Water Evocator Question

[Chao]

Hey guys,

So my crew and I are starting a new game. One wants to play a hydromancer/aquamancer/water bender whatever you wanna call it. He puts his plan to me as thus.

As of right now, I am thinking of modeling a character after the water-benders from Avatar. Ignoring blood-bending (yes, I did read the rules on the seven no-no's of magic) simply set a rote spell in which you freeze water. The first round of combat you hit the Big Evil with a basic water attack, even if I miss, whatever, he is wet. Next round, freeze it. Even if his athletics score can over come BOUND IN PLACE, the ground would be frozen, so in addition to damage potential, you have battlefield control. I am assuming that water created remains, since we know that fire created, also remains as the caster is continually reminded of burning risks.

While I understand that an attack is an attack, I am having trouble justifying why someone would not have a DRIPPING WET aspect on them after getting hit with a geyser of water. How do you guys handle this?

A second question has to do with his freezing idea. Would that evocation then place a HUMAN POPSICLE aspect on all targets and a ICE SLICK aspect on the zone, for a total of...?

[JDK002]

An easy way around this is to require the attack spells to be more than just a high impact torrent of water.  Carlos' big green acid-like bolt spell is a good example.

You could justify that a simple stream of water isn't going to seriously harm most supernatural entities in any significant way, though I do admit that's kind of a stretch.

[Mr. Death]

You can't put two different aspects with one evocation, and you normally can't cause a temporary aspect with an attack (barring causing a consequence, that is). An attack is an attack, and only causes stress and consequences. You might declare a relevant aspect later (which might cost a fate point), but no, you're not going to successfully put an aspect on someone else with an attack, especially not a failed attack.

[Chao]

right, and I understand that. I was wondering if there was a plausible explanation for water evocations not to do that, because intuitively they would.

[MagusVulpes]

I would make the assumption that while magical fire can create natural fire (read magical = there then gone, natural = sticks around for the party), conjuring water and earth (or things related to such) would fall under being magical constructs that would fade once the power for it ran out. Basically, magically called water evaporates faster than regular water, probably like ectoplasm, so that would work as a good explanation as to why being hit with a torrent of magically conjured water wouldn't leave the target soaked. Now, that being said, redirecting the flow of water or using magic to tear up a fire hydrant or water line would have other implications.

[PirateJack]

I would make the assumption that while magical fire can create natural fire (read magical = there then gone, natural = sticks around for the party), conjuring water and earth (or things related to such) would fall under being magical constructs that would fade once the power for it ran out. Basically, magically called water evaporates faster than regular water, probably like ectoplasm, so that would work as a good explanation as to why being hit with a torrent of magically conjured water wouldn't leave the target soaked. Now, that being said, redirecting the flow of water or using magic to tear up a fire hydrant or water line would have other implications.

That, or you could narrate the failed roll as missing entirely, or the bad guy ducking behind something that prevents him from getting wet. A failed roll doesn't necessarily mean the attack hit but did no damage, it just means the attack failed in some way.

[GryMor]

That, or you could narrate the failed roll as missing entirely, or the bad guy ducking behind something that prevents him from getting wet. A failed roll doesn't necessarily mean the attack hit but did no damage, it just means the attack failed in some way.

Heck, something that causes stress and consequences may still not have hit, consider the case of a 5 stress 'hit' with guns, could easily end up being a 3 stress hit with a mild consequence of 'Dislocated shoulder' from the person being shot at diving for cover and landing badly, without the bullet coming anywhere near them.

[Mr. Death]

Or even on a successful hit, just say that the amount of water sticking to the guy isn't enough to actually do anything with.

There's really nothing that has to be taken as a given, whatever the dice say, in this system. As pointed out, a successful 'hit' doesn't necessarily mean the attack even came close to hitting the person.

[crusher_bob]

It's also possible to make 'spin' related house rules.  The specific problem with doing with in DFRG is that the sort of massively overpowered/successful attacks are largely the domain of evocation.  Which is already borderline overpowered.  So any house rule addition that start off with something like, "if you get a really good hit in on the other guy, you also get a free aspect" are going to power up evocation, which doesn't really need the help.  Even worse, they'll power up evocation more than almost any other ability.

But a house rule that says something like, "after damage is calculated, but before the damage is taken, you can trade 3 points of damage for a fragile aspect or 4 points of damage for a sticky aspect" would not be too bad.  Just be aware that people will tend to give you the hairy eyeball over it.

[Sanctaphrax]

Being hit with a blast of water will likely leave you soaking wet, but that doesn't mean you'll have a SOAKING WET aspect.

Not everything in the game-world is an Aspect.

PS: I don't think I'd use the canonical spellcasting Powers for benders. They don't seem to fit. I'd probably use either Incite Effect or a Channelling hack where you trade in focus slots for pyramid-less specializations.

[Tedronai]

Not everything in the game-world is an Aspect.

Only the things that matter (and aren't already represented by some other mechanic - and even those might also be represented at some times by Aspects).

[Mr. Death]

If I were writing it, I'd base it off channeling and evocation, reflavored so that you cast with Fists instead of Discipline. And instead of different elements, different specialties within that element--a waterbender might have an Evocation reflavor with the "elements" being Water, Ice, and Bloodbending, or Water, Healing, Steam.

[Sanctaphrax]

Not a bad idea, but I'm bothered by the presence of foci. I don't think benders use items like that.

(That's why I went for Incite Effect.)

[Mr. Death]

Not a bad idea, but I'm bothered by the presence of foci. I don't think benders use items like that.

(That's why I went for Incite Effect.)

Well, sometimes they do--Aang had his staff which he used directly with his airbending, there was one Earthbender who used hammers, and Zuko's used his swords in conjunction with his firebending.

[Sanctaphrax]

Were those items special? Did they make their users into better benders?

If so, then I suppose there's a place for foci. But giving foci to every bender and making them as important as they are seems unsuitable. So normal spellcasting is probably still inappropriate.