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 - Drachasor

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 43
1
DFRPG / Re: Bad Luck Curse?
« on: July 09, 2011, 07:54:50 AM »
It says "most prone", not that it will necessarily violate a law.  Remember all the other stuff it is lumping in there too.

I could see an Extreme Consequence Bad Luck spell breaking the Law though, as that will cause a massive change in someone.  Short of that though, I don't see it for luck-based stuff.  It's a lot easier if you are directly messing with the mind, body, or emotions of someone, however.

I suppose a very unfriendly GM might try to enforce that any use of such things violates the law.  I don't think that makes sense.  Entropomancy is dark stuff, sure, but are many things like summoning demons.  A lot of darker magic doesn't inherently break a law, even if the Council wouldn't particularly like it.

2
DFRPG / Re: Bad Luck Curse?
« on: July 09, 2011, 04:30:04 AM »
Have to agree with Braincraft.  Entropy Curses are only connected to transformations for mechanical reasons, not Law Breaking ones as far as I can tell.  Certainly there's no reason to think of it as any different than say wounding someone and inflicting any other sort of consequence.

Now, on the very, very extreme end, such as inflicting the curse of a Loup Garou on someone, that IS breaking the 4th Law, just like the extreme end of zapping someone with electricity will kill someone rather than stun.  In each of those one is fine as far as laws go and the other isn't.

3
DFRPG / Re: Bad Luck Curse?
« on: July 09, 2011, 01:16:33 AM »
I actually like the Breath Weapon idea, though one could make it more close-range and base it off of claws.  You could pick a skill for making attacks with it of course.

For a Breath Weapon, I'd say allow spread attacks and maneuvers and call it Baleful Eye or something.  Direct attacks would actually be some unlucky event, like something falling on them, slipping, etc.  Maneuvers would be a bad luck curse that could be invoked.  To finish it off, toss in the ability to make any inflicted consequence by someone with this ability to become curses themselves.  So if you attack with a gun, and inflict a severe consequence, you can choose to instead of inflicting "Belly Wound", you give them "Horrible Luck".*

You could probably make this a -1 ability if you only allow maneuvers and no attacks.

*In game terms you inflict stress as normal.  In Narrative terms you perhaps steal luck from your shot (so it essentially misses on a story level), and use that to curse the target.

4
DFRPG / Re: Lightning
« on: July 09, 2011, 01:07:38 AM »
I don't think Spirit makes sense.  Might as well say Spirit can cause fire then.  When they talk about energy manipulation there, they mean more like spatial distortions (that's why they say "bending energies around them" and don't say it is about manipulating energy directly).  Spirit is already crazy-powerful compared to the other elements, so giving it more stuff doesn't seem like a good move.  Pure Water is actually a very poor conductor of electricity.  And overall lightning doesn't really fit its theme of liquids and entropy.  Fire perhaps makes the the most sense of all, given its relationship to plasmas, but fire has quite a bit on its belt being able to do cold and flame already.

I mean, sure, you could justify lightning with anything.  Heck, you could justify any element being able to make fire or cold.  It would require somewhat extensive reasoning.  However, at that point the elements stop being very unique and your choice of an element no longer matters.

5
DFRPG / Re: Looking For some advice on fleshing out a sub-plot
« on: July 08, 2011, 08:08:46 PM »
Eons ago, perhaps during the war to cast out the Outsiders, there was a nameless, terrible thing.  It could not be stopped, or held, or reasoned with.  When all hope seemed lost, 9 gods managed to seal it away, mostly outside our universe, though they died in the process.  The cage wouldn't last forever, and would eventually need to be reinforced.  However, the cage slowly drifted out of alignment with our reality, and over a few thousand years, much was forgotten.

As the cage weakens, many factions seek to gain advantage.  Some want to free what is inside, convinced they can gain an ally for themselves or at least create a powerful enemy for their foes.  Some believe they can turn the seal into a binding on the prisoner, forcing it to their will.  And there are some that want to reinforce the seal.  As to the exact nature of what has been sealed away, no one remembers...

There are scattered scions of those original 9 gods left among the world however.  The Merlin himself is one and knows it.  Most however, are simply not away of their heritage, much less what it means.  The two kids are scions of one of the gods, and their parents were sorcerers.  The accident was in fact a magical attack, staged so that the children would survive without the guidance or protection of their parents without believing that some purposeful force had orphaned them.  Of course, multiple factions are away of what is going on.  There are factions that want to use their blood in a ritual to weaken the cage, factions that want to guide and protect the children so that the cage may be reinforced, factions that want to guide the children for their own dark ands, and others with even fouler intentions (perhaps Fomori who seek to twist the children to some unique purpose).

