An idea for modeling completely untrained magical talent

[devonapple]

And here I was thinking that one of the few points of consensus reached in this thread was that aspects referencing supernatural power were acceptable on Pure Mortals where that power originates external to the character.
A familial relationship with an entity of power, even one that allows the character to 'call in debt' does not necessitate the character themself having power.

Oh, hamburgers - you're right. That was a bad example in exactly the way you explain. It's hard: I can see the potential for abuse, but I'm failing to invent compelling ways to abuse it. The only one I can come up with has to do with leveraging the High Concept to be able to shift into the Nevernever.

[Mr. Death]

One of the ways I look at it is (and this may not make sense), Aspects and Fate Points are outside of the character's actions and intentions, while powers are the character's actions and intentions. Fate points and Refresh, as has been stated before, do not directly correspond to anything 'in universe', instead being mechanics in the realm of the players.

So one place I would draw the line on the Luck-based aspect requiring the supernatural is if Luck just happens to favor the character, or if the character is actively influencing Luck himself.

So, going by that example, if the player invokes his Luck aspect for things like, "My character is the scion of a Luck god, so the rafters just happen to fall right now, on the demon's head, because I'm that lucky and/or Dad is looking out for me," that wouldn't be something supernatural on the part of the character, and could be done without losing the bonus.

But if the action is, "My character is a scion of a Luck god, so he fiddles with luck and makes the rafter fail at just the right moment to crack the demon on the skull," that would be a supernatural nature and action on the part of the character, and would be reason to lose the bonus (in favor of taking a power to represent the conscious/willing/just plain increased manipulation of luck).

Mind you, I'm still of the opinion that a character with supernatural heritage should have supernatural powers to reflect that, but I can be flexible.

[devonapple]

So one place I would draw the line on the Luck-based aspect requiring the supernatural is if Luck just happens to favor the character, or if the character is actively influencing Luck himself.

So, going by that example, if the player invokes his Luck aspect for things like, "My character is the scion of a Luck god, so the rafters just happen to fall right now, on the demon's head, because I'm that lucky and/or Dad is looking out for me," that wouldn't be something supernatural on the part of the character, and could be done without losing the bonus.

But if the action is, "My character is a scion of a Luck god, so he fiddles with luck and makes the rafter fail at just the right moment to crack the demon on the skull," that would be a supernatural nature and action on the part of the character, and would be reason to lose the bonus (in favor of taking a power to represent the conscious/willing/just plain increased manipulation of luck).

It's a good illustration of extrinsic versus intrinsic supernatural power, but this example is still one of those "same outcome, different reason" situations that was mentioned before as a matter of flavor but not, ultimately, game balance.

[Richard_Chilton]

When blatant mis-characterizations are the best you can do, it's time to stop trying.

How is it a mis-characterization?

You've said:

Quite simply, I am not positing new reasoning, rather citing existing reasoning, thus not engaging in the
It is my position that they do not BECOME Changelings until such a time as they take their first power (which does not contradict their minimum refresh cost due to the existence of -0 powers).

Which ignores the "born changeling" material from the RAW and the setting.
To quote:
Changelings are half-human, half-faerie people who—at least for the moment—are still living life as mortals.

Which is why I said "You disregard the bulk of the changeling template".  A person can't wake up one day and decide to be half human, can they? Nay, you are born that way.

(condensed here because the two are ultimately restatements of the same objection)
You'll find the solution to this nagging obsession of yours in my ACTUAL position.  Don't call them Pure Mortals.  Heck, it's even a softer stance than that you received from the game designer.  But I can see quite clearly that arguing against anything other than a straw man makes you uncomfortable.

Thing is, if I don't call them Pure Mortals then they don't get the Pure Mortal bonus UNLESS you make a custom template - which is fine, but not part of the RAW.  The fact that there are a couple of templates that have +0 under their Musts and do not reference that bonus makes it clear that they do not get it.

When debating this point with you I do not need a straw man.  Your continued fixation on one line of a Template (while ignoring the rest of it, along with the entire changeling template) is as extreme enough.


And if we are talking debating styles:
It is very frustrating when you say "you don't understand my position" without then stating your position.  It gives the appearance that you do not wish to be pinned down to a position that you must defend but rather prefer to dance around with "that's not exactly what I said".

For example, you stated: "even though he has no Powers one of his aspects (his High Concept) precludes him from claiming the Pure Mortal template." then said that the character would not be a Changeling until he took powers - which strongly implies a custom non-Pure Mortal, non-Changeling Template - but you will not actually say that is what you mean.

Richard

[devonapple]

Having read and re-read Fred's thoughts on the subject, his reply does diminish the importance of the phrase "nothing supernatural going on" by clearly specifying "no supernatural powers."

At this point, my only concern is with the scope of potential Invocations, and using an Aspect as a dodge to get access to supernatural effects (specifically, effects which could not be mundanely replicated with a similar investment of mundane time and effort, or more overtly mimic existing Powers) by Invoking the supernatural Aspect in question.

