1
DFRPG / Re: Holding Someone Down
« on: November 04, 2011, 08:10:14 PM »
Or offer a concession to the GM. "I'll get Taken out and killed if I can take him with me."
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Pages: [1]
2
DFRPG / Re: little power but high control tasks
« on: February 24, 2011, 01:53:43 AM »For example: Say the challenge to lift the chair and move it from point A to point B is a Discipline result of 2, but after factoring in the actual obstacle course, it may actually be a challenge of 4 shifts. So rolling a 2 or 3 means the chair got moved, but not with any finesse. 4 would mean it was successfully maneuvered around the obstacles, while higher rolls would be more impressive.I agree this is how it should work.
3
DFRPG / Re: little power but high control tasks
« on: February 24, 2011, 01:52:34 AM »Actually, I'd say the rules do have something to say in this matter. I'd call that a Maneuver, for purpose of Evocation categories. Assuming it would take 2 shifts of power to lift a chair, yes, that's easy enough to control. However, the additional cost of 1 shift per extra exchange (or, for fluff's sake, let's call it direction change) WILL make this more awkward. If you move this chair through an obstacle course in just a single exchange, I'd argue that either the chair or the obstacl course are largely inappropriate for their intended use afterward... Maybe both, even.A couple of hints with this. Maneuvers place aspects. They don't actually do anything real. Also if you haveto increase the power to do somelike like this it makes the concept of a wizard who is not very strong in the power but with a lot of control not doable. It seems that discipline is limited by conviction except in one specific case. Attacks. Then you can use the extra shifts you get on a roll. I just don't think it should be like that. There should be something good about having a high discipline low conviction. You may not be a powerhouse but you should be able to have some type of advantage.
Also, look at "Prolonging Spells" for how to make sure you have the spell going long enough to get it through said course. It IS stressful, and takes time, but it's quite feasible. The more complex the task, the more power you need to put into the spell, even if most of that power is only a constant trickle to keep the effect going...
4
DFRPG / Re: little power but high control tasks
« on: February 23, 2011, 10:13:27 PM »
So going by this, that means that lifting a chair and moving it aroudn through an obstacle course would require the same roll. Lets say that 2 shift were strong enough to lifth the chair, then a discipline roll of 2 would allow you to have complete control over it and move it anywhere you want, no matter how complex?
It is just a personal issue harry has, that he can't manage to do it?
It is just a personal issue harry has, that he can't manage to do it?
5
DFRPG / little power but high control tasks
« on: February 23, 2011, 06:33:12 PM »
From the books there are a alot of instances where harry will not use magic to do things, because his control is not great enough. As far as I see the rules really don't support this. The discipline roll is only important when you are using more power that you can aesily handle.
What about a situation where you only need a little power, say enough to lift a chair, but you then want to move the chair through say an obstacle course. If would seem this type of spell should have a low power requirement, but a high discipline roll needed. as far as I see, there is not current wy to simulate this? Thoughts?
What about a situation where you only need a little power, say enough to lift a chair, but you then want to move the chair through say an obstacle course. If would seem this type of spell should have a low power requirement, but a high discipline roll needed. as far as I see, there is not current wy to simulate this? Thoughts?
6
DFRPG / Re: Is a disarm tag, a reasonable maneuver/effect?
« on: February 23, 2011, 06:14:48 PM »
I have been thinking about this alot, and it seems that the limits in evocation should be opened to simple conflicts. If you are using magic to pull a weapon from someone, it seems the best way to handle it would be to force a simple conflict. Might vs the power of the spell. If you are using it against more than one person, than you have to split your power up, or spend the the power to make it a zone wide effect, (Requiring your allies to roll too).
The thing that gets ma about maneuvers as that it can be completley negated by a fate point. You use magic toss a person and they fail the roll, then they get the aspect tossed. But then they can still use a fate pont to avoid being tossed? If you lose a physical conflict, say an arm wrestling match, you can not just spend a fate point at the end to avoid losing it. Why should magic be different. It seems that there should be a better way to get into a simple conflict without involving manuever to place aspects.
The thing that gets ma about maneuvers as that it can be completley negated by a fate point. You use magic toss a person and they fail the roll, then they get the aspect tossed. But then they can still use a fate pont to avoid being tossed? If you lose a physical conflict, say an arm wrestling match, you can not just spend a fate point at the end to avoid losing it. Why should magic be different. It seems that there should be a better way to get into a simple conflict without involving manuever to place aspects.