Now, one could certainly have this sort of thing be a basis of a campaign.  However, you could also have it as a one-shot adventure that just demonstrates there is BIG STUFF that happens all the time.

6
DFRPG / Re: Mindreading through an enchanted object?
« on: July 05, 2011, 10:10:15 PM »
Quote from: noclue on July 05, 2011, 07:42:47 PM
The Coucil would most likely execute you for making and using with equal fervor.

Without question.

Quote from: noclue on July 05, 2011, 07:42:47 PM
I also don't agree with the assumption that using an item to do black magic shields you from backlash. Else there would be a lot of perfectly healthy black magic practitioners.

In lore there is no reason why there would be backlash when the item is used.  Using a magic item is a lot like using a gun as far as intent/will goes, if it requires any thought at all (e.g. Harry's Duster).

It leads to an interesting quandary for the Fire Law, since a wand of fire doesn't seem like Black Magic to make, but it could be easily used to kill.  This is a LOT like wards killing people.  With other laws, you usually can't stumble over a violation like that.  So there's certainly some things to struggle with in the game here.

Now, in terms of game balance, this would be considered an exploit and almost undoubtedly needs to be stopped for the good of the game.  In terms of lore, I'd consider this an exploit in the same manner that a steam engine is exploiting the laws of thermodynamics.  So largely I consider this an interesting topic in an academic sense.

7
DFRPG / Re: Mindreading through an enchanted object?
« on: July 05, 2011, 06:26:05 PM »
Well, first we should realize that the acts that break the laws of magic are only really, really bad in the Dresdenverse, because of how magic works (generally).  Killing someone in self-defense isn't bad and won't lead you down the path of being a monster.  Nor would killing people in a war.  Let's face it, Molly's GOALS were not bad.  Getting people to not kill themselves and unborn children via drug overdoses and abuse is a good thing.  Theoretically her methodology was even quite good.  The problem was that it was done by magic, which creates all sorts of problems.  It has to be something you are totally committed to, and gets warped by second thoughts, reservations, and petty feelings you might never act on in real life.

It does make magic items that do this stuff really interesting, from Laws of Magic standpoint.  From the standpoint of the Laws as laws of men, it seems like making it and each use are separate infractions.  However, as Laws of (Magical) Physics, it would seem like you wouldn't really get backlash from using it, since it doesn't really require the same sort of dedicated will and commitment of beliefs to use a ritual would (or making it probably does).

8
DFRPG / Re: A Thought On Healing Magic
« on: July 05, 2011, 06:51:56 AM »
Quote from: Sanctaphrax on July 05, 2011, 04:17:47 AM
Wasn't talking to you.

I was replying to darkfire's suggestion of 6 shifts for a severe consequence.

You posted while I was writing.

6 for a mild is probably okay, but as aforementioned I'd prefer to avoid fixed difficulties.

Whaaat?  People not talking to ME!?  OUTRAGEOUS!

Fixed difficulties could be problematic, unless perhaps you went with a fate point route so that the person would have to use a ritual for a temporary power and then spend fate points to power it.  That might be ok.  Probably depends on a bit on the game.  Of course, healing a severe consequence is highly questionable in any case.

Though, I suppose one might go the route of the recovery powers.  You do an expensive and difficult ritual and it just makes it heal as if it was something of a lesser severity.  That's not as big of a deal, perhaps.

That said, one would think a ritual powerful enough to kill someone, maybe with a bit of extra change, should be enough to heal them.  That's how fully transformative magic works anyhow.

In the end, I think a lot of what works depends on the particular campaign.

9
DFRPG / Re: A Thought On Healing Magic
« on: July 05, 2011, 04:11:23 AM »
Quote from: Sanctaphrax on July 05, 2011, 03:46:34 AM
6 shifts seems a bit too cheap to me.

6 shifts for a consequence that ends at the end of the next scene?  I don't think that's really too cheap when you're going to need to prepare for the ritual.

10
DFRPG / Re: A Thought On Healing Magic
« on: July 05, 2011, 03:44:40 AM »
Quote from: darkfire14 on July 05, 2011, 03:37:45 AM
Why can't magic "Heal" consequences? For instance mend a "Broken Leg" severe physical consequence. its MAGIC goddammit, it should be able to do such things. I woulden't make it easy of course (Probably a 6 shift evocation or thaumaturge spell). After all if Queen Mab could heal Dresden of his broken back, then certainly magic can cure consequences.

