(Rules Questions) Negative Refresh: Roleplay & Mechanics

[void]

Ok. If this is the case, why stat them monsters with aspects?

An item of note, even if they don't happen have any fate points on hand to invoke their own aspects, it's always possible for someone (such as a PC) to tag an aspect on them, once it's been discovered through Assessment.

[Papa Gruff]

An item of note, even if they don't happen have any fate points on hand to invoke their own aspects, it's always possible for someone (such as a PC) to tag an aspect on them, once it's been discovered through Assessment.

Kind of the point I made before actually. Stating them with aspects witch they can't invoke them selfs is just the same as providing them with more flaws that others can abuse, further adding to the imbalance that comes from not giving them fate points of their own.

[KOFFEYKID]

I think void is trying to point out that a compel on one of their aspects would hand them a fate point. Like I said ealier, they might not start off with fate points, but they can still gain them through compels and complications just like a PC can. Also, since these guys are going to be fairly Bad Assed they probably have a few fate points banked (from past compels).

[Papa Gruff]

I think void is trying to point out that a compel on one of their aspects would hand them a fate point. Like I said ealier, they might not start off with fate points, but they can still gain them through compels and complications just like a PC can. Also, since these guys are going to be fairly Bad Assed they probably have a few fate points banked (from past compels).

Ok. I misunderstood then. I agree with that.

[void]

Kind of the point I made before actually. Stating them with aspects witch they can't invoke them selfs is just the same as providing them with more flaws that others can abuse, further adding to the imbalance that comes from not giving them fate points of their own.

Adding to the imbalance? What about the part where they don't have to worry about fate refresh? Remember, even in our source material, the bad guys outweigh our heroes by a Bunch of a Lot on the power scale. Fate points are actually what lets our PCs have a chance against the monsters. That, and manipulating their natures.

Honestly, most of the time I'd be disinclined to let negative refresh bad guys have very many fate points, if any at all; I'd expect anyone who'd be so far gone to be more or less unable to hold onto any gained from compels for long. If they were inclined to restrain themselves against their nature, they wouldn't have gone negative in the first place.

[Wordmaker]

Of course NPCs don't have to worry about their Refresh, since Refresh is what determines whether or not a PC becomes an NPC. That's hardly any kind of a balance to not getting any Fate Points.

NPCs should be using Fate Points for things like ensuring that the main villain escapes, or to ensure the final big showdown isn't over in a single round of combat because a PC happens to get lucky on a Weapons roll.

For NPCs, Fate Points should only really reflect the GM's ability to keep the game fun and challenging for the players.

[Crion]

I think it's been pretty clearly said, but I'm just tossing this out there to make sure I personally didn't misread something from the rulebooks:

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there a section discussing NPCs and Fate Points, and that there were two methods involving them?

If I remember correctly, the NPCs start off with a number of Fate Points equal to the number of Refresh they have left (which, if you are scaling the NPCs, they have a base Refresh of the party). If they have gone into the Negative Refresh Zone, they do not start of with ANY Fate Points unless they are given them via compels.

The second (this is the one I can't remember offhand, and I'm getting zerg rushed here again): GMs start off with a set number of Fate Points in a pool for their NPCs based upon the number of party members/available refresh among them. This will make badder bastards with some semblance of control, but isn't that the reason this is being brought up?

If anyone knows the page for that idea, please let me know; would be nice to know I'm not crossing my games too badly again ^^;

[Papa Gruff]

Of course NPCs don't have to worry about their Refresh, since Refresh is what determines whether or not a PC becomes an NPC. That's hardly any kind of a balance to not getting any Fate Points.

NPCs should be using Fate Points for things like ensuring that the main villain escapes, or to ensure the final big showdown isn't over in a single round of combat because a PC happens to get lucky on a Weapons roll.

For NPCs, Fate Points should only really reflect the GM's ability to keep the game fun and challenging for the players.

That sums it up nicely i think. It comes down to being able to adept the opposition on the fly when it seems necessary. I'm in no way suggesting that the fate point system should be used in the same way as it is for players. In most circumstances that's not even necessary. Just saying that in my opinion non human or negative refresh NPC not getting fate points is problematic.

[DFJunkie]

The section on NPCs and Fate Points (YS 351-352) suggests that NPCs acquire fate points based on their status in the game.  Main NPCs gain fate points like PCs, through compels, negative invocation of their aspects by other parties, etc.  Supporting NPCs get fate points in all the usual ways, and additionally one extra per scene they participate in, since they have fewer aspects to compel.  Finally, nameless NPCs don't usually get any since they have no aspects of their own, but optionally you can give them access to their master's fate points, and give any fate points the minions earn from consequences and cashing out back to the master.  

