Nudge, first, thanks very much for taking the time to go through the list. While I don't agree with every assessment, this sort of thing is definitely a service to us, and it's appreciated.
Overall - Recovery Justification: The "justification for recovery" Stunts seem inconsistent, and some seem like a stunt wouldn't be necessary. (A concussion is bad, but a good roll of relevant knowledge should allow for recovery without a stunt, for example. Not to mention that I don't think Empathy really helps recover from social consequence "WENT BONKERS AND DANCED NAKED ON THE DEAN'S DESK")
We're comfortable with the consistency level of things, here. Social consequence justification (with Counselor) is gonna depend on the particulars of the consequence. Or you could make this just about mental consequence recovery and give another stunt, "Public Relations Expert" for the social-consequences-as-public-opinion issues.
Overall - Faster: The "does this faster" Stunts are hurt by the fact that I can't find strong guidelines for how long things SHOULD take in most cases. I'd suspect in short order the GM would mentally start adjusting for the existence of the stunt (unintentionally), removing the benefit. I don't think this is an error, but I personally would tend to be leery of them for that reason or at the very least adopt an "ask how long, argue if it is high, them remind of stunt" policy.
This is a fair concern, but one that's not likely to get addressed. How long things will take will vary from game to game, circumstance to circumstance. They represent the player having a shift or two to spend on "making it go faster", which is a core function of a skill roll anyway, so the expectation is that the GM will parse both in the same fashion.
Athletics - Too Fast to Hit: It says "gain an additional +1 to the roll when making such a move". First, Couldn't that be multiple moves? (Full Defense isn't a block). Second, it's unclear if the bonus +1 applies only if you are moving zones while using Full Defense.
It's the idea that if you're doing a full defense, you can do the supplemental action of "move one zone" for -1 to the roll, only you don't get the -1 to the roll (that's the first effect of the stunt) and you get a +1 to your full defense bonus. It's not multiple moves.
Reworded:
Too Fast to Hit: When making a full defense (page 199), gain an additional +1 to the roll (for a total of +3) if you also take a supplemental action to move one zone. You do not take the usual –1 penalty for the supplemental action.
Contacts - Ear to the Ground: Any reason the Difficulty is reduced instead of getting a +2? I know it works out the same, but it's a bit odd to be different.
Well, the whole difficulty reduction thing is partly on the notion that maybe there's a "doesn't go lower than Mediocre" principle in action. You're right though, you can always state it as a +2 if that's your preference. Remember: when you take a stunt, YOU word it. These are just examples.
Conviction - Resilient Self-Image: I know this was pegged as being too strong; I don't recall what the fix was.
I forget the original version but I think this may have been a case of the benefit remaining but the circumstances of its applicability getting narrowed. Here's the current draft version:
Resilient Self-Image: Your sense of self is strong, enabling you to endure more psychological punishment than most. When facing torture or other extreme interrogation techniques, You may take two additional mild mental consequences (page 203).
Conviction - Tower of Faith: Armor for both mental AND social seems a bit strong (an argument can be made that physical is more frequent - I'm willing to hear that argument)
Deadmanwalking got this right by & large. It's both a more frequent physical thing and a "you have to pray to get this benefit" thing. Since you have to take deliberate specific action to enjoy that benefit, the stunt's a little more broad in its application.
Deceit - Pick-Pocket: Actually, this is fine (I like it!) I just found it odd that it didn't include a page reference like the other sections did (page 126)
Underneath "Deceit" it presently says "Skill & Trappings, page 126" -- if that was missing, it's been put in, and if you're talking about a page reference specifically inside that stunt, it was likely deemed redundant.
Deceit - Stage Magician: Why not say the +1 bonus stacks with the Pick Pocket stunt, making it more clear that it applies to pick pocket attempts even if you don't have the stunt?
I like this suggestion, so I've adopted it.
Empathy - Counselor: See "Recovery Justification" above. I'd have a hard time arguing with someone that has a high Empathy that they can't work to help someone with a moderate consequence. Requiring justification is good - requiring stunts for those is harsh. (but that may just be me). Wouldn't this be better as a bonus to rolls to provide justification?
See commentary above, as well as Deadmanwalking's statement. The idea is that the stunts provide a guaranteed justification; it's baked right in, the way that going to a doctor is more likely to get you a course of treatment that actually works than going to your buddy down the street who maybe took a first aid course once.
Endurance - No Pain, No Gain: Already has been ruled too strong; Don't recall the fix
No Pain, No Gain: You can take a bunch of punishment before it starts to add up. You may take one additional mild physical consequence (page 203).
(This is a rare case of a broadly applicable stunt, but consequences by their nature are expendable, which is where the justification for going broad comes from. But yes, we've cut it down from two milds to one because of that broad application.)
Fists - Martial Artist: See other thread, but (a) I would've assumed that Fists COULD do assessments on fighters without the Stunt (p115 says it's usually perception or knowledge skills, but this seems perfectly appropriate). and (b) Why is this a prereq (and the only prereq in the game?) I don't see a problem with dropping the entire prereq concept given the stunts presented. If you're keeping this Stunt, I'd revise Assessments (p115) to create a hard line that without stunts, it's perception and knowledge skills ONLY. (Side note: Guns grants Gun Knowledge(p131), why doesn't Fists grant Brawling knowledge?)
Well, Guns doesn't grant a defense roll, right? So there's general precedent for some trappings existing with one skill but not another.
That said, I do think it may make sense to 1) drop the prerequisite business for Martial Arts (but still note the notion of prereqs as a way to justify more potent stunts as a stunt building option) and to give a small bonus, like a +1, on the assessment roll.
Fists - Lethal Weapon: Weapon:2 seems too strong. Weapon:1? Or is it because it's only vs unarmored opponents?
I feel that, sans prerequisite, Lethal Weapon is about right: a Weapon:2 effect that you get in a limited circumstance. That said, I could see broadening it a little by allowing it to apply partially against Armor:1 opponents: "Each point of Armor the opponent has reduces this Weapon value by 1, so this is Weapon:1 vs. Armor:1 and no benefit against targets with Armor:2 or better." So that may get edited in.
Fists - Step Into the Blow: Someone can sacrifice several actions in stack as written (though they'd be reeling from so many failed defenses, it can happen). That seems...weird. Round 1: 4 guys smack the center guy, center guy smacks all of them. They spend the next 3 rounds running/debating/ordering pizza while he waits for an action.
Nope. If you don't have a next-round action to sacrifice, you can't use the ability. I'll make sure that clarification gets in there.
Might - Wrestler: Already fixed to be +1 to maintain a grapple. (or break?)
Yes.
Performance - Pointed Performance: I have the desire now to rewrite Hamlet as a series of DFRPG-FATE conflicts... Nothing wrong with the stunt though.
Indeed! Hamlet is full of classic social conflict examples.
Presence - Teflon Persona: This is fine, but makes Tower of Faith still look too strong.
You don't have to deliberately activate Teflon Persona, which is the point on which those balance.
Weapons - Riposte: See Fists - Step Into the Blow for discussion of limiting how many actions you can sacrifice. Why is this successful vs that stunts roll at +1?
Just different flavor. One version (Riposte) means you get the benefit as is achieved via your defense roll; another brings in the potential to improve that result or miss. It's basically a "risk-range" vs. a "take it as it is" thing, which for me at least is a zero sum tweak.
