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.


Messages - CottbusFiles

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 9
46
DFRPG / Re: So I'm probably missing something
« on: February 08, 2012, 08:56:43 PM »
A couple ideas:

*Throw some werewolves at them.  It's definitely on the greyer line of the 1st Law, and will force them to pull their punches.

It in fact does not. You can still hit them with your +9 Weapon 10 attack. If you take them out you get to narrate the how. You don't even have to kill anyone (have a FP in reserve just in case) by RAW.

47
DFRPG / Re: my players are requesting
« on: February 06, 2012, 11:47:15 AM »
I still think those books have been commissioned by the white court to make hunting on teenage girls even easier.

48
DFRPG / Re: Do you STAT your Big bad or do you just kinda play it by ear?
« on: February 03, 2012, 10:04:34 AM »
There is a whole continuum between Player Control and GM Control, and the optimal level will change from table to table.

As DFRPG is largely based on narrative control wielded by both GM and Player, and not a tactical combat simulator, the arbitrary choice is in fact a huge component of the game. Add in the fact that players can effectively write their way into or out of situations with a well-justified Declaration, and the playing field is just not that dire if the GM opts to play it by ear from time to time. In fact, he will often need to in order to adapt to the Players' contributions to the game.

Yes but both have exact rules for narrative control. I can just decide that my PC now has a different power (okay i can if i have modular power or something like this).
Deciding on the fly that "oh, that is too weak he needs more stressboxes" is cheating. It's cheating in a game sense of way and it is cheating the PCs part of their victory.

If something has concrete stats it can be beaten by a clever player. Once you start changing stuff arround on the fly the PCs have no power in any way and only you, the GM, decides who wins.

49
DFRPG / Re: Who can pop a Containment Circle?
« on: February 03, 2012, 08:15:03 AM »
If you are a spiritual creature and you get invited into a house the threeshold doesn't matter. And if the threeshold is weak then you can force your way through if you have enough power.

#and if a demon/erlking could break a circle by just stomping their foot then there wouldn't be such containmend circles. The existence of them shows that this is not possible. All the power of the beeing is stoped at the edge of the circle.

For the Storm Front example. I think Bob tossed him the bottle, he broke the circle and then Harry drank the potion to escape - no contradiction there.

50
DFRPG / Re: Using Shields (the physical kind, not magic kinds)
« on: February 03, 2012, 08:08:34 AM »
There is already something written explicitly into the rules for exactly that situation:

Jim B.: I wanna spend a fate point to declare there's a RIOT SHIELD sitting right in the street.
GM: Okay, I'll allow that.
Jim B.: Okay, good. I hold up the shield and tag that for a +2 to my defense roll.

You want a bonus to a roll? Invoke/tag an aspect or take a stunt. You want a penalty? Compell something in their aspects that indicates they don't know how to use a shield.

You can spend a Fatepoint to make somethign true, not just to create an Aspect. Finding an item is surely the former case. You find the item and you keep it and you use it.

51
DFRPG / Re: Who can pop a Containment Circle?
« on: February 02, 2012, 07:11:16 PM »
(click to show/hide)

Free will has absolutely nothing to do with, even a falling leaf can break a circle

52
DFRPG / Re: Using Shields (the physical kind, not magic kinds)
« on: February 02, 2012, 03:32:20 PM »
The tradeoff of a shield is that it takes a hand to use.
Seriously, think about that.

For me they (the classical medieval type metal shield) would give 2 shifts to mix between Armor or +Defence. You can decide yourself how to aply them but you have to choose when you pick it up

53
DFRPG / Re: Who can pop a Containment Circle?
« on: January 31, 2012, 03:14:31 PM »
Free will has nothing to do with the cirlce itself.

A circle build to contain something can easily be disturbed by the outside. The redcaps could in fact have destroyed the circle. If it is a special made anti-fey circle this might be something else.

54
DFRPG / Re: About blocks
« on: January 30, 2012, 05:23:17 PM »
or you do a Maneuver (which creates an Aspect, which requires the player to activate for the Aspect to be able to affect the game world).

Does it really? The player can tag the aspect to "force" a compel. The gm could still compel it himself if he feels like it.

55
DFRPG / Re: Paranet.
« on: January 29, 2012, 06:04:19 PM »
I think somewhere they say that they are moving into europe, establishing the paranet there.