7
DFRPG / Re: Yes, A Free Tag Can Invoke For Effect
« on: February 06, 2011, 11:31:34 PM »So I would think it would be too much to say an aspect like "Loose Weapon Grip" could be invoked to make the enemy drop the weapon...to do that you'd have to do a compel and use a fate point since you are making an enemy take a disadvantageous action.
A tag does just that though, without a fate point. The enemy can still spend a fate point to ignore the aspect. If they take the compel though, they do not get a fate point since it is a free "tag". Remember the only way to get a free tag is to reveal or place the aspect, so that means a maneuver (When you could attack instead) or causing a consequence. It seem fair to me that if you hit a vamp hard enough with a shotgun, that he has to take a "broken leg" aspect, you can then tag it to invoke for effect that he can't run up to you and attack. You should be able to do it for free once, as you are the one who gave him the broken leg. Now though, it turns into a compel. The GM decides if he spends a fate point to ignore the pain and run up anyway, or if he doesn't want to spend it, he stays where he is and tries to throw something at you. Now if next exchange you want to invoke it again, you have to spend the fate point. Compel #2, That damn broken leg keeps getting in the way, but at least this time since the tag is not free, if the vamp takes the compel, he will get your fate point. Manhole cover #2 coming your way.
8
DFRPG / Re: Spell for Critique: Stone Bridge
« on: February 03, 2011, 01:20:35 AM »
I think I may have missed this? I checked the rule for tagging, and it says the only restriction is that it should be done immediately. I didn't see where it said you could not invoke for effect. Can you point me to it. (If so we have been playing wrong).
9
DFRPG / Re: Spell for Critique: Stone Bridge
« on: February 02, 2011, 11:12:37 PM »
If you really wanted to use a maneuver and aspect maybe something like this. Use the spell to create a maneuver to give the zone the Aspect "Filled with rocks". Then use your free tag to make a declaration. "The rocks are stable enough to cross over on." Then anyone can cross them i think?
10
DFRPG / Re: Newbie Players And Basic Tactics
« on: January 30, 2011, 09:44:20 PM »@Mijrai: thank you for the outbreak of realism. Much appreciated.
@Hey, Bitterpill, I've got some news for you: My game isn't at Submerged! Right now, they've all got 9 base refresh. Also, amazingly, not everyone takes fire as an evocation element. My wizard-warden PC is an earth mage, with Air, Earth and Spirit for evocation. Also, remember that fire is still just that: fire. Hot air and smoke are still going to be issues, even if your GM has allowed your wizard to draw off the flames from your zone, which is something that makes me go "buh?" And I said they levitated; not fly. They climbed up the side of the building with a fraction of their weight. And you just proved my point for me even better: wizards that are creative are never out of options; they could have had the hydromancer bust open a pipe and slid out of there, Bobby Drake-Iceman-style, just for one example. The issue is that they disregarded all of those options and went into a place where their options would be constrained because they weren't thinking, they were reacting.
Also, you're forgetting one major, massive issue: There. Are. Still. People. In. The. Building. People work late, even on the weekends. Students are studying. Setting the building on fire, or even using any evocations indiscriminately, is an invitation to take Lawbreaker.
@ Lanir: I agree, we all need to start learning somewhere, and making mistakes is one of the best ways. The list I posted was sent after the session was over as a basic primer points-to-keep-in-mind. But, in this case, which precipitated the list, the mistakes could easily have been lethal, and should have been. But, yeah, they need to be allowed to make mistakes. I was just trying to share some of what I've learned so they don't make as many (in my first RPG game ever, my PC started two wars--completely by accident, so been there, done that)
Why are you asking for feedback and then jumping at the people providing it? To me it sounds like you are not giving your players enough credit. You hit them with spooky music, which doesn't tell them anything. They see something that look bad and they take it out. They then go to a car that should start and doesn't. From that point, if I was them, I would thing something is outside with me, and messed up my car. I think getting up on the roof is a smart tactical situation. Then they can see what is going on, have a defensible position, etc. When that doesn't turn up anything why wouldn't they go back in the building. There are people there. That means if something outside (that messed with tier car) really wants them, it has to risk being seen. You haven't given them enough to think differently. Try putting yourself in other people's shoes and look at it from their perspective before preaching.
Also if you don't want criticism, don't ask for feedback.
11
DFRPG / Re: Aspects placed by GM?
« on: January 26, 2011, 01:48:22 PM »
I think if the GM is happy with it, the player is happy with it, and the group thinks it is cool... Of course do it! The point is to make it fun. If it adds, do it. If it comes up again, and wouldn;t add to the fun, then don;t do it. It dosen't have to be a precedent. Do what feels fun.
Pages: [1]