Author Topic: House Rules for a New Game  (Read 2153 times)

Offline Jayden

  • Lurker
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
House Rules for a New Game
« on: March 19, 2012, 07:17:09 AM »
Hey Guys, been lurking for a while and thought I'd seek the forums opinion on some house rules I was thinking of using in my new campaign.  Am I falling into any obvious traps?  Things like that.  I've played in a few Dresden games but this'll be my first time running.

1) Starting all of the stress levels at 4 (while keeping the same bonuses for skill i.e. +2 stress boxes and a consequence at max). 

This is to make the stress increasing skills less important while still keeping them valuable.  I always have a problem with things that look like required skills.

2) Allowing fate chips to be spend (invoking an appropriate aspect) to take an immediate extra action.

This is to allow things like Harry tossing up a defensive spell before an attack by invoking Wizard and that magic is at the speed of thought.  Would also allow for things like a quick draw artist and the like.

3) Allow resources to be used to make declarations on the quality of the person's gear. 

I'm not even sure if this is a house rule but it gives resources something more to do than just throw around cash.

4) Changing the balance/economy of Guessing/Declaring/Assessing.  Guessing would become free (like tagging) and take no action but if you guess wrong the opponent may make an appropriate declaration against you. (e.g. Harry guesses the gang leader is a 'Reasonable Man' but instead ends up with his 'Guard Down' by trying to negotiate).  Declaring stays the same, free action that requires a skill roll.  Assessing takes an action (which may be supplemental) but you may ask for all aspects related to on particular situation. (i.e. I want all of his emotional aspects or all related to fighting).

This is to make the value of each of the different types of actions distinct and make it a more relevant tactical choice.

I was also considering using the idea of Persistent (P) aspects from strands of fate (basically aspect so important that they don't require a Fate Chip to invoke, and would apply to any Consequence over Minor and some significant scene aspects like Burning Building (P) or Pitch Black (P)) but I'm worried that would add too much record keeping for my players.

So anyone have any advice or suggestions?

Offline Tallyrand

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 221
    • View Profile
Re: House Rules for a New Game
« Reply #1 on: March 19, 2012, 07:24:14 AM »
Looks ok, I think that Resources is a pretty powerful skill as is so using it to make declarations might be abused, but that depends on your players.  Also it depends on how experienced your players are, personally I don't like using house rules with a new group.

Offline sinker

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 2115
    • View Profile
Re: House Rules for a New Game
« Reply #2 on: March 19, 2012, 04:01:51 PM »
1) Starting all of the stress levels at 4 (while keeping the same bonuses for skill i.e. +2 stress boxes and a consequence at max). 

This is going to lengthen conflicts a little, but as long as it's applied to everyone (PC and NPC alike) it should be fine.

2) Allowing fate chips to be spend (invoking an appropriate aspect) to take an immediate extra action.

This worries me a bit as it would be relatively easy for someone to abuse this and simply kill off all opposition without them gaining a turn. Perhaps limit it to a single action per exchange.

Additionally I can see this being a bit more powerful for spellcasters than it is for everyone else as it allows them to extend spells without sacrificing an action (and extended blocks can be very powerful).

3) Allow resources to be used to make declarations on the quality of the person's gear. 

Yeah I'm pretty sure this is not a house rule.

4) Changing the balance/economy of Guessing/Declaring/Assessing.  Guessing would become free (like tagging) and take no action but if you guess wrong the opponent may make an appropriate declaration against you. (e.g. Harry guesses the gang leader is a 'Reasonable Man' but instead ends up with his 'Guard Down' by trying to negotiate).  Declaring stays the same, free action that requires a skill roll.  Assessing takes an action (which may be supplemental) but you may ask for all aspects related to on particular situation. (i.e. I want all of his emotional aspects or all related to fighting).

This is probably the one with the most far reaching consequences, and I have no idea what those may be. I worry about making guessing free, because it makes it a viable option with little downside (unless you are proposing that if they are wrong at all then they receive an aspect).

I was also considering using the idea of Persistent (P) aspects from strands of fate (basically aspect so important that they don't require a Fate Chip to invoke, and would apply to any Consequence over Minor and some significant scene aspects like Burning Building (P) or Pitch Black (P)) but I'm worried that would add too much record keeping for my players.

This one you can actually do as the GM if you don't want to worry about the record keeping. Just universally compel aspects that you feel should be persistent.

Offline devonapple

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 2165
  • Parkour to YOU!
    • View Profile
    • LiveJournal Account
Re: House Rules for a New Game
« Reply #3 on: March 19, 2012, 04:30:41 PM »
The problem I note with adding Persistent Aspects is doing so seems to be a zero-sum game: nobody in a conflict has narrative priority over that Aspect for having Declared/Assessed/Maneuvered it into being. When everyone in a conflict has +2, nobody in a conflict has +2, I believe?
"Like a voice, like a crack, like a whispering shriek
That echoes on like it’s carpet-bombing feverish white jungles of thought
That I’m positive are not even mine"

Blackout, The Darkest of the Hillside Thickets

Offline Jayden

  • Lurker
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Re: House Rules for a New Game
« Reply #4 on: March 19, 2012, 09:08:13 PM »
This is going to lengthen conflicts a little, but as long as it's applied to everyone (PC and NPC alike) it should be fine.

Actually I was thinking about only applying it to PCs and major oppositions, I was hoping that at least if mooks fall easily then combat wouldn't seem so long.  I'll let you know if I notice a major change.

Quote
This worries me a bit as it would be relatively easy for someone to abuse this and simply kill off all opposition without them gaining a turn. Perhaps limit it to a single action per exchange.

Additionally I can see this being a bit more powerful for spellcasters than it is for everyone else as it allows them to extend spells without sacrificing an action (and extended blocks can be very powerful).