Also look at the Hunternet from the old Hunter game from White Wolf, that seems to be something similiar (maybe)

56
DFRPG / Re: Paranet.
« on: January 28, 2012, 11:07:49 PM »
It's more or less a tightly regulated forum i think. Mailinglist eventually with really minor talent printing out stuff for the guys that really can't even handle the old computer at the library. That is what i think it is.


57
DFRPG / Re: Dealing with Supernatural and High Combat
« on: January 27, 2012, 07:34:43 PM »
All the magic Dresden threw around i doubt that any cameras survited that encounter

58
DFRPG / Re: Alternate Magical Mechanics
« on: January 26, 2012, 10:38:30 PM »
First question : Why?
or more exact, there is a perfectly fine system out there with the DFRPG, what is really bothering you in it?
Taking things here and there but not the other things is like putting the wheels of a monstertruck on the blue bettle - it creates all sorts of new problems.

We would need to know why you want to change stuff and why and to what effect before really helping in that way is really possible.

Bye
CottbusFiles - who is really into running games as RaW as possible

59
DFRPG / Re: AP Podcast - City on the River
« on: January 23, 2012, 11:36:59 PM »
That "ooomph" comes at the expense of basically every other element of the system. With lower volume economies, each element can do what it is intended to do without interference. With high volume economies, Aspects override everything else, since as long as you've got FPs to burn, you can throw them at anything. Having a Skill at Great (+4) is meaningless if you can just find two relevant Aspects (character, scene, Theme, whatever) to pump a Skill you don't even have on your sheet for the single task that matters.

Aspects are not the entirety, or even bulk of FATE, frankly a game where they are sounds rather dull to me.

FATE Points are not a central important aspect of the FATE-System?

About skills using importants:
Let's J.B. knows she will have to spend some time in the wilderness alone but she doesn't have any survival. She spends a day reading the PAthfinder outdoor guidebook and puts a "read up on the topic" aspect on her and later tags that and invokes her choosen of the ghaleb duwr aspect to reach her obstalce of 4. That shows you exactly how she does it.  You have an in-game reason why she made the roll. Someone with a 4 in survival would have been able to just save those FPs. I don't see the problem there. The imersion is not broken and everyone is happy. Spend FPs generate more story. It's cooler to remember that one time when the red court killed your wife to fuel your strike with anger. To use his limb leg to trick him into your feint and then hit him with The Blade of Love for a loooot of damage rather say, i attack him with my sword.

The rulebook says. Aspects are the most important attribues of your character. It says who your character IS. If you don't base your story around them you are robbing the players of a valueable ressource and of cool.
The ghosts attacked J.B. because someone send them to get her BECAUSE she is the chosen of the earth spirit. This is a compel. Her live got harder because of WHO she is. If she doesn't get a FP for that you are cheating her of a ressource. There are only so much slots for aspect and then to not get rewared for them is bad.
The trouble aspects aren't there for fun, there are there to create trouble for the PCs. If they are not involved in the story then why have them? The story should be about the characters right? Aspects are about characters so use them, they are an excelent tool.

A game without a lot of Fate-points is a more gritty game, at the same time it has a lot less conflict (compels generate conflict and drama and suspense). When you compel a lot you have more drama and the PCs have the ability to shine, to be heros and defend opponents that are bigger than they are. The whole bookseries is about harry getting kicked around a lot so that he can succeed in the end. the game should emulate that and it does perfectly if you use it.

It also takes a lot of work from the GM because he doesn't have to have the whole plot ready. just a startscene and a good idea on how to compel the shit out of the players.

But that is just me coming from a Burning Wheel high and applying a lot of the ideas to this system - mainly to use it as it is written and the tools it gives me to the fullest. I still really enjoy your podcast and in some part i feel terrible for telling you "how you should run your game" - i don't want to do that. I just saw that one of your players had problems and that you generally have a low ammount of fate points and wanted to help with this problem.


60
DFRPG / Surrendering your Game to Aspects, Compells and Fate Points
« on: January 23, 2012, 09:48:11 PM »
Do you do that? Just compel as much as you can (either as player or as pc) and look where the story and the pacing is taking you? Do you use Fatepoint declaration a lot and liberally (like coming into a murder scene and declaring that there are wolftracks, the victim has bite wounds and all of his money and jewelery are stolen instead of waiting for GM information)

Has anyone done this/do you do this and how well does that work?

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 9