In the books it is far from easy, though I'd say it is SLIGHTLY better than what they have in YS.  In the game it would have to be really expensive, on the order of a ritual that's 3-5 shifts of power for each shift the consequence absorbs.  So a mild consequence would be a 6-10 shift ritual, a moderate would be 12-20 shifts, a severe would be 18-30, and an extreme would be 24-40.  That feels about right -- most of the time it just wouldn't be worth it, but for someone like Mab, they could do it easy.

11
DFRPG / Re: I'm a wizard and I like my tech.
« on: July 05, 2011, 03:39:54 AM »
Quote from: Sanctaphrax on July 05, 2011, 02:56:35 AM
I'd be interested to know how that enchanted item works.

It probably works under the theory that a invoke for effect will the right compel.  So a maneuver that is called "I cannot Hex" can then be spent to cancel a hex compel.

That's my guess, anyhow.

12
DFRPG / Re: You don't have to take a consequence? Really?
« on: July 03, 2011, 06:08:59 PM »
I think mostly everything has been said.  I would only add that if the player is really against an extreme consequence of being in love, then you should find something else.  Consequences are not about punishing the player.  They should make life more difficult, true, but even more importantly they should make the game more fun.  It seems a bit unclear to me where the player stood in all this (beyond not wanting to get hurt much).

Now, like EdgeofDreams said, if someone gets taken out, then the attacker can decide the rough nature of what happens (within reason), but not the precise details.  That may mean a significant consequences and may not.  You might consider whether this NPC would have wanted to inflict a life-altering consequence on the PC, or whether they'd be happy with perhaps a moderate or severe one instead.

13
DFRPG / Re: Using Aspects Against Players
« on: July 03, 2011, 04:11:05 AM »
The willing suspension of disbelief comes in when you consider the probabilities involved and how they change with regards to aspects.  These are significant, but they bother some people a lot and others not at all.  And of course, like Mouse said, fractals can do things that can't otherwise be represented by aspects, like environmental damage.

14
DFRPG / Re: Using Aspects Against Players
« on: July 03, 2011, 01:39:45 AM »
Quote from: noclue on July 02, 2011, 10:48:42 PM
Yes, I agree with that last part. If it bothers someone, they should be using a situational modifier. But, I disagree that you're making a choice to suspend disbelief that a brightly lit hallway is just as easy to sneak down. The GM is using a currency to say that "you can't get the drop on the guard, because I see you in the brightly lit hallway +2." But, the guard hasn't seen anything until after the roll. And the aspect is just providing a bonus to that roll. It's not a question of easier or not. Aspects are not creating a model of the world, they're influencing a dice roll. The results of which will determine the direction of a narrative. Until the contest is determined and a winner decided, we can't say if this particular guard was snuck up upon or not, and the fiction will inform us as to how hard or easy it was. All we know is he is in a brightly lit hallway and we know that brightly lit hallways tend to make sneaking hard. If the guard wins, than dammit that brightly lit hallway really fucked up the PC. But, if the PC wins, they managed to get the drop on the guard despite all those lights and you can narrate how damn hard it was to sneak up on the guard.

Depends on the person.  Some people can watch a show where someone makes a hole in the event horizon of a black hole and have no problem with it, whereas another person might cringe in intellectual horror.  What falls under the willing suspension of disbelief varies from person to person, and so it will vary from group to group.  So for some people the "despite all those lights" will be fine, and for others it will be something they just can't take seriously.

Ideally, everyone in a group can find a good compromise where everyone is happy.  Ideally there's a middle ground between the extremes of complexity/realism (for a given game) and simplicity/abstraction at a given gaming table.

I agree with Sinker that for a new GM in general, going with what is straight out of the book is definitely best.  Complexity can be added later once the core rules are well understood if desired.  Someone new to GMing Fate is probably best getting used to aspects to start even, before adding fractals, since it is a pretty unique concept/mechanic (imho).

15
DFRPG / Re: Magical shapechanging as Evocation or Thaumaturgy?
« on: July 02, 2011, 01:47:28 PM »
First, Beast Change is clearly magic.  Secondly, Harry considers it a very specific and well-practiced spell when the Alphas do it.  I think this is by far the easiest way to go.

It's going to be hard to get enough shifts to make a decent facsimile of shapeshifting using evocation or thaumaturgy.  I do think using the shapeshifting powers is the best way to go here.

Edit 2:  You could try going with using aspects and the like to do it.  Problem is aspects are pretty hard to stack up on yourself.  9 shifts of power only will get you 3 tags, so 3 uses of "I'm a Cat" (to invoke for effect or a +2 bonus) assuming no use of fate points is not so great.  You could get more by spending refresh to get refinement or items to help make it easier, but once you start spending refresh, the shapechanging powers become a more effective way to handle it.  Really I think going the thaumaturgy route should only be used if you don't plan on changing shape very much at all.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 43