Powers = Tools ?

[devonapple]

Thing is, even though it's an altered version of FATE, it's still FATE. There are many setting elements, but the core of it is still a generic system. Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, Eberron, etc are all sperate games, but in the end use a generic system.

Alright. Can you provide an example of an RPG in which the setting and game system ARE completely intertwined, so we know how to draw a difference between that and DFRPG?

[Mr. Death]

See, I don't particularly like the Warden Sword. But I understand the reason for the way it was made, I think. (And no, it's not overpowered to balance out the job requirements. Harry has those with no Sword.)

Yeah, but that's Harry. The world exists to make his life painful. Him having the responsibilities without the sword is just another symptom of that.

The Warden Sword is probably the way it is in order to push people in the direction of being a sword-swinging Warden. It kind of has to be overpowered to do so, because taking Weapons on a character with Evocation is not a great idea.

Inasmuch as the sword is part of what sets a Warden apart from your average Wizard, yes. Though I'd also add that it's probably the way it is to reflect (as nearly as possible) its affect in the stories.

If you take it as a precedent, then the whole thing collapses. Which is part of why I dislike the thing.

Depends on what you're taking as precedent. If the precedent is "A wizard can have a really powerful enchanted item without the stats to justify it," yes, that's bad. But if the precedent is, "A wizard can have a really powerful enchanted item without the stats to justify it, provided a very good reason for that item," that's not so bad.

Honestly, once again I feel compelled to suggest that if a problem arises from taking a power or item out of its narrative context, the thing to do would be not to take it out of that narrative context.

[devonapple]

Honestly, once again I feel compelled to suggest that if a problem arises from taking a power or item out of its narrative context, the thing to do would be not to take it out of that narrative context.

In this setting, I tend to agree, despite assertions that a system and a setting are and/or need to be considered separate entities.

[Richard_Chilton]

Thing is, even though it's an altered version of FATE, it's still FATE. There are many setting elements, but the core of it is still a generic system. Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, Eberron, etc are all sperate games, but in the end use a generic system.

I don't see  Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, Eberron as separate games.  The core mechanics are the same with each world adding a bit of difference to the flavor of those rules.  You can take a PC from Forgotten Realms to Eberron to any other D20 world and you have the same PC interacting other PCs who are basically built the same.  Maybe a difference in regional feats, maybe another difference here or there, but the rules don't change.

Take a character from Spirit of the Century into Dresden and you have something that doesn't look like  the other PCs.  It will have no High Concept, no Trouble, and 10 Aspects.  It will have stunts that are formed into stunt trees with the higher level stunts effectively being powers.

Why?

Because in order to make a game that reflects the DV, the people at Evil Hat had to twist FATE into an unfamiliar shape.  They had to change character creation, flatten the stunt trees, add all sorts of powers, come up with a magic system, then come up with a that better reflected the DV, and finally come up with a that even better reflected the DV.  Along the way they scraped the game and started from scratch once or twice because the game they had developed didn't reflect the DV the way they wanted it to.  That's why they didn't release in 2003 when they got the license or 2006 when they said they would.

They spent seven years rewriting FATE to produce a game that could model the DV - that's not a generic system but one modeled around a specific setting.

Richard

[Sanctaphrax]

Depends on what you're taking as precedent. If the precedent is "A wizard can have a really powerful enchanted item without the stats to justify it," yes, that's bad. But if the precedent is, "A wizard can have a really powerful enchanted item without the stats to justify it, provided a very good reason for that item," that's not so bad.

I don't think that would be a good idea. As a guy who optimizes by instinct, I'd always have a good reason. And my characters would be busted, without me doing anything wrong.

I'm especially invested in this because I have a very powerful spellcaster character in my PbP game who has at least two excellent reasons to have a massive defensive Enchanted Item. (I'm not saying she could find reasons, I'm saying she has them.) Giving her such a thing would be terrible. But by your suggestion, it'd be appropriate.

Plus my character concepts would be altered by me having to have good reasons.

