DFRPG In Other Time P... *AHEM!* Yadda-Yadda, Something About Claws and Stuff.

[Mr. Death]

First, I'm not invoking Stormwind here. I'm using an example to demonstrate the power of mechanics to control behaviour. Wizards with Mediocre casting stats are mechanically discouraged, and as a result hardly anyone plays them. A similar effect will occur if you discourage something else mechanically. That is the entire substance of that argument.

Personally, I think that's part of the intent of the power. They, the writers, may not have wanted people to have the Claws power just for the Weapon:2 effect. Claws, from my reading of it, is supposed to be a power for monsters and animals, to reflect that whatever it is sitting the end of their arms, it's different and more dangerous than normal hands, and stunts like Killer Blow and Lethal Weapon were meant for the "I've got normal hands, but I hit harder with them" type.

And Mr. Death, you seem to be suggesting that we bend/break the game deliberately, in order to control player behaviour. And you know what? That's okay. That's a standard part of game design.

But I see no sensible reason to bend/break the game against people with weird natural weapons. That sort of thing should be reserved for when it's really necessary and when it can be done elegantly.

I'm not sure what you mean by bending and breaking the game. Do you mean I'm suggesting that is what you're doing, or that I'm suggesting it's something we should do?

PS: Does anyone actually care this much about Claws? This has been about deeper principles, I thought.

Well, no. Mostly I thought it served as the most immediate example about the larger argument.

My baseline is, I'd rather questions of "How do I do this?" be answered by adjusting the concept to fit the rules and powers rather than changing the rules and powers to fit the concept.

And apologies for being part of the derail.

Say for instance: When would you say the "technology and magic don't mix" thing started?
and what changes do you think would be necessary to the system to set the campaign in 1875 and what would you change (if any) to set the campaign in 1960s?

I've heard it suggested that hexing happens largely because the wizards don't understand how, say, a computer works, and their magic unconsciously reflects that by making it not work.

So I'd say the technology hexing probably started around the time that technology stopped working in "obvious" ways.

[ways and means]

I've heard it suggested that hexing happens largely because the wizards don't understand how, say, a computer works, and their magic unconsciously reflects that by making it not work.

So I'd say the technology hexing probably started around the time that technology stopped working in "obvious" ways.

So a wizard with high scholarship should get a bonus to hexing.

[eri]

So I'd say the technology hexing probably started around the time that technology stopped working in "obvious" ways.

So a wizard with high scholarship should get a bonus to hexing.

Or a bonus to avoid it?

I think it says that Wizards usually only don't hex things with tech they've grown up with somewhere in the book, but I don't have it on me right now, so I can't check.

Anyway, do you think a change of skills would be necessary for a "Victorian" game. Say swapping Drive for Travel (Ride/Coach-driving with stunts to add sailing) or something?

[Mr. Death]

Yeah, a bonus to avoid it, if anything. Not a big one, maybe one shift.

And I think I suggested earlier in this thread that you'd probably be safe with just dropping Driving entirely. It barely seems much of a useful skill in the regular game as is.

[eri]

You did, or someone did anyway. I can't be bothered to go back and check. I think, however, that I like it enough to keep it, (I've even used it,) provided that it also includes stuff like piloting a plane or boat and navigation and such. Anyway I think ride and such has more interesting opportunities than drive. I often grow bored during car-chases, but horses actually have personalities to play with.

So no one thinks anything should be changed for a 1960s game?
How about WW2? or the thirties? Prohibition game anyone?

[Mr. Death]

You did, or someone did anyway. I can't be bothered to go back and check. I think, however, that I like it enough to keep it, (I've even used it,) provided that it also includes stuff like piloting a plane or boat and navigation and such. Anyway I think ride and such has more interesting opportunities than drive. I often grow bored during car-chases, but horses actually have personalities to play with.

Wouldn't horses and riding animals fall under Survival, though?

So no one thinks anything should be changed for a 1960s game?
How about WW2? or the thirties? Prohibition game anyone?

I think those are close enough to the present to translate without problems as far as the Skills listing goes.

[Pbartender]

I think those are close enough to the present to translate without problems as far as the Skills listing goes.

No computers, though...  at least, not of the usual sort.

[Richard_Chilton]

I think the "magic doesn't work with tech" change would have happened when technology started to make huge inroads on people's everyday lives.

When did it start? Say the age that the Titanic was launched - when people thought tech was there to make the world a better place.  Maybe a bit earlier, when Edison and Tesla set people's imaginations on fire.

WWI is another significant point.  Before then the bulk of the population was rural - tech wasn't a huge factor in the lives of those outside the cities.  Then people left the farms and villages and were introduced to the technology of war.

