Suggest you clarify at first mention of Quirks either that negative consequences thereof are treated as Compels for the player owning the stunt, or that they're treated as Compels against Debt (in which case they could still be bought out of, but wouldn't actually return a FP if accepted)
Quirks are not Compels. If they were, they'd not give bonuses.
They're similar to the quasi-narrative restrictions on stunts.
This should be obvious, but I wrote them badly.
That being said, I actually like the debt Compel idea. What do the rest of you think of it?
Obviously there'd need to be guidelines for how often said Compels would arrive, but I think it could work.
...("of course the related skill for my Wizard's Mercenary Hireling is his Discipline, he managed to impress him with his stolid and iron willed nature....").
I'm actually fine with that. If you aren't, the system has significant wiggle room there so you can have it your way when you play.
For the minions stunt, I'd suggest giving them a stress track of 2 each, that seems to be the standard from SotC and Kerberos, and although minions are meant to be squishy, I think that a stress track of 1 could make them too easy to take out. Additionally it might be worth allowing them a grouped 'Taken Out' consequence, but this would probably require some playtesting to ensure that it doesn't result in too much book-keeping.
Keeping track of minion stress seems like an aggravating chore. I'd rather avoid it if at all possible.
Also on minions, are we allowing people to drop the number of minions they can have in order to give them stunts/powers...
No, not with these rules. I don't really see the need for the extra complexity. Especially since most people who trade minions in for Powers will have spent Refresh to buy those minions.
Something quite problematic just occurred to me:
How does one perform the cliche strangle-wire stealthy take-down (ie. grapple inflicting stress) on a minion if they have even the least bit of endurance under these rules?
Good question.
The same issue arises when you try to grapple anyone with armour, but it might be worse here.
Maybe it shouldn't be possible to reduce grapple stress to 0 with armour.
I'm anti multi refresh stunts. I think a "simple" rules set regarding how to make a minion/ally/pet better by investing individual refresh points for upgrades is a better route.
This is simpler than using upgrade stunts. That robot stunt would be about half a page long if I made it out of upgrade stunts.
It occurs to me that a modified version of the IoP rules could work pretty well for this kind of thing. Just would have to determine how skills would be assigned and at what cost (if any.) Obviously some things would be out such as unbreakable and the player would not have quite as much control so a slightly higher rebate might be in order (+3 or +4 perhaps.) Skills could be bought at 10/15 points per -1 refresh.
So if you wanted a pet wolf:
[-1] Echoes of the Beast
[-1] Claws
[-2] Inhuman Speed
[-2] Inhuman Strength
[-2] 20 Skill Points <= Depending on how many skill points a refresh ends up being worth.
[+4] One time rebate, large and hard to conceal, limited control (animal), can be killed
Total cost [-4] refresh.
There are problems with this.
First, it's not very similar to an actual IoP. Using the same name is just confusing.
Second, you haven't specified the limits on how those skill points can be spent.
Third, it's not clear exactly how this works. Is the wolf an extension of the character? Or is it its own being? Does a companion get its own actions in fights?
Fourth, it's not very balanced. A 50-skill-point character for 1 Refresh is crazy good.
I don't have a problem with multi-refresh stunts, but I agree that this write-up is probably too complicated as-is. I think, for the most part, it just needs to be worded clearer.
I agree, the wording here is not great.
I would seriously advise against this option.
I don't think a minion or companion's skill cap should ever equal or exceed that of the main PCs. Such a caveat prevents someone's pet from outshining another player. Keep in mind, this is a minion or cohort we're building here. If they were all that good or interesting they should be a player character.
If you want to allow them to reduce their companions' skill cap for some benefit that's fine, but they should have a hard upper-bound that doesn't risk outshining other players.
Some people might want to play a character who benefits from the assistance of a much more powerful character.
If that character concept can be enabled in a mechanically balanced and elegant way, it should be.
Sure, it's niche. Most people wouldn't want to play a character who's weaker than their assistant. But if someone does want that, they should be able to.
PS: I don't understand the comment about how really powerful and interesting characters should be player characters. The Senior Council is powerful and interesting, but they wouldn't make good PCs in most games.
