Both answers to that poll are equivalent. Neither contradicts the other. It is a game using the Dresdenverse as a setting, and inspired by the works of Jim Butcher.
Both answers to that poll are equivalent. Neither contradicts the other. It is a game using the Dresdenverse as a setting, and inspired by the works of Jim Butcher.
To be perfectly technical, the game (Fate) came first, and is adapted to Jim Butcher's fiction. I don't see them as mutually exclusive though. The rules convey the setting fairly well, despite coming first.
You can't see the difference between them?
Allow me to give you an example:
There is nothing in the RAW about playing angels with freewill.
The setting that Jim produced has defined angels as lacking freewill. Should an angel wish to exercise freewill that angel becomes a Fallen Angel, which isn't the same as being an angel.
So, can you play a freewill angel in DFRPG? Option 1 says "no, because the setting has defined angels as not having freewill". Option 2 says "yes, because the rules doesn't say that you can't".
There is nothing in the RAW about playing angels with freewill.
The setting that Jim produced has defined angels as lacking freewill. Should an angel wish to exercise freewill that angel becomes a Fallen Angel, which isn't the same as being an angel.
So, can you play a freewill angel in DFRPG? Option 1 says "no, because the setting has defined angels as not having freewill". Option 2 says "yes, because the rules doesn't say that you can't".
So that's a false dichotomy, and I still don't really understand the difference.
Canon isn't...closed, maybe, would be the right word? We know that there are vampire Courts that haven't been and may never be revealed, for instance - should we not make them as templates because they're not known or definitely make them as templates because they do exist?
Lash appears to have gained free will prior to her demise. I believe Jim confirms it in an interview at some point. So we know from Jim's setting that entities with monstrous natures can gain free will.
As a kitchen sink setting, if you want to be true to Jim Butcher, it doesn't help to ask "did he write it already"; instead, try "does it fit the general weirdness of a setting where Harry's perpetually randy air fairy spirit once possessed an undead dinosaur". If it fits, you're being true to the setting.
So that's a false dichotomy, and I still don't really understand the difference. Jim makes very few "absolutes" clear by design, so it feels like using absolutes to distinguish between "game based on" and "game inspired by" doesn't work. Canon isn't...closed, maybe, would be the right word? We know that there are vampire Courts that haven't been and may never be revealed, for instance - should we not make them as templates because they're not known or definitely make them as templates because they do exist?
It's not, it really isn't. As mentioned before, it is a clear dichotomy if you interpret the RAW and the guiding text as meaning that no free will = unplayable NPC.
Lash was an exception, an echo in Harry's mind, which eventually bowed to Harry's stubbornness. And similar exceptions may come to exist - any number of tables may grant similar latitude for their characters. Doesn't mean you can'tcan'tcan't ever do it, but it's going to be a GM-player-table decision, and you're not necessarily going to extract community approval for it as anything other than something that was allowed at an individual table.
But don't mistake an exception for a rule, don't ignore that they *are* exceptions.
Even your example of angels is questionable. Have all types been mentioned? What of the type myth says interbred with humanity (nephelim?) - have they even been mentioned?
Jim has made it clear that angels who exercise freewill fall. There's even that conversation with Lash concerning how she didn't have freewill as angel.
Richard
So fallen angels have free will which makes them playable characters nice, it is interesting that Jim equates freewill with evil in this example and lack of free-will with monstrousness in other examples this means that Angels are in-human monsters and fallen angels something more.
So we should tell Fred to jettison the "Update to the setting" chapter in Paranet?
Back to the DresdenVerse: I'm not certain whether or not the setting/Jim has said outright that the 30 Fallen bound to the Blackened Denarii comprise ALL of the Fallen to date, or if there may be an unknown or unnumbered cadre of Fallen who have not aligned with the Knights of the Blackened Denarius. For the sake of an open setting, I'd buy that some of the Fallen didn't actually join the Denarians, aren't specifically aligned with "evil" - that is, until I'm presented with canonical evidence to the contrary. And even so, I might condone it as one of those compelling "exceptions" like Thomas.I think he has. Someone asked if there was a 31st Denarian with a gold coin, and Butcher's response was along the lines of, "No, the Pharisees didn't tip."
I think he has. Someone asked if there was a 31st Denarian with a gold coin, and Butcher's response was along the lines of, "No, the Pharisees didn't tip."Note that saying "there are more Fallen than the those thirty that bound themselves to coins" is different than saying "there are more than thirty Fallen who have bound themselves to coins". WoJ is that there are only thirty Blackened Denarians, but he hasn't said the same about Fallen in general. For example, Chaunzaggoroth might be a (lesser) fallen angel; if he isn't, it seems likely he has a boss who is.
So fallen angels have free will which makes them playable characters which is kind of nice for those wanting to play an angel.
Note that saying "there are more Fallen than the those thirty that bound themselves to coins" is different than saying "there are more than thirty Fallen who have bound themselves to coins". WoJ is that there are only thirty Blackened Denarians, but he hasn't said the same about Fallen in general.
Playing a Fallen Angel isn't the same as playing an Angel.
Interesting. What difference is there?I think any priest could give you all sorts of input on this subject, more authoritatively than I could. :)