Now that I think about it - the turbulent post war period might have been the tipping point.  When it went from "magic sometimes affects tech and sometimes it causes milk to spoil" to "magic effects tech".

There's a book - Cider with Rosie - that chronicles the life of a boy growing up in a village in England from WWI to the late 20s, maybe early 30s.  In hindsight, the writer notes that he was witnessing the end of a way of life that had endured for about a thousand years.

For example, when he was young a trip to the nearest real town, well, that was a major excursion that was planned by a village committee for months.  A once a year thing where everyone took buses (horse drawn ones) and rode for hours just to get there, spent a few hours gawking at the place, then spent hours in the buses traveling back.  When he was in his later teens you simply rode the motor coach for an hour or so there, spent the entire day enjoying yourself, and then took the motor coach home.   The trip had gone from being something big to just another thing.

Walking culture was dying out then as well.  Until cars came around, people would walk for hours to get where they were going.  There were walking songs, games, etc - all of which disappeared with the coming of the automobile.  You went from walking when you wanted to walk to waiting for the bus that would take you near where you wanted to go.

Yes, the years between the wars brought a massive, wide spread shift in thinking in the west as technology entered people's lives.  At  the same time you had the Empires shipping tech to the farthest colonies - where in some cases it was seen as another form of magic.  It looks like the perfect point for the swing to happen.

So if I was making the call, no real changes in hexing until the 1920s, variable from 1920s until the 1880s, and "milk curdles" stuff before that.

Richard

[MAK]

Well, finally...

As for magic vs tech, I'd say any high tech appropriate for the period should pose problems. Once something has become "mainstream" enough, magic should not affect it any longer. Examples (no way / problematic / OK):

Present day - digital circuits / analog circuits / electricity
WWII - analog circuits / electricity / internal combustion
Victorian - electricity / internal combustion / gunpowder
Napoleonic - steam / gunpowder / ??
Renaissance - gunpowder / ?? / ??

As one goes further back it becomes harder to find susceptible technology and the whole hexing idea should be examined again (as discussed earlier in this thread)

[eri]

Wouldn't horses and riding animals fall under Survival, though?

It would, but that's only one and a half trapping of a fairly wide skill. It won't make that much of a difference to move it to Travel. And more people know it. Even blatant "city boys" who wouldn't know a thing about finding drinkable water and such.

I think the "magic doesn't work with tech" change would have happened when technology started to make huge inroads on people's everyday lives.
[...]
Yes, the years between the wars brought a massive, wide spread shift in thinking in the west as technology entered people's lives.  At  the same time you had the Empires shipping tech to the farthest colonies - where in some cases it was seen as another form of magic.  It looks like the perfect point for the swing to happen.

So if I was making the call, no real changes in hexing until the 1920s, variable from 1920s until the 1880s, and "milk curdles" stuff before that.

Sure, seems sensible. I might have put it slightly earlier in some places, like England, because of things like the railroad and spinning machines and such (the industrial revolution starts in the 1700s!), but mostly that's sensible. What about those Wizards who live through the change? How do they experience it? There must be a lot of them since many live such long lives.

[Sanctaphrax]

Personally, I think that's part of the intent of the power. They, the writers, may not have wanted people to have the Claws power just for the Weapon:2 effect. Claws, from my reading of it, is supposed to be a power for monsters and animals, to reflect that whatever it is sitting the end of their arms, it's different and more dangerous than normal hands, and stunts like Killer Blow and Lethal Weapon were meant for the "I've got normal hands, but I hit harder with them" type.

I don't take the intent argument very seriously, I admit. Partly because Evil Hat is very clear about how worthless their intent is. And partly because it's circular: the power's writing is good because it supports its intent, and its intent is whatever is written there.

I'm not sure what you mean by bending and breaking the game. Do you mean I'm suggesting that is what you're doing, or that I'm suggesting it's something we should do?

You are suggesting that the game be deliberately made less balanced in order to ensure that people use teeth and claws instead of lightning-touches or supernaturally-effective punches.

Which seems kind of pointless, to me. Those concepts are not evil, and even if you find them distasteful your proposed measure is too drastic. Plus it goes against the way the game is written; other powers don't dictate thematics.

[Mr. Death]

I don't take the intent argument very seriously, I admit. Partly because Evil Hat is very clear about how worthless their intent is. And partly because it's circular: the power's writing is good because it supports its intent, and its intent is whatever is written there.

I'm not saying whether it's good or not. I'm just saying it's there for a particular purpose.

Claws, as a power, says, "There is something on your hands/feet/mouth/tentacle/whatever that makes you do more damage when you hit people," rather than just, "You do more damage when you hit people."

