doesn't add a block. It doesn't add fruitcake or apples. It satisfies that catch.
Further tacking Lasting Emotion onto that increases the damage potential of either attack by Weapon:2, but you still can't do both of them at the same time- just one or the other. Lasting Emotion exactly equals the Lethal Weapon stunt for psychic damage, and isn't broken because it applies to both anymore than any equivalent similar ability.
Ditto Powerful Emotion (for a further +2, total Weapon:4)... this outstrips the equivalent stunts, but it is a power after all, and costs more refresh to take it to this level.
Tacking Ranged onto Incite Emotion could conceivably allow feeding at a distance for the same argument as I have above, but we've never seen a WCVamp do so in the books, and while I think increasing the Weapon Rating of 2 separate but nearly identical (and definitely related) actions with a single refresh is fair, I think making both of them ranged might be worth more than that.
Make sense now?
-
I think I see what you're trying to say, but I definitely do not see how the RAW could be honestly read in that manner (though, if this is meant merely as a house-rule to address a perceived game-breaking imbalance, it works fine, imho).
-
RAW, no, but Rules As Read, I have to disagree... there is some room for interpretation as to what they meant by "as one action"... and I think what I'm saying fits into that room.
Moreover, I don't see any other interpretations that fit in the same room and don't cause at least some problems.
1) Certainly, we all agree the double-whammy is out.
2) Combining the two powers into a single power (with all the trappings of both) is safe.
So I'm sticking to 1.8, roughly speaking.
-
I think everyone agrees that two mental attacks a turn would be game breaking (though perfect legitimate by the RAW) mind you not allowing the combining of the incite emotion upgrades and emotional vampires does make the upgrades superfluous (what would you rather have a +2 to accuracy (+3 on every hit after the first) + a aspect (so another +2 on every hit after the first for a total of +5) or +4 weapons rating for twice as much refresh.
-
for twice as much refresh.
More accurately, 'for as much refresh again'.
-
"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" from YS189).
Being able to place an Aspect through a Maneuver and to Attack is really powerful (especially if it can be done every exchange in addition to tagging the Aspect created to further increase the stress caused).
Isn't that similar to the "Special Effect Attack" rule? Weapon rating goes to Placing the aspect, overflow goes to damage?
-
Isn't that similar to the "Special Effect Attack" rule? Weapon rating goes to Placing the aspect, overflow goes to damage?
Except that, by default, the attack in question has no weapon rating.
-
by default, incite emotion isn't even capable of causing stress.
nor emotional vampire of creating maneuvers.
by combining them, we end up with a non-default situation, so why does default matter?
-
'the attack' being the combined use of both Incite Emotions and Emotional Vampire, which, by default, both places a maneuver-aspect and causes stress
-
In which case, we're back in the territory of special effect attacks.
But wouldn't it be a wash anyway?
Let's talk through it, mechanically.
On subsequent exchanges, if the emotion is still in place you may continue to feed, gaining a +1 on the roll
If the target has to have a viable emotion in order for you to feed on them... the way I'd run that is that I'd require the WCVamp to either do a maneuver, or make a declaration/assessment to place an emotion aspect on the target.
They then use that aspect not to gain a bonus to their roll... but to be able to feed in the first place.
If it's a fragile aspect, then using it to gain a +2 would make it go away... at which point you wouldn't be able to feed off them anymore.
If it's sticky, then using it to gain a +2 would still be problematic (easier to resist, since you have to split your shifts between power and duration), repeated uses cost FP, and it still eventually goes away, at which point you can't feed anymore.
So if you're concerned about the WCVamp who gets a free maneuver with his attack... I'm concerned about the WCVamp who's dumb enough to cure his target mid-feeding.
Sure, they can re-establish the emotion next round, with another combined action... but I'd say that resets the process, too. They'd be trading their +1 for subsequent exchanges for a one-time +2 each time... not very broken all told, IMO.
-
Only spellcraft-generated maneuvers need define both power and duration.
If the WCV is placing sticky aspects, they will continue into subsequent rounds unless the target takes an action to remove them, which should be a perfectly acceptable scenario, tactically, for any WCV, as that means their target isn't using that action to, y'know, retaliate in any way.
And with a new sticky aspect each exchange, paying actually having to invoke them shouldn't be an issue unless the vamp is in a particular hurry (at which point they should have at least a few easily justifiable aspects beyond those you'd expect from any build).
-
Now- I'm going to ask a semi-stupid question...
How many feeding aspects do you think the WCVamp can place here? I mean... really.
The semi-stupid part is "Duh. Infinite, limited only by the creativity of the player...." but I'm not so sure- at least, not in the crews I run with. It's considered bad form if not outright double-dipping to place 2 nearly identical aspects on a target. For example, if a teammate uses a sudden flare of light to leave a target "Blinded by the light," and then I throw sand in their eyes to leave them "Blind as a bat," my GM would smack me. And when I GM, I would smack any player who similarly tried that. Blind is a nearly binary trait- you either are or you aren't... you can't be extra-blind. (note, I said nearly. One can have severely hampered vision, but that's still not a lesser state of blindness).
(Best case scenario on that one, I'd allow the second maneuver to extend the duration of the first).
If that leaves you unsatisfied, now imagine that the next player in the order comes up with a knife and slashes the target's face, makes a phenomenal roll, and leaves the target with an extreme consequence aspect of "Eyeless." Have we reached the limit here, or can someone come along to make him even more blind?
That said, unless the WCVamp is one of those rare (indeed, unheard of in the books) ones that can feed off more than one emotion simultaneously (which you have to pay extra for in the mechanics, in which case I have no problem with the idea)... then you're running into that same problem- multiple aspects in this case are going to be layering the same emotion on top of itself...
There's something to be said for shoring that emotion up, making it more powerful... but that's more about it being harder to resist than it providing a better damage bonus... and even if you represent it with multiple aspects, there ought to be a limit to how much stacking can occur like this (specifically, identical or nearly identical aspect stacking) that might prevent the problem you're talking about.
Or you could simply rule that using Emotional Vampire is a tag of that aspect, and that way, even applying one every round, they can't gain their +2 without FPs.
-
Or you could simply rule that using Emotional Vampire is a tag of that aspect, and that way, even applying one every round, they can't gain their +2 without FPs.
This sounds very reasonable and fair. It makes sense because the original text mentions receiving +1 to subsequent feedings if the aspect remains, but does not even mention the possibility of a tag for +2. It might have been an oversight, but perhaps the creators wanted Emotional Vampire to use up an Aspect's tag if available, sort of like the Grapple rules, but a little more powerful.
-
This sounds very reasonable and fair. It makes sense because the original text mentions receiving +1 to subsequent feedings if the aspect remains, but does not even mention the possibility of a tag for +2.
It doesn't need to mention that possibility, there, just as it doesn't need to mention it in the evocation attack section, because it's mentioned elsewhere, and not contradicted in Emotional Vampire.