Catches and Banes

[johntfs]

How exactly does one determine damage from various Compels?  It strikes me that a White Court vampire touching a wedding ring is probably going to take less damage from that than a Black Court vampire who gets shoved into the noonday sunlight or smacked in the face by a holy water balloon?

[Deadmanwalking]

Again, just taking damage from a Catch isn't usually a Compel, and seems to usually inflict either standard attack damage (maybe with a Weapon rating of some sort) if they're an attack or one stress per turn as per Environmental Effects if that's what they are (ala sunlight). Compels/invokes for effect mostly come in when things other than damage happen (being repelled by crosses or garlic for example).

[UmbraLux]

How exactly does one determine damage from various Compels? 

Compels are negotiable.  Any damage (more likely a consequence) resulting from one depends on what the table thinks appropriate. 

One group may decide the Black Court elder can handle enough sunlight to take nothing more than a mild consequence.  Another may decide he takes no damage as long as he uses both hands to hold a coat between him and the sun.  Someone else may decide a ring passed through generations inflicts a severe consequence on the WCV.  It's all negotiable. 

[Sanctaphrax]

Again, just taking damage from a Catch isn't usually a Compel, and seems to usually inflict either standard attack damage (maybe with a Weapon rating of some sort) if they're an attack or one stress per turn as per Environmental Effects if that's what they are (ala sunlight).

If you're subject to a special hazard that nobody else is subject to because of your character concept, though, then that probably ought to be a Compel. You deserve some compensation for adding a vulnerability to your character, and The Catch doesn't suffice if the thing hurting you wouldn't normally be a threat.

[Deadmanwalking]

If you're subject to a special hazard that nobody else is subject to because of your character concept, though, then that probably ought to be a Compel. You deserve some compensation for adding a vulnