Author Topic: Hexing! We got a problem  (Read 9685 times)

Offline noclue

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 333
    • View Profile
Re: Hexing! We got a problem
« Reply #45 on: December 08, 2012, 11:04:52 PM »
Is there a difference? 

If you don't want to use the wizard's high concept you can simply declare A Wizard is Near by spending a fate and immediately tag it for the same effect.  Declarations don't take an action and fate points get transferred the same as in noclue's description.  I don't see a meaningful difference.

Yeah, so here's what I've been thinking about. The examples with unintentional hexing and wild gunfire aren't great for digging into this from a design issue. The situation is easy to fix. It's a scene aspect. Done. Or, save a step and just compel the aspect from one character's sheet on another character and done even faster.

So, it looks like its fine either way. It looks like if you don't have a relevant aspect on one character's sheet, just look at another character's sheet and compel that. But, I think there's something elegant hidden beneath the question that makes me want to look it in a different light.

So, let's say we have two characters, Alvin and Sheila. Alvin is your stereotypical nerd accountant type. He can best be summed up with the aspect "Bookish accountant with a head only for numbers." For Sheila, we'll go with a cliche as well, like "Fresh-faced beauty." Sheila's been selling breadcrumbs at tuppence a bag but she doesn't seem to be making a profit and she's come to ask Alvin for help.

So, in she walks and I think it would be really cool to spark off a romance between these two characters with a compel. I look at Alvin's sheet, and I got nothing. If Alvin had "Accountant with the heart of a poet," I'd have him. I'd compel that poet heart as he looks up while she steps into his room. But, he doesn't and I can't. Similarly, I look at Sheila's sheet and I got nothing there. If she had "Looking for love in all the wrong places" or "No more bad boys for this good girl," or something I'd be good. But, nope.

Of course, if they were in some kind of conflict, Sheila could invoke her "Fresh-faced beauty" aspect for a bonus and Alvin could use his single mindedness to help him ignore her by invoking his own "...mind only for numbers" aspect. But as the GM, the players haven't given me relevant Aspects to push things where I want them to go. Even if we all think a relationship between Alvin and Sheila would be cool, I don't have anywhere to spend my fate points yet. I don't really get a say.

And that's a good thing. This is a good problem to have. Because, who the fuck am I really. The player created Alvin and he crafted all those aspects to represent the character. The game is going to advocate for Alvin to be the best Alvin he can be. If he's built to be blind to Sheila, then where do I get off trying mess with that? I haven't earned the right to push him there. Same with Sheila, she's not built to be interested in Alvin. That's not something I can poke at.

And if one of them were created with Aspects that drove towards romantic sparks in this situation, that's where I should push. That's the character I should be looking at with my FP in hand. That's the one I should be prompting into action, based on their aspects that they built. If Alvin has the heart of a poet, I poke there. If Sheila's looking for a sensitive guy who's good at math, I push there.

So, let's say everyone's on board with this romance idea, but no one has Aspects built for it. That's cool. Because the characters can roleplay their little hearts out and create a romance and the game rewards that. Now, I can look at the situation and say "Hey, I like this thing we've built in play. I think I'll just compel this "Budding Romance" that we all know is there now." I can turn to Alvin's player and say "you know getting involved with Sheila is going to piss off Frank, but...." And now we're cooking gas. It may have taken longer to get to where the Aspects were relevant, but now everything makes sense. I don't have to impose on Alvin or Sheila. I can just use the Aspects that are organic to the situation and push there.

And that's what I really want out of aspects. Not the fastest way to get to a +2, or even the most expedient way to push the fiction where I want it to go, but a currency that builds a cool experience based on the things we each bring to the table.

I don't see how any of that is relevant to what I'm talking about. It seems to be just an outline of a particularly lazy GM not bothering to describe things, which isn't what I'm talking about.
Assume equal description in both examples.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2012, 11:16:59 PM by noclue »

Offline JDK002

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 355
    • View Profile
Re: Hexing! We got a problem
« Reply #46 on: December 09, 2012, 06:05:20 PM »
I think Umber and Mr.D are saying the most elegant way to do it is by using the most direct method that doesn't force the player to make needless Declairations, possibly requiring them to make an entire extra roll, because most players are going to want to roll on the possibility to save a FP.

It just bogs down the scene, when the simpler (and more elegant IMO) method is to just let them invoke the aspect right off the character sheet for the exact same effect.

Offline noclue

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 333
    • View Profile
Re: Hexing! We got a problem
« Reply #47 on: December 09, 2012, 06:33:17 PM »
Assuming thats true, I'm not sure I see the value in reducing declarations. I like declarations. I don't find them useless and I'd actually like to see more of them rather than fewer.

Offline JDK002

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 355
    • View Profile
Re: Hexing! We got a problem
« Reply #48 on: December 09, 2012, 07:27:52 PM »
Assuming thats true, I'm not sure I see the value in reducing declarations. I like declarations. I don't find them useless and I'd actually like to see more of them rather than fewer.
for the most part I would agree.  I know my players still have kind of a hard time grasping the full power declairations have, so they tend to only use them for the +2 or reroll.  When the declairations become redundant and don't cover anything that aspects that are already in play do is where I just "trim the fat" so to speak.

Offline noclue

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 333
    • View Profile
Re: Hexing! We got a problem
« Reply #49 on: December 09, 2012, 09:41:37 PM »
Fair point.