You are suggesting that the game be deliberately made less balanced in order to ensure that people use teeth and claws instead of lightning-touches or supernaturally-effective punches.

Which seems kind of pointless, to me. Those concepts are not evil, and even if you find them distasteful your proposed measure is too drastic. Plus it goes against the way the game is written; other powers don't dictate thematics.

Ah, I see. No, that's not quite what I meant. I'm not saying that the rules should be bent or broken to that end; I'm saying that's what the rules are.

My position is that reskins of a power should retain aspects, in some fashion, of the original power--this is a setting where, generally speaking, when supernatural power comes out to play, people can tell by looking at it (unless whoever's behind it is doing something to hide it). So lightning touches would be fine, if they're accompanied by some lightning-ish effect. Or supernaturally-effective punches coming off with an aura of some kind (sorta like the Elmo's Fire-like effect that accompanies Mouse's powers in the books). Either of which is plenty thematic to a supernaturally-powered martial artist.

Sure, seems sensible. I might have put it slightly earlier in some places, like England, because of things like the railroad and spinning machines and such (the industrial revolution starts in the 1700s!), but mostly that's sensible. What about those Wizards who live through the change? How do they experience it? There must be a lot of them since many live such long lives.

I'd put it that a wizard from the sticks, where the railroad and such haven't reached, would be more likely to hex something in Victorian England than a Victorian Englishman would be. If it has something to do with the hexing wizard's understanding of it, then someone who has a vague understanding of it might be less apt to hex than someone who sees it as the Magical Metal Horse.

[eri]

As for magic vs tech, I'd say any high tech appropriate for the period should pose problems. Once something has become "mainstream" enough, magic should not affect it any longer. Examples (no way / problematic / OK):

Present day - digital circuits / analog circuits / electricity
WWII - analog circuits / electricity / internal combustion
Victorian - electricity / internal combustion / gunpowder
Napoleonic - steam / gunpowder / ??
Renaissance - gunpowder / ?? / ??

As one goes further back it becomes harder to find susceptible technology and the whole hexing idea should be examined again (as discussed earlier in this thread)

There's a table on YS258 which addresses how difficult it is to intentionally hex something. Something could be made of that I suppose, but Harry seems to regularly hex anything down to difficulty five on the list, so some tweaking is in order. Maybe something like have the top point be whatever time you're going for, hex just the top part if you're a focused practitioner, top three for sorcerers and their ilk and top five for wizards. Still on the No Way / Problematic / Ok scale of course. You'd have to extend the list of course. Maybe we could get someone here to do that?

Sanctaphrax, you like writing rules, are you up for it?

Any other problems you guys can think of regarding moving the setting to the past?

[Richard_Chilton]

Sure, seems sensible. I might have put it slightly earlier in some places, like England, because of things like the railroad and spinning machines and such (the industrial revolution starts in the 1700s!), but mostly that's sensible. What about those Wizards who live through the change? How do they experience it? There must be a lot of them since many live such long lives.

The machines mattered since the Industrial Revolution began, but mostly in the cities of the more advanced nations.  Much of the world was still living in villages until the great changes wrote by the motor car, running lights, and the telephone.

As for those who lived through the change, Bob did mention that some people made a study of how (and why) magic interacted with the environment.  I can see the White Council being puzzled and commissioning reports on the wherefore and the whys - then just adapting to the new reality.

Richard

[Sanctaphrax]

Ah, I see. No, that's not quite what I meant. I'm not saying that the rules should be bent or broken to that end; I'm saying that's what the rules are.

I'm not saying you think the rules should be bent or broken. I chose my words with care, and I said balance.

You think that the rules should be written in a way that discourages non-obvious natural melee weapons, right? (Though for whatever reason you apparently have no problem with non-obvious natural ranged weapons).

That's bending the game's balance. It's useful for preventing people from playing the game wrong.

this is a setting where, generally speaking, when supernatural power comes out to play, people can tell by looking at it (unless whoever's behind it is doing something to hide it).

That's just not true. Everything Uriel does is incredibly subtle, and there's no indication that he's trying to hide anything. He just acts in subtle ways. Soulgazes and The Sight, so far as we can tell, don't look like anything. Some thaumaturgy and most accidental hexing is subtle enough that it can be passed off as coincidence. Michael and Charity are to all appearances totally mortal, despite having plenty of supernatural power.

Furthermore, it's worth mentioning that the rules don't require Claws to be obvious when it's used, they require it to be obvious at all times.

And Claws doesn't even have to be supernatural.

So lightning touches would be fine, if they're accompanied by some lightning-ish effect.

No they wouldn't, not unless that effect is always visible. If they're only obvious when used, they break the rules for the power.

Sanctaphrax, you like writing rules, are you up for it?

Up for what, exactly?