Aside from starting with no fate points, I don't think that having a negative refresh has any mechanical impacts.  In terms of roleplaying, I would say that the degree of negativity reflects the degree that the NPC is ruled by its nature.  A -1 refresh NPC has a harder time overcoming its drives than a -30 NPC.  As a GM, I would almost never refuse a compel to a -30 NPCs aspects, even when accepting it is wildly stupid.  

[Janus Node]

Thank you DFJunkie for th page numbers, that helps me a lot 

Also thank you everyone else for your thoughts and input so far, it helps to see this from the multiple viewpoints that you're bringing.  I'm thinking I may still adopt some sort of side mechanic for my Negative NPCs, but at a much lower involvement level than I was thinking before.  It would be something used mostly for Named NPCs and not lower involvement characters.  It's just the sort of thing I like to have... a sort of symmetry in the system.

*shrug*

In the meantime... for "Negative NPCs", is there a "Bottom Limit" any other GMs consider when making folks for their game?  It looks like -30 is the limit on what they have statted without going into the Canon Characters section.

[luminos]

theoretically, my bottom limit is twice the total refresh the group of PC's have spent on powers and stunts.  However, it can get hard to stat up foes that have more than -30 refresh spent, and around -40 or so you might have to start making custom powers for it to work, and at that point, the power may not scale in a way that the refresh actually represents the challenge rating of the opponent.

[Crion]

In the meantime... for "Negative NPCs", is there a "Bottom Limit" any other GMs consider when making folks for their game?  It looks like -30 is the limit on what they have statted without going into the Canon Characters section.

I don't think there is a "set" limit, but there was a comment on YS335 that explains when an NPC gets too out of hand with powers (you know, after you treated the powers section like a shopping list), you may want to consider how much more you want to do with one NPC.

Personally, I'd be tailoring the major faced foes based upon the party. Literally. Be fair and not cover EVERY weakness, but be enough of a jerk to make sure that their major, mainly used powers have to be used in new and creative ways.

If I ever have anything with the Refresh Costs in the range of the Nickleheads, it'll either be a majorly recurring villain that does little face-to-face work with/against the PCs, or one that I know my PCs can handle if they work together and are smart about it.

Then again, if I'm building something THAT big. . .I might as well go all out and break every rule in the book ^^;

Again, just tossing ideas out there.

[Deadmanwalking]

I think YS p. 329 makes it clear that NPcs with Negative Refresh (Mavra for example) can still gain and lose Fate Points.

Still, the definitive word is YS p. 351:

"...as truly monstrous opponents will often start the game with no fate points due to negative refresh and require “on-camera” compels before receiving them."

So that's clearly how you do it.

[DFJunkie]

Yes, but I think that Janus is now thinking about a house rule now.

Personally I'd consider charging ubernegative NPCs extra fate points to buy out of compels. 

One thing I want to make clear, when I talk about an NPC with negative refresh, I mean an NPC that has spent more points on powers and stunts than it can afford with its base refresh.  It isn't so much a balancing mechanism (total points spent on powers/stunts determines actual power) as it is a measure of how much control the NPC has over its nature.

Think of a character who picks up a Denarius while at a +1 total refresh.  At first he resists the Fallen and maintains his positive refresh.  Eventually our tragic anti-hero gives in and buys Hellfire at the angel's urging, bringing him to -1.  Sure, he's an NPC, but he isn't going to go around slaughtering his friends and family for no good reason.  He might even help out his former comrades from time to time.  As time goes buy the Fallen helps him master his magic, and he buys four more points of refinements, for a total of -5.  At this point he's pretty far gone, but still recognizably the same person he was.  Twisted and evil, yes, but still the same person.  Then he goes hog wild and takes all the shapeshifting powers, bringing him to a total of -15.  Ouch.  At that point I'd say the person he was is gone, entirely under the thrall of his Fallen.

Come to think of it, I'd say that the Denarians who keep their human names probably don't have substantially negative refresh totals.

[Janus Node]

Great thoughts there everyone, and thank you.

Yes... I'm thinking both in terms of house rules and as a progression into "uncontrolled power" for roleplay.  I like DFJunkie's progression thoughts, and agree with the progression of the mortal away from their original personality and towards the nature and instincts of one of The Fallen.  I'm still not sure if there's anything I'll actually do different for my game from what's in the book, but whenever I start seeing number ranges my brain starts juggling through permutations and formulas to find ways of defining and explaining things.  If I playtest anything with the group that seems to work, I'll bring it forward here to see if there are any new thoughts on the matter.