Honestly, once again I feel compelled to suggest that if a problem arises from taking a power or item out of its narrative context, the thing to do would be not to take it out of that narrative context.

No problems arise from taking a power out of its narrative concept. You could use the Knight Of The Cross Template to represent something very unlike a Knight and no problems would arise.

The problems come when you take something out of its mechanical context.

The obvious solution is to not take it out of its mechanical context. Which requires you to adjust the mechanics so that they not allow unacceptable context changes. Which is what I've been advocating for ACaEBG.

Alright. Can you provide an example of an RPG in which the setting and game system ARE completely intertwined, so we know how to draw a difference between that and DFRPG?

Exalted.

They spent seven years rewriting FATE to produce a game that could model the DV - that's not a generic system but one modeled around a specific setting.

A long development cycle does not make a game non-generic. What about the system is modelled around the setting? I can think of the Lawbreaker powers and that's about it. Maybe Addictive Saliva or the Warden Sword? But those are all kind of tacked-on.

Most of the changes from Spirit Of The Century were, as I understand it, just improvements to the system.

In this setting, I tend to agree, despite assertions that a system and a setting are and/or need to be considered separate entities.

Why?

[Viatos]

Yeah, if I could have an enchanted Gundam with multiple-use attacks, blocks, and maneuvers all worked into it for a few slots at far more power then I could craft, and the only penalty was that I had to make my character more interesting, and the GM would need to give me more face-time and Fate Points to balance it out...

...well, it's not really a hard choice. Being a Warden comes with drawbacks (the Warden Aspect's compels) that are perfectly balanced by its advantages (the Warden Aspect's Fate Point stream and invokes). Getting an extra-powerful magic item that no other Aspect can provide doesn't make any sense in terms of balance or narrative.

If your Lore is +3 and you want a Warden Sword, you can make an enchanted item that functions as a Weapon:3 and counterspell +3. That's fair. The +6 for literally no drawback or downside of any kind is not.

[Viatos]

Exalted.

To give a specific example of how that works, when designing powers descended from a certain class of god-equivalent entity, you *must* work within the thematics of that entity. It's not optional. You can bend those thematics in all kinds of interesting ways to achieve whatever you're looking for, but you need to be creative to do that, you can never contradict them. For instance, an entity whose core identity is formed of rage, leadership, nuclear fire, overwhelming force, architecture, and inexplicably dancing: you cannot design a power for this entity which incorporates a concept of servitude (unless it's something like the servitude a king performs for his people) or relaxing and chilling out (except maybe during dance). A power that, say, improve your teamwork skills under someone else's direction is completely unacceptable - you might be able to get away with taking advice from a designated vizier, but that's the limit.

There's nothing like this in the DFRPG. The Dresdenverse itself really doesn't make many unchallengable assumptions, and the rules have little to offer except "go for it" if you want a vampire dragon that turns into a wizard under the light of the full moon. Even the things that are "set" like Lawbreaker can be worked around (canonically, by whatever power the Blackstaff grants).

[Richard_Chilton]

A long development cycle does not make a game non-generic. What about the system is modelled around the setting? I can think of the Lawbreaker powers and that's about it. Maybe Addictive Saliva or the Warden Sword? But those are all kind of tacked-on.

The entire magic system was modelled around the DV.  That's the part that required several redesigns, each time impacting on the game as a whole.

There was no way they handle various magical powers as stunts (as they do in SotC and SotS) so they developed a new class of items called "powers" for the DV.

With the powers there to soak up the refresh points, they were forced to flatten the stunt trees.

Those are the three biggest changes and they are based on modelling the game on the DV.  If they didn't want to make the game world specific they could have shipped in 2006.  The magic system wouldn't have been able to do what Harry can nor would the other mechanic accurately to the world, but as "generic system to setting" goes it would have been as good (if not better) than the average licensed GURP book.

Richard

[Sanctaphrax]

If your Lore is +3 and you want a Warden Sword, you can make an enchanted item that functions as a Weapon:3 and counterspell +3. That's fair. The +6 for literally no drawback or downside of any kind is not.