[sinker]

At this point, my only concern is with the scope of potential Invocations, and using an Aspect as a dodge to get access to supernatural effects (specifically, effects which could not be mundanely replicated with a similar investment of mundane time and effort, or more overtly mimic existing Powers) by Invoking the supernatural Aspect in question.

Personally I don't fear that much, because I don't have any problem calling my players out on that one when they are clearly abusing my good will.


Ok, Here's what I perceive as our problem (I.E. the thing we must all overcome to reach consensus):

We have one party who says that by RAW pure mortals are the only template that provides a refresh bonus and a pure mortal should have absolutely nothing supernatural going on.

We have a second party that believes that to remove a mechanical bonus when there is no mechanical difference makes for a weaker game.

The first party keeps insisting it's not RAW, which is technically correct, but seems like a slight at the second party's concerns ("not RAW" translating to not acceptable or ideal). The second party keeps insisting that when we have problems like this it is best to look at the intent of the RAW to try to find a solution that works.

These two views aren't irreconcilable. I am willing to admit that if you go by strict RAW that you can't create the characters who have come up in the course of this discussion (of course you also can't make a scion at all). Others should be willing to admit that RAW is not always ideal. That is how we could come to a peaceful resolution.

Finally I would like to say that everybody who keeps saying that to create something other than the templates in the book is to create something outside of the setting, and that doing that is "Not playing the Dresden Files game" should really stop. You do not know the setting so intimately as to exclude anything. Period. We are presented with a very narrow view of the Dresdenverse, and things that we "know" have been proven wrong before. For all you know, all of this is included in the setting. So stop.

Another thing I would mention is that "That works for your home game" or "Sounds like a houserule" is being seen (and I think used) as a slight here.

[devonapple]

Finally I would like to say that everybody who keeps saying that to create something other than the templates in the book is to create something outside of the setting, and that doing that is "Not playing the Dresden Files game" should really stop. You do not know the setting so intimately as to exclude anything. Period. We are presented with a very narrow view of the Dresdenverse, and things that we "know" have been proven wrong before. For all you know, all of this is included in the setting. So stop.

Of course. Scions are basically a free-for-all as far as custom templates go.

[Richard_Chilton]

The first party keeps insisting it's not RAW, which is technically correct, but seems like a slight at the second party's concerns ("not RAW" translating to not acceptable or ideal). The second party keeps insisting that when we have problems like this it is best to look at the intent of the RAW to try to find a solution that works.

Speaking as a member (possibly the standard bearer) of the first party, I have nothing against homebrew fixes.  I've even proposed a possible custom Template.  I'll acknowledge that the rules aren't perfect - but I feel if we are going to change things based on intent then the intent of the setting should take precedence over that of the mechanics.

Because the mechanics from are a generic system (FATE) that has been adapted to the DV setting.

These two views aren't irreconcilable. I am willing to admit that if you go by strict RAW that you can't create the characters who have come up in the course of this discussion (of course you also can't make a scion at all). Others should be willing to admit that RAW is not always ideal. That is how we could come to a peaceful resolution.

There are guidelines to making scions in the RAW...

And I will admit that the rules are not perfect.  Alas, unless Fred contracts us to write his errata, any 'solution' we come up with will be known only to those of us currently following this discussion.  When someone joins the forum six months from now, he won't know about this discussion or anything except the RAW.  They are the only common ground we have for discussions.

That's why we keep posting links to the alternate conjuring/summoning rules - people join and ask "How does blah work" and we give the RAW answer then tag on "but you might like the alternative rules found in this link".

Maybe Paranet will have rules that clarify things, but I think not.

Another thing I would mention is that "That works for your home game" or "Sounds like a houserule" is being seen (and I think used) as a slight here.

I'm sorry if that seems like a slight - I don't mean it to be.  When I use those phrases I mean to clarify the issue.  I do it because in a previous discussion, when I referred to the RAW, I was told that it should be obvious that the discussion was on a house rule.  It didn't seem obvious to me, so now I am careful to differentiate when I talking about RAW or about homebrew.

There is one factor that prevents me from hoping that this discussion will lead to a meeting of the minds. You agree that the other position is "technically correct" but I do not believe that Tedronai feels that the position is technically correct (Tedronai - please feel free to correct this assumption).

If people want to turn this thread into a discussion a homebrew system - that's fine. Because the RAW are a baseline that every table takes in its own direction.  Looking at the custom power thread, there are some that I see and think should have been included in the rules and other I disagree with - and I'm sure that most people feel the same way.  That said, we probably don't all agree on which powers are great and which aren't.

Even without adding custom things, the RAW are elastic enough that when Billy says that Toot-Toot was a weapon that Harry used (rolling Contacts to hit) I can nod and saw "I can see that".  It's not something covered under the RAW, but I can see a table going with that.

Richard

[sinker]

Because the mechanics from are a generic system (FATE) that has been adapted to the DV setting.

