A question on mass compels

[zenten]

So I'm thinking of introducing a plot point that would require a mass compel against all the PCs (they each have at least one appropriate Aspect).  The question is, what happens if only some PCs buy it off?

[noclue]

That would really depend on the Compel itself.

[zenten]

It's to have a kid they're trying to rescue from a group of red court vampires to have been already infected.

[admiralducksauce]

Because there is no middle ground here, the kid either IS or IS NOT infected, you have 2 options:

1.  ANY FP expenditure resists the compel.  This is the "nice guy" option IMO, for when you want to offer some FP but don't really want to necessarily burn the PCs' stocks if they refuse.

2.  ALL the PCs must resist the compel for it to be refused.  This is playing harder, for a situation where you feel it's a significant or cool complication and you don't feel it's worth just the one FP out of the group to buy it off.

[Wolfwood2]

It's to have a kid they're trying to rescue from a group of red court vampires to have been already infected.

I wouldn't even do a compel.  That seems to be the sort of thing that is within your GM authority of 'defining the world'.  Unless it's such a blatant retcon/unlikely that you feel the need to justify it with plot coupons, I guess.

It seems to me that anything that would need a mass compel might be something you should just be able to declare.

[zenten]

It's more that I'm not totally sure the players will be OK with this plot point for a few reasons, not the least of which is none of the PCs are your typical "gamer sociopaths".

[MorkaisChosen]

It's more that I'm not totally sure the players will be OK with this plot point for a few reasons, not the least of which is none of the PCs are your typical "gamer sociopaths".

Won't that just make it more fun and interesting and fun...?

[sinker]

Tell them he's infected and hand them all a chip. The aspects should have more to do with how the players react then it should be about the world at large. Just because they refuse the compel doesn't mean that the kid's not infected, it just means that it has less to do with them or that they're reacting to it in a manner different than they would normally. You're the GM so the kid is infected, they can have a chip for it if they want.

[Roxy Rocket]

I think the kind Admiral has the right of it.

2.  ALL the PCs must resist the compel for it to be refused.  This is playing harder, for a situation where you feel it's a significant or cool complication and you don't feel it's worth just the one FP out of the group to buy it off.

I don't think I'd leave a plot point as important as the heroes being too late up to a blind choice. But you know the most about your game and your group though, right?

[admiralducksauce]

Thanks, Rocket.  I've tried both ways but my players would whore out their mothers for fate points so the "group refusal" situation has never come up.  Maybe my choices aren't hard enough is all.

Tell them he's infected and hand them all a chip.

I have to say, I like this way too.  "Rotten luck fellas, here's some bribe money."  Settles the problem right quick it does.  Hey, in most games you wouldn't get ANYTHING when the story takes a turn for the worse.

[noclue]

Are they all equally invested in saving the kid?

What aspects were you going to compel on each PC?

Why do they have to be sociopaths to enjoy a game where something tragic and poignant happens?

In our recent game one of the PCs, a vanilla mortal medic with a savior complex, is all about saving his family and getting vengeance on the RCVs that hunted and killed his uncle and several other members of his family. Of course, when he rescues his niece she's been infected. Now he has to help her resist the infection and get her help. It ended with the a ritual in which the PC took her hunger upon himself, becoming infected himself to give her strength to resist.

[Becq]

I think the section on "GM-Driven Compels" on YS 101 might be useful here.  Basically, this is a case of the GM creating dramawhich the players don't have a say in.  As any compel, there is room for negotiation, in theroy, but in the example you gave, there really isn't any middle ground.  The players might have a choice to buy out of some of the consequences (in this case, that might mean that they find out about the condition early enough to help him avoid going all the way over the line into full vampire).  But, to quote the next page:

Sometimes, it may seem as though there is no practical way to buy out of a “scenestarter” compel. Suppose you have the aspect My Dear Brother, and the GM proposes a compel with, “Hey, so you find your brother beaten to a pulp and left on your doorstep, with a note that says ‘Now we know where you live’ on it.” It would be pretty lame to spend a fate point and suggest that it doesn’t even happen.

I think this example is very much the equivalent of what you have planned.

So what you might do is just cryptically hand the players a Fate point each, possibly accompanying it with a comment about how there seems to be something ... different about the kid (perhaps do this a session or two later, to make the connection with the rescue a little less obvious).  If any of them buy off the compel, give them the info about the cause of that feeling 'for free', otherwise they have to either investigate the situation or guess or ... whatever.  And if they just take the Fate and ignore the situation, then perhaps that means they'll be getting more Fate a bit later, as the find the kid standing with a bloody mouth over a fresh corpse...

[evileeyore]

sinker ans Becq have the right idea.

[noclue]

So I'm thinking of introducing a plot point that would require a mass compel against all the PCs (they each have at least one appropriate Aspect).  The question is, what happens if only some PCs buy it off?

Just because I haven't said it yet, I think using a mass compel to get this to happen is an extremely bad idea. But, I think there is probably a way to get what you want, and make it fun for all the players at the same time.

So, your players are all "This game is about us trying to save the kid! Success means he be saved!" and you want to say "No, success is about this other thing, because when you get the kid but he's been infected already." To me, making this sing is all about what you want to do with this premise, what your players like in games, and how their characters are built mechanically. I'd want to know why they're trying to save him and what the kid means to them once he's saved. I'd want to know if any of the characters have a particularly close bond with this kid. And I'd want to know if any of the characters have other things they should be doing that might be going pear shaped while they're focus is elsewhere.