ParanetOnline
The Dresden Files => DFRPG => Topic started by: Locnil on April 16, 2012, 03:54:28 PM
-
Welp, my first topic. Anyway.
So, it seems like, for balance reasons, everyone rules that self-inflicted stress bypasses all mental armor. But would a character with such a power still be able to make use of the extra mental stress boxes granted by toughness?
And to take it broader, how exactly does it work? Say a Fae is hit by a fist made up of steel. It bypasses toughness armor, but can the Fae still soak up the hit with the extra stress boxes it has from toughness?
-
No. The Catch on a Toughness power bypasses both the armor and the extra stress boxes. The Catch makes it as if the Toughness power isn't there at all.
-
Ah, I see. So for the first example, would you recommend not letting self-inflicted stress use up the extra stess boxes as well?
-
I'd say yes, you'd still be able to use them. You can bypass your own armour because, um, you start out inside it or know where all the chinks are or something, but toughness isn't something you can turn on or off. Unless you use your own Catch of course, then that bypasses like normal.
-
Mr. Death is right about the Catch.
As for self-inflicted stress, it depends. If the stress is part of a cost for something, then you can't use your Toughness at all. If you're just attacking yourself for whatever reason, then you get your Toughness fully.
-
According to the raw self inflicted stress bypasses any Armour (physical, mental etc) but does not count as a catch, so there is no reason why you couldn't use the extra stress boxes (other than balance reasons).
-
Mr. Death is right about the Catch.
As for self-inflicted stress, it depends. If the stress is part of a cost for something, then you can't use your Toughness at all. If you're just attacking yourself for whatever reason, then you get your Toughness fully.
Would you be willing to provide a RAW source for these conclusions?
-
Sorry, should have specified: that's not RAW. It's just my opinion.
Since there's actually no way to get extra mental stress boxes by the RAW and no way to spend physical stress as a cost by RAW, the RAW obviously has nothing to say on the matter. I think.
-
Sorry, should have specified: that's not RAW. It's just my opinion.
Since there's actually no way to get extra mental stress boxes by the RAW and no way to spend physical stress as a cost by RAW, the RAW obviously has nothing to say on the matter. I think.
You're not counting backlash as a cost here, I take it?
-
There is a side bar in the book where they asks what happens if someone creates had a mental Armour stunt and reply that self-inflicted stress always bypasses Armour.
-
There is a side bar in the book where they asks what happens if someone creates had a mental Armour stunt and reply that self-inflicted stress always bypasses Armour.
YS250, for the curious.
I'm a bit unsure if backlash should count as "self-inflicted". I mean, my first instinct says that of course the Wizard doesn't intentionally cause a spell to backlash (and it therefore shouldn't count as self inflicted), but it's also clearly a conscious choice on the wizard's part to take it as backlash and not fallout, so they are in essence accepting that damage... Hm, I don't know
-
YS250, for the curious.
I'm a bit unsure if backlash should count as "self-inflicted". I mean, my first instinct says that of course the Wizard doesn't intentionally cause a spell to backlash (and it therefore shouldn't count as self inflicted), but it's also clearly a conscious choice on the wizard's part to take it as backlash and not fallout, so they are in essence accepting that damage... Hm, I don't know
Shouldn't matter if it's intentional or not. If I clock my elbow on a countertop, that's not intentional, but it's still self-inflicted.
Personally, I'd stat this Toughness ability with a Catch (+0) of anything self-inflicted. Then, of course, other Catches besides, maybe, but definitely include that in the mix.
-
Serving as a Catch is far beyond merely bypassing armour, which is what that sidebar suggested.
I won't bother even getting into the beggaring of logic that results from such a ruling though, if simply 'clocking your elbow on a countertop' can bypass Mythic Toughness with a Catch of, say, Soulfire.
-
I figure it's external vs. internal.
Anything causing damage from outside, whether the gun's wielded by you or your enemy, is subject to Toughness.
Something you do to yourself from inside--such as Backlash--would at the very least bypass armor.
-
I know RAW is supposed to solve all problems and generally be infallible.
It doesn't and isn't all the time. See the 20 page thread everyone loves to hate for proof.
Catches vs self inflicted damage
satisfy the catch: see below
Use common sense:
bumping your elbow? no - falling down? No. - Harakiri/suicide? yes. - bumping into a wall? no
caveat in all cases of no: if your actual catch is bumped, fallen on etc...yes it satisfies the catch
Backlash? yes
powering a spell with stress? yes ... why? game balance. Not a good enough reason...thats fine, but keep in mind many rules in RAW make no sesne other than to provide game balance.
self sacrifice (life or blood etc) for a spell? yes
YMMV, your table your rules etc.
-
My comments on the topic come in two forms: thematic & game-balance.
Thematically, self-inflicted damage (spending a consequence to power a spell, or taking backlash) is a sacrifice. If you can absorb that with toughness, or instantly heal it with recovery... that's not much of a sacrifice anymore, now was it?
In terms of game balance, spellcasters are already one of the strongest things out there; letting them fuel their powers off of recovery, or use toughness to absorb backlash, just makes them that much scarier - and they really don't need it.*
Also - bumping your elbow? For someone with toughness, they wouldn't even notice. To some extent, injuries (read: the names assigned to various consequences) need to be scaled to the target; I still remember my players' first encounter with ghouls. "Ok; you got a solid hit in; the ghoul will take a minor consequence of 'bullet hole in the leg'" "That's a minor consequence?!?" "It is if you're a ghoul."
*Footnote: the exception to this is if other players are just utter cheeseweasels, and the GM decides to let them get away with it. For example, I've seen a player decide that it's clearly fair play to try to stack literally everything that could give a bonus to melee attack rolls - vampiric powers, plus the sword of the cross' special purpose power ("re-flavored" & purchased on its own, of course, to avoid its original thematic limits), and mortal stunts, and so on and so forth. Oh, and then paying for all that with, among other things, a meaningless feeding dependency that applies to a small enough subset of powers that its odds of having any game-mechanical effect are less than one in a thousand...
But if you've got people doing that, one custom power is really the least of your problems.
-
In cases such as those, I would advise you to liberally apply and expand the Stunt Building Guidelines' advice on stacking: IF you allow it, only do so at reduced effect.
-
I still think the guide lines on stunt stacking should apply to refinement, because the high level of stack ability with refinement is silly with a max skill of 5 you could get +12 (+17 total) to control (this does takes 10 refresh worth of refinement and two lawbreaker stunts), which compares rather well when the most you can get with melee is +3 (true aim variant, stunt, blood drinker) or +7 (12 total) if you really cheese it with sacred guardian. To get that +3 (8 total) you need to spend 3 refresh which compares badly to a +4 focus item for two refresh.
-
(this does takes 10 refresh worth of refinement and two lawbreaker stunts)
Whereas in games such as one featuring conventional bruisers alongside Practitioners, and a minimum of 16 base refresh (meaning that the practitioner has only Evocation, lawbreaker, and refinement), that the stacking restrictions be lightened somewhat, perhaps to as little as '-1 to the total effect', or even ignored altogether, allowing stunts to stack unimpeded.
-
You're not counting backlash as a cost here, I take it?
I wasn't, but I should have. Backlash should probably bypass Toughness. Though I'm not 100% certain about that, only about 80%.
Non-spellcasting fighters reach their maximum practical level of investment in fighting earlier than casters do. This may or may not be a problem.