Good call, I will definitely keep that as a limitation.  I'm not sure that Wizards will be using that a lot if only because they tend not to have a lot of fate chips to space, but I guess that depends on how much I end up compelling.  Also I could simply say that 'maintaining' a spell really isn't appropriate use for the action.  Really this is supposed to represent quick reactions not sustained effort.

Quote
This is probably the one with the most far reaching consequences, and I have no idea what those may be. I worry about making guessing free, because it makes it a viable option with little downside (unless you are proposing that if they are wrong at all then they receive an aspect).

That was my intention for guessing, making it basically like blind tagging but with the risk of putting yourself at a disadvantage.

Offline Mr. Death

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 7965
  • Not all those who wander are lost
    • View Profile
    • The C-Team Podcast
Re: House Rules for a New Game
« Reply #5 on: March 19, 2012, 09:12:30 PM »
Actually I was thinking about only applying it to PCs and major oppositions, I was hoping that at least if mooks fall easily then combat wouldn't seem so long.  I'll let you know if I notice a major change.
Mooks ought to fall easily anyway. I think mooks are usually the minimum of stress boxes, no armor, and Fair (maybe Good) ratings in the relevant skills, and they shouldn't get consequences. A 3 shift hit (easy for any PC meant to be combat capable, especially if weapons are involved) is enough to Take Out a mook.
Compels solve everything!

http://blur.by/1KgqJg6 My first book: "Brothers of the Curled Isles"

Quote from: Cozarkian
Not every word JB rights is a conspiracy. Sometimes, he's just telling a story.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_T_mld7Acnm-0FVUiaKDPA The C-Team Podcast

Offline sinker

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 2115
    • View Profile
Re: House Rules for a New Game
« Reply #6 on: March 19, 2012, 09:56:35 PM »
Yeah, I was about to say pretty much the same thing. Having no consequences mooks usually go down in a single hit. If this change was applied to them as well then you might get fights where mooks will last two or three (unless someone gets lucky).

Likely that change to guessing aspects will result in less players guessing aspects. I'm not sure if I like that or not. YMMV

Offline Vargo Teras

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 113
    • View Profile
Re: House Rules for a New Game
« Reply #7 on: March 19, 2012, 10:52:22 PM »
Extra actions in a game which normally doesn't have them at all risks a serious shift.  If you're going to use them, I'd limit them only to purely defensive or navel-gazing effects.  If your major concern is things like defensive magic, consider this houserule: a wizard can use evocation to defend himself against an attack without spending an action to create a block.  If he does so, that defense lasts only for a single attack, rather than an entire exchange, and cannot be extended.  Costly, but effective as an emergency measure.

Offline sinker

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 2115
    • View Profile
Re: House Rules for a New Game
« Reply #8 on: March 19, 2012, 11:04:55 PM »
Extra actions in a game which normally doesn't have them at all risks a serious shift.

I would say extra actions in a game where nobody else has them risks real issues, but as fate points are a resource available to all, I see few issues.

Offline UmbraLux

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1685
    • View Profile
Re: House Rules for a New Game
« Reply #9 on: March 19, 2012, 11:52:49 PM »
Welcome to the forums!
1) Starting all of the stress levels at 4 (while keeping the same bonuses for skill i.e. +2 stress boxes and a consequence at max). 
I suggest reading some of the older commentary on Spirit of the Century's (SotC) stress track.  Dresden's stress tracks were shortened at least partially because of some of the issues run into while playing SotC.  From memory, the biggest issue was the feel of combat - too long and too repetitive.  However, Google's memory is almost certainly better than mine.  ;)

Quote
2) Allowing fate chips to be spend (invoking an appropriate aspect) to take an immediate extra action.
I'm wary of extra actions.  Also, the issues you mention can be solved in different ways.  Allow casting reflexive rotes, stunts for drawing and attacking (or just a Declaration), etc.  Extra actions seems a very brute force solution.

Quote
3) Allow resources to be used to make declarations on the quality of the person's gear. 
This isn't a house rule - you can make declarations on just about any fact, knowledge, or bit of scenery.  Just takes GM and table buy-in.

Quote
4) Changing the balance/economy of Guessing/Declaring/Assessing.  Guessing would become free (like tagging) and take no action but if you guess wrong the opponent may make an appropriate declaration against you. (e.g. Harry guesses the gang leader is a 'Reasonable Man' but instead ends up with his 'Guard Down' by trying to negotiate).  Declaring stays the same, free action that requires a skill roll.  Assessing takes an action (which may be supplemental) but you may ask for all aspects related to on particular situation. (i.e. I want all of his emotional aspects or all related to fighting).
What do you mean by "Guessing"?  Guessing at an aspect doesn't cost anything by the book...trying to use it does.  Whether the GM confirms or denies prior to use is up to him.  I tend to default towards openness unless I have a reason to keep something secret.  At least one of the designers has stated he's open about almost all aspects.

Quote
I was also considering using the idea of Persistent (P) aspects from strands of fate (basically aspect so important that they don't require a Fate Chip to invoke, and would apply to any Consequence over Minor and some significant scene aspects like Burning Building (P) or Pitch Black (P)) but I'm worried that would add too much record keeping for my players.
Check out Fred's blog on hazards - it may clear up some of the "It's On Fire!" aspect issues.  As for persistent 'aspects', I'm tempted to specify mechanical advantages to clarify tactical choices.  Not entirely happy with the book's default of "it's up to the GM to set appropriate modifiers".  From experience, they can get lost in the mix of other aspects.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2012, 11:54:33 PM by UmbraLux »
--
“As our circle of knowledge expands, so does the circumference of darkness surrounding it.”  - Albert Einstein

"Rudeness is a weak imitation of strength."  - Eric Hoffer