Finite Catches

[devonapple]

When Lion-o pulls out the Sword of Omens, we know that Mumra should start running away. When the PCs arrive on scene, it is ass kicking time. Skeletor and his flunkies run away, they don't get to "win", they don't get to "challenge" He-man and the Masters of the Universe.

Children's cartoons... "Dresden Files"... children's cartoons... "Dresden Files"... I think there may be a comparison error here.

I was wondering about catches that can be destroyed for example if a player had a +0 catch of direct family and all of his direct family were ruthlessly murdered would he have to change his catch to something else? 

How would one take advantage of this catch normally, assuming the family was still alive and present? Using the blood and bones of same, as suggested earlier? Or is it that only his family can physically hurt him?

[ways and means]

Children's cartoons... "Dresden Files"... children's cartoons... "Dresden Files"... I think there may be a comparison error here.

How would one take advantage of this catch normally, assuming the family was still alive and present? Using the blood and bones of same, as suggested earlier? Or is it that only his family can physically hurt him?

When I originally thought of the catch it was just that only his family could bypass the catch because of 'bloodline magic' and shared magical heritage.

[devonapple]

When I originally thought of the catch it was just that only his family could bypass the catch because of 'bloodline magic' and shared magical heritage.

I think in this case, then, the eradication of his entire family line would have far-reaching personal consequences, and his Catch would be replaced by some new susceptibility, depending on which metaphysical direction the table wanted to go. This could be:

- susceptibility to the person who went to the trouble of murdering that entire family (and a new Trouble to reflect the enemy pursuing him)
- switching the Refresh around and making it immunity ONLY to the person who went to the trouble of murdering that entire family (a la Harry Potter and his weird immunity to Voldemort's curses) for some sort of vengeance story arc - that should free up some points for some new powers
- susceptibility to Spirit magic, or spirits, or anything which can be justified as the force of his ancestral line trying to pull him beyond the walls of death to join them
- susceptibility to the element which this unspoken villain used to destroy the family line

This sort of story event - the murdering of one's entire family - can be the launching pad for a great number of story options.

But the general response with eliminating a finite Catch is simply to find a new Catch - maybe one worth more points.

[Sanctaphrax]

Do you really think that the toughness powers are too strong for their cost when they don't have a catch?

I've never even heard of Toughness breaking a game.

PS: If I was to worry about the power of toughness, I would worry about Supernatural Toughness with a +3 catch.

[devonapple]

Do you really think that the toughness powers are too strong for their cost when they don't have a catch?

Doesn't matter - I consider this house rule territory.

True, creatures like Zombies have no listed "Catch," but the game rules indicate that, with sufficient expenditure of effort, the players can find one, and in so finding, overcome the Toughness. I don't want to help set any sort of no-Catch precedent.

[Sanctaphrax]

I was talking to Tedronai. He said that he thought the listed costs might not be appropriate for catchless toughness.

So don't worry, I'm not asking you to set any kind of precedent.

But: A catch that never comes up is like no catch.

Do you believe that a character who takes a toughness power with +0 catch and never encounters his catch is getting more than his refresh's worth?

PS: I actually approve of the unknown catch on canon zombies because it let different groups approach the issue differently.

[devonapple]

I was talking to Tedronai. He said that he thought the listed costs might not be appropriate for catchless toughness.

Sorry, man! My apologies.

[Sanctaphrax]

No need to apologize: it was unclear. I forgot the little @Tedronai: bit.

[Tedronai]

Do you really think that the toughness powers are too strong for their cost when they don't have a catch?

I think they have the potential to be, which is why, as I said, I would experiment with a 'fix'.

[toturi]

Children's cartoons... "Dresden Files"... children's cartoons... "Dresden Files"... I think there may be a comparison error here.

As I said before, different people, different games. Children's cartoons... "Dresden Files"... maybe there is a comparison error. Children's cartoons... "Dresden Files Roleplaying Game"... maybe not.

[Aminar]

Personally I just don't buy that every Toughness power needs a catch.  But I'd love to see catches extended to other things.
It's be great if there was just a drawback system applicable to any power.
Drawback to someones Super Human Speed-(+1)  When used it outputs boatloads of magical power that are detectable by anybody.)
Drawbacks to someones Superhuman Strength.(+2)  They only work after having eaten a can of spinach.

[DFJunkie]

It's be great if there was just a drawback system applicable to any power.
Drawback to someones Super Human Speed-(+1)  When used it outputs boatloads of magical power that are detectable by anybody.)
Drawbacks to someones Superhuman Strength.(+2)  They only work after having eaten a can of spinach.

That's what compels are for.  If the PC wants his powers to have those kinds of drawbacks his high concept should reflect it, then when his detectable speed or spinach powered strength cause him problems he gets a fate point. 

I like the fact that there are no blanket reimbursements ala GURPS/HERO/Every Point Based Game Ever primarily because there are no arguments about what constitutes an actual limitation.  For instance, if your second character made sure to carry half a dozen cans of spinach, including one in his sphincter for emergencies, to the point where you never managed to deprive him of his Superhuman Strength then he never should have received a discount.  Alternatively, if the character from the first example pisses off an enemy Sorcerer who never, ever stops dogging his steps than the one point discount was too small.  Using compels ensures that the player gets a cookie every time the limitation complicates his life, no more and no less.

[jadecourtflunky]

I like this thread, and would like to pose a question here:
I like catches, and have my characters use them, but I think some catches should have an additional component that adds to the damage when done with that item. For instance, faeries have problems with cold iron. But it doesn't just circumvent their defenses, it injures them. If you threw a small piece of iron at a normal person, it does nothing. If you throw a small piece of iron at a fae, they freak out and get injured.
What do you think about this?

[crusher_bob]

That sort of stuff is a compel/invocation of an aspect (usually the high concept).

[Richard_Chilton]

I like the idea of finite catches...

Looking to another series of books that involved a "Harry" as hero, Voldemort took a +0 catch of "Harry Potter" for his immortality.  I could see that in a Dresden game - where only someone from the right family or born at a special time can defeat the evil guy.

That turns the game into a race - can the evil guy take out the good guy first or will the good guy survive to act as the catch...

Giving this a bit more thought, this might be the basic plot line of the Dresden files books.  The big bad is slowly gaining in power and Harry has the power to fight Outsiders...  Yeah, that might be the books.

Richard