Supernatural Stunts

[ralexs1991]

Ok it's pretty straight forward should stunts effect powers or not?

[Papa Gruff]

I voted ney.

I'd say generally stunts shouldn't aid supernatural powers, especially those of the strength and toughness kind. That said it seems perfectly fine to add extra trappings to existing powers like you would on custom powers.

All in all stunts that relate to powers become problematic if they circumvent existing mechanics like catches and I think that is the primary reason why the book says that stunts and powers should remain separate. If a supernatural stunt gets added as a trapping to an existing power this won't be the case and everything should be shiny.

[Tsunami]

Personally I don't see the big difference.

As soon as you have at least one power, the distinction between Mortal and Supernatural Stunts becomes somewhat fuzzy anyways. Calling it a -1 power/power option or a Stunt is then only a matter of denomination.
The Stunt creation rules present an existing system to create new stuff, and are nice guidelines when it comes to balance issues.
And since using the Stunt creation rules imposes limits that powers not usually have i see no real problem there.

Any and all Stunts, be they supernatural or Mortal, are of course subject to scrutiny by the Gaming Group and the GM.
But to get hung up on the question of what to call it is somewhat fussy imho.

All in all stunts that relate to powers become problematic if they circumvent existing mechanics like catches [...]

I do agree on that point. But that's just a matter of common sense in my book.

That said, if calling those Stunts that affect powers "Power Options" or "Power Addons" or "Supernatural Stunts" instead of plain "Stunts" solves the problem... hey, who am i to fuss about what to call them :-P

[Becq]

Stunts exist to provide guaranteed situational benefits. These benefits might be the result of special training, unique (but non-supernatural) abilities, or something that’s just innately cool about your character.

The stunts in this chapter are called mortal stunts because they’re available to everyone—supernatural and mundane characters alike—and have both feet firmly planted in the realm of what’s possible for a normal (mortal) human to do.

Supernatural powers also come at a greater price beyond the simple math of your character’s refresh rate. No supernatural ability may exist in a vacuum—it must come about due to specific reasons rooted in your character’s concept. At the very least, this usually means that the supernatural abilities must clearly derive from your character’s high concept

Supernatural powers have effects that can be further reaching, adding trappings to skills that cover strange supernatural territory. Moreover, the trappings that supernatural powers add can cover actions and abilities that would otherwise be flatly impossible.

Given how ... vaguely defined some of the game concepts are in this game, it strikes me as odd that on this point, they hammer on the importance of the dividing line between mortal stunts and supernatural powers.  Maybe they felt the difference was pretty important?

In any case, it seems clear.  While the mechanics of stunts and powers are similar, the following are true:
1) If the 'capability' is supernatural in cause or effect, then it's a power.
2) Powers require a High-Concept that justifies their purchase.
3) Acquiring a power disqualifies you from Pure Human status.

I think that in this lies the subtle but important reason to differentiate between the two, and that is that Pure Mortals may have not abilities that are based in the supernatural.  So if you create 'supernatural stunts', then you need to distinguish those from the 'non-supernatural stunts' that Pure Mortals are allowed to have and remain Pure Mortal.

I suspect that the designers cleverly accomplished this seperation by referring to 'supernatural stunts' as Powers.  Makes it easy to determine what Pure Mortals can have.

[Sanctaphrax]

I voted yes, which probaby won't surprise anyone. But I think that the question could have been a bit better phrased. There are a number of different ways that stunts can affect or resemble powers, and different people have different opinions on each of them. Here's where I draw the line:

A stunt is anything that can result from practise, talent, circumatance, or other mundane things. This can include improved use of powers, but not the powers themselves. For example, take the following stunt:

Master of the Sight: You are remarkably good at seeing through your third eye. Increase your Discipline and Lore skills by 1 when using them to interpret or control the Sight.

This stunt reflects the character's skill at interpretation and mental toughness, which are entirely mundane skills that are being applied to a power. A pure mortal could take this stunt, although they don't have any reason to.

[Amelia Crane]

It really shouldn't matter.  One of my players asked me if I would allow something that would give more rotes.  Since one of the uses of a stunt is to give a +2 to one use of a skill, I figured a -1 refresh thing that gave 2 bonus rotes would be balanced.  Is it a Lore stunt?  Or is it a version of the Refinement power?  Frankly, it doesn't make a difference.

If you have a power for a potential "stunt" to affect, then you already don't get the mortal +2 refresh.  And that's really the only reason to differentiate stunts and powers.

[Papa Gruff]

Yeah ok... I get that sight thing ... sort of. I could argue against it and say, that, according to Harry (witch is always problematic because we get everything through his point of view) you can't really prep yourself for the impressions that the sight confronts you with. I'm aware of this being nitpicking.

An other thing: If it is OK to boost such a minor thing like the sight, then where is the line to be drawn? Lets say Inhuman Strength for example: You are really really strong. You are it through the power. Now. You do some mortal training and become even stronger? It doesn't make any sense, nor is it comparable really.

