Questions about DFRPG

[cowardlylion]

I have a couple of questions about DFRPG?

Firstly how severe should a taken out result be for example is Darth Vader's fate (permanent life support machine) an appropriate take out result for a PC.

Secondly does negative refresh mean an absolute inability to act against ones nature, for example would Darth Vader at the end of Return of the Jedi have to have been in positive refresh to have made his choice ?     

[Magicpockets]

The player who takes out someone gets to dictate the taken out result. Death, permanently crippled, emotionally scarred, (mind)raped or other results are all appropriate (as long as everyone at the table is comfortable with it; RAW might allow it, but RPGs are still a social activity!). The person on the receiving end of the taken out result gets to describe the details though.

Negative Refresh generally means an inability to decline compels on one's High Concept. Darth Vader at the end of Return of the Jedi had an Extreme Consequence inflicted on him which changed his High Concept. Btw, I don't think Vader is a good example, as I see him as a character with positive Refresh.

[InFerrumVeritas]

I have a couple of questions about DFRPG?

Firstly how severe should a taken out result be for example is Darth Vader's fate (permanent life support machine) an appropriate take out result for a PC.

Secondly does negative refresh mean an absolute inability to act against ones nature, for example would Darth Vader at the end of Return of the Jedi have to have been in positive refresh to have made his choice ?   

Darth Vader's fate could be modeled a couple ways:
It's a taken out result.  Anakin's dead.  Vader's an NPC who the GM runs in a later game.
It's an extreme consequence.
It's a concession that results in an extreme consequence.

Negative refresh basically means that the GM can compel you a number of times equal to your refresh deficit with you not receiving a fate point (or having any fate points to refuse).  Zero refresh means that you have one compel that you just can't refuse.  Fate points represent free will because they mean that you can refuse a compel.

[Taran]

I think Anakin became an NPC when he became Darth (as noted above).

- He has an aspect related to his son
- The fight at the end of the last movie was a social conflict (not a physical one)
- maybe, possibly, a mental conflict between The emperor and Luke with Vader as a prop.
- The take out result was Vader turning on the Emperor and dying, dictated by Luke's Character - or possibly a concession by whoever is running Vader.  I think it's the former because Luke dictated that Vader turns away from the Dark Side.

The conflict wasn't about whether Luke beats Vader in a fight.  It was whether Vader/Emperor could bring Luke to the Dark side or whether Luke could bring Vader back to the Light side.

Lots of maneuvers got thrown around and Luke compelled some of Vader's aspects/consequences and Vader doesn't have much in the way of FP's to refuse compels.

Anyways, that's how I see it.

[Mr. Death]

I think what needs to be clarified is that cowardlylion is referring to Darth Vader at the end of Revenge of the Sith, not Return of the Jedi.

[g33k]

Firstly how severe should a taken out result be for example is Darth Vader's fate (permanent life support machine) an appropriate take out result for a PC.   

I'd see this as an "Extreme Consequence" -- something that alters the High Concept of the character!
Yeah, Anakin was "Taken Out" in suffering this consequence.

And yes, this IMHO *IS* something that -- with general group buy-in -- can be applied to PC's.

The question really needs to be addressed up-front, alongside several other issues.  DFRPG is one of the games where "everyone on the same page" is rather important!
 - What level of intra-party conflict is allowed?  Are PC's who are liable to kill (or meaningfully undermine) one another OK "within the group"?
 - How much of what kinds of violence are allowed?  Might there be a serial-murderer as a villain?  Serial child-murderer?  Serial rapist?  Etc...  Quite a few people will say "NO" to some of this (I probably would, myself).
 - Can "worse violence" than happens in-play happen via brief no-details GM-narration, establishing the villainy of the villain without getting too graphic/squicksome?
 - When a PC gets "Taken Out," what sorts of results *might* that mean?  Permanent death?  Permanent maiming/scarring?  Life-long life-support?  If it happens at a REALLY climactic story-arc culmination, is self-sacrificing success ("win" the issue, but die) OK?

[toturi]

From my view, Anakin Skywalker was taken out 2 times during the events of Revenge of the Sith.

1) He was "Turned to the Dark Side".

2) He was "Left for dead" on Mustafa after Obi-wan defeated him.

He didn't die because the Emperor Maneuvered the Left for Dead into Permanent Life Support.

Really... something that takes you out doesn't really mean create new PC. It could mean "Blue Ghost Mode". Ben knew he was going to lose the physical duel, so he placed an Aspect on himself to go to the Blue Ghost Land once Vader cuts him down.

[Taran]

From my view, Anakin Skywalker was taken out 2 times during the events of Revenge of the Sith.

1) He was "Turned to the Dark Side".

2) He was "Left for dead" on Mustafa after Obi-wan defeated him.

He didn't die because the Emperor Maneuvered the Left for Dead into Permanent Life Support.

Really... something that takes you out doesn't really mean create new PC. It could mean "Blue Ghost Mode". Ben knew he was going to lose the physical duel, so he placed an Aspect on himself to go to the Blue Ghost Land once Vader cuts him down.

Agreed.

The take out was "left for dead". After thar, they have no control as to what happens.

Obi wan i see as being a concession.  He dies but continues to play as a ghost.  There's even a power for that.