This isn't quite right. Enchanted Items can have whatever range you want, limiting Warden Swords to melee is a downside. Also, you can't normally make Enchanted Items with multiple effects.

But as I said before, I'm pretty sure it's intentionally broken to push players in a specific direction. Like the Pure Mortal bonus, except not as elegantly executed. (The Pure Mortal bonus is awesome at low power levels and unimpressive at high ones. This means that if you play below Feet In The Water you'll see few supernaturals and if you play above Submerged you'll see few mortals. Personally, I like this a lot. It goes against my principles slightly, though, so I think of it as an example of how to break the rules properly.)

@Richard: Not convinced that that stuff is actually Dresden-specific. That's exactly how I'd go about converting FATE to a generic supernatural game. But I admit, I'm biased.

[Richard_Chilton]

@Richard: Not convinced that that stuff is actually Dresden-specific. That's exactly how I'd go about converting FATE to a generic supernatural game. But I admit, I'm biased.

All I can say is that if FATE Generic Urban Fantasy was what they were aiming at the game would have been out in 2006.

Richard

[Locnil]

Except that DFRPG is a system that can model the Dresdenverse. It's not a system that can model only the Dresdenvserse. Then again, I'm just going tnto semantics, and honestly I'm not even sure what this thread is.

Well, literally everything else I was going to say had been said by others (Interestingly, by people on different sides...), so I'm just going to note that I don't think I have anything more to contribute, and I'm just going to bow out of this thread.

Have a nice day.

[Sanctaphrax]

All I can say is that if FATE Generic Urban Fantasy was what they were aiming at the game would have been out in 2006.

Richard

I'm sure they spent a lot of time editorializing about the Dresdenverse and statting up canon NPCs. And I'm sure that Dresdenverse canon had an effect on what Powers were included in the core book. But the system itself is almost completely setting-agnostic.

You can tell because you can use another setting with the system, without significantly changing the rules.

[Silverblaze]

I'm sure they spent a lot of time editorializing about the Dresdenverse and statting up canon NPCs. And I'm sure that Dresdenverse canon had an effect on what Powers were included in the core book. But the system itself is almost completely setting-agnostic.

You can tell because you can use another setting with the system, without significantly changing the rules.

White Wolf's World of Darkness (old and new) actually mutates easier than this system to fit other settings.  The D20 system was used to exhibit the following: D&D, Star Wars, Pathfinder, Everquest, World of Warcraft, Spy Craft (JamesBond stuff), D20 modern, Gamma World, more I'm sure I forgot.

The MEGS system and GURPS are generally the easiest to adapt to other settings.  You can say the system is setting agnostic about most systems.  I don't find that stance in this debate to be very strong.

[Sanctaphrax]

Not sure I see your point here.

Storyteller and d20 are, without a shadow of a doubt, generic systems. So's GURPS. Not sure what MEGS is so I won't comment on that.

I'm not trying to say that DFRPG is more generic than d20 or anything. It's probably more generic than D&D, though. Non-D&D d20 games use significantly different rules, right?

[Silverblaze]

Not sure I see your point here.

Storyteller and d20 are, without a shadow of a doubt, generic systems. So's GURPS. Not sure what MEGS is so I won't comment on that.

I'm not trying to say that DFRPG is more generic than d20 or anything. It's probably more generic than D&D, though. Non-D&D d20 games use significantly different rules, right?

Generally speaking yes.  Also MEGS stands for Mayfair Exponential Gaming System - not a horribly balanced system (requires a group and Gm be on the same page), but it can simulate anything.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayfair_Exponential_Game_System

My point is if almost any system can be mutable, then deciding setting isn't important should be close to equal across the board.  I also think other systems work as well or better at simulating other settings.  DFRPG = Gundam Wing?  Maybe.  GURPS or MEGS = Gundam Wing? Maybe, but likely better. 

DFRPG = DFRPG best?  yeah likely.  MEGS = Superheroes best? Likely, but can fit anything really.