In the end it comes down to what makes this system so insanely great and at times so furiously frustrating. If the game table agrees on a stunt making sense then it gets into their game. If anyone has a problem with it, then there should be a debate where everyone should keep an open mind and listen to what the others have to say. If the debate cannot be resolved then the GM can and should make a ruling, witch should be excepted by everyone.

[Drashna]

What's the point of this entire argument?  Seriously!

If you look at a lot of "add on abilities" to the powers, they are equivalent power of stunts.  For example,  Incite Emotion.  "At range" is fairly simple, and may not be easily transferable. But "Lasting Inspiration" adds two stress to using the power. Is that not what a stunt does to various physical, social or mental attacks? 

If you *ignore* the fact that it says stunt, and relabel it as a power, or as a power up for the specific relevant power. Why does it matter?  I see this entire thread as an exercise in schematics. Guys, it's just a name. If you don't like it, rename "what" it is. Does it actually matter if it's a stunt or a power, other than if it applies to a "pure mortal"?  And if it does matter, why not discuss that with your group?  Arguing *here* of all places feels juvenile to me and like trying to "one up" other members of the forum, which is totally not cool.  Again, if you feel it's not a stunt, call it a power. Period.

Best example I've seen so far, is "Investigative Psychometry" "stunt", but I personally just call it a power up for the Psychometry power, namely because you *have* to have Psychometry first.  So what *is* the point about getting all offensive about it *what* it is called?

[devonapple]

In "Mutants & Masterminds," they have "Feats" (which are loosely comparable to Stunts in this game) and "Power Feats" (which are feats that modify/improve the superpowers). Perhaps we could agree on calling them "Stunts" and "Power Stunts"?

[Sanctaphrax]

@Drashna: I'm aware that this is mostly pointless. But it doesn't cost me anything, lets me hone my debating skills, and may end up causing me to actually do something. For example, I'm considering reformatting the Homebrew Stunts Master List to show the difference between "supernatural" and "mundane" stunts. Also: there are a couple of differences between stunts and powers. They are rather obscure and don't come up often, but the rules lawyer in me won't ignore them. In conclusion, I feel that this discussion is well worth having as long as it remains friendly. After all, why not discuss it?

@Papa Gruff: Characters with Inhuman Strength can boost their strength further with mortal training. In game terms, they can increase their Might skill or take a stunt like Mighty Thews. But they can't upgrade to Supernatural Strength without magical monkey business or a special understanding with the GM.

[Becq]

Master of the Sight: You are remarkably good at seeing through your third eye. Increase your Discipline and Lore skills by 1 when using them to interpret or control the Sight.

This stunt reflects the character's skill at interpretation and mental toughness, which are entirely mundane skills that are being applied to a power. A pure mortal could take this stunt, although they don't have any reason to.

No, actually a mortal could take this 'stunt' to provide himself with supernatural resistance to Soulgaze (since Soulgaze is an application of The Sight and involves a mutual Conviction vs Discipline conflict when contesting control of the Soulgaze).

[Sanctaphrax]

Hadn't thought of that. It wouldn't be very efficient, but it would be possible. My hat's off to you, although I'm not sure if it is relevant to the main discussion.

[Becq]

Well, it is, because per your definition, I could easily create, say, a stunt that allows Endurance to be used to resist magical spells, and another that grants a +2 to Endurance when resisting magical spells, and a third that allows a Fate point to be spent to resist magical spells, granting ... oh, probably a +4 to the attempt since it's a very narrowly defined use of the bonus.  Poof, instant near-immunity to magic on a Pure Mortal, since it's only Stunts.  Heck, the character would effectively get the first two of them for free!  I could do the same thing with Athletics and make the bonuses for dodging magical attacks (and wouldn't need the first feat), but that would be a bit less useful because it wouldn't cover non-dodgeable spells.

In any case, the rules seem pretty adamant: Stunts cannot apply to supernatural stuff.

[ralexs1991]

I'm with Sanctaphrax on this one I think that anything achieved through practice and hard work qualifies as a stunt.

@Becq as for your example of the magic resistence there's one thing you forgot to equate into your doomsday theory and that's that no GM would ever let a player do that or at least I know I wouldn't

[Sanctaphrax]

@Becq: Your example uses stunts that stack in a possibly illegal way. But even ignoring that, I don't think that it's a very good argument. You could use the same trick for anything from guns to thrown pies without any supernatural power at all. What's more, that trick isn't really supernatural even when it applies to magic. It's mundane capability being used to protect against the supernatural. It's no different from using No Pain No Gain to get an extra physical consequence to absorb the damage of an evocation. And it isn't even that powerful. Physical Immunity to magic is far superior (as it should be, being a power). So you use three stunts and a fate point for every use to do what a [-3] power does, except not as well. Really, I don't see the problem.

Sorry if that was harsh. I just don't think that that is a very good example.