To be completely fair though this particular mechanic (the pure mortal refresh bonus) is not adapted, but actually part of the adaptation. And there seems to be two sides to the reason for the adaptation (which is probably why we have two sides to this debate).

[Richard_Chilton]

When looking at the mechanics justification, I always think about a minor talent who only has a -0 power.  Zero cost powers are so worthless that they are free, yet they prevent the person with Cassandra’s Tears from having that refresh bonus.

Is that fair? I don't think so - but the RAW say that anyone with Cassandra’s Tears or Wizard’s Constitution don't get that bonus.

Richard

[ways and means]

Fred has pretty much stated that the pure mortal bonus was designed for game balance as powers> stunts. So If someone decides not to take powers they should get the bonus from a game balance perspective. 

[Tallyrand]

Fred has pretty much stated that the pure mortal bonus was designed for game balance as powers> stunts. So If someone decides not to take powers they should get the bonus from a game balance perspective.

And that is a perfectly valid opinion, the only argument here is that is isn't RAW and it isn't an appropriate choice for all tables.  I personally think that if I had two players, one playing Murphy and one playing an Untrained White Counsel Level Talent and I allowed them both to gain the +2 Pure Mortal bonus I would be doing Murphy's player a disservice.  Not only is she staying true to RAW while the other player is not, the other player's Fate Chips are more versatile than Murphy's.

[Becq]

A lot of this discussion has touched on game balance or lack thereof, but its also not strictly a matter of game balance.  A parallel example of this is found in the Lawbreaker powers.  To 'normal' DFRPG characters (by 'normal' I mean those who, like Dresden, try to be heroic and at least pay lip-service to the Laws), the Lawbreaker powers are completely imbalanced.  They cost refresh, but offer no benefit whatsoever (because the character has reason to actively avoid using the 'benefits' of the power).  And yet they they might be 'required' based on character background or decisions (or mistakes) made in the course of game play -- if the character has power and has chosen to use it the wrong way, then he loses refresh with 'nothing' to show for it.  Balanced?  Perhaps if you're playing a dark-side character.  But for Harry Dresden, for example, its a pure liability with no upside.  It's flavor given mechanics, not mechanics built with balance in mind.

So I see at least part of the reason for the existence of the Pure Mortal bonus to be based in this same concept.  In DFRPG, those who grasp the supernatural and make it part of themselves (or who are grasped by the supernatural and taken over by it) are changed, and that change moves them away from humanity.  Such characters are not Pure Mortals any longer, even if all they got out of it was a -0 power.  Very nearly but not quite Pure Mortal is not Pure Mortal in much the same way that a very nearly but not quite non-pregnant woman is in fact not non-pregnant. 

And in Dresden Files, being supernatural meants being separated from humanity/mortality/free will.  Which is a large part of the reason there is a 2 refresh difference between Pure Mortals and slightly ImPure Mortals.  (And yes, there is a balance attempt being made, too, but its not only balance.)

So I guess my argument against characters who are "a little bit supernatural" counting a Pure Mortals is largely one of principle, rather than game balance (though again, my argument is a bit about balance, too, because supernatural aspects tend to have more potential).  And it's true that 2 refresh is a big deal from a balance perspective, far more than the advantage than gained by having supernatural aspects -- I think its the big transition from +2 refresh to no bonus (and resulting balance questions)that fuels the counterargument.  So perhaps it would make sense to house rule it along these lines:

(1) Modify the pure mortal template as follows:

Musts: Pure mortals must have a high concept that is in line with their nature as a non-supernatural being.  Although it is possible for such a character to be derived from a supernatural bloodline, a pure mortal is unable to tap the power of that bloodline while remaining pure mortal.  It is possible for pure mortals to carry latent potential; should this potential ever express itself, the character's template (and high concept) should be altered to reflect this as appropriate.  Pure mortals may not take any supernatural powers. In exchange for this restriction, pure mortal characters (and only pure mortal characters) get a +2 bonus to their starting refresh. If this character ever takes a supernatural power or switches templates for any reason, this refresh bonus goes away immediately (which may be mitigated by dropping one or two mortal stunts).

(2) Add the following verbage to any template (including custom templates, but not the pure mortal template) that has a sufficiently low minimum refresh:

If a character with this template has no more than a single power costing at most -1 refresh, then the character is considered a {choose one: Minor Talent, Freshly Emerged, Rookie, etc} and gets a +1 bonus to their starting refresh.  If such a character ever gains a second power or any single power costing more than -1 refresh, then this refresh bonus goes away immediately (which may be mitigated by dropping one or two mortal stunts).

I think that this house rule adequately retains the concept that supernatural power/nature/etc is the antithesis of free will (as expressed by refresh) and further smoothes out the differences between 'true' pure mortals, minor talents, and more deeply supernatural characters.  It allows for characters to play weak supernatural templates and benefit from being supernatural whiel still retaining part of the pure human bonus.

Thoughts?  Suggestions?  Flames?  Hate?  Pie?

[devonapple]

Pie, I think.

[Becq]

Pie, I think.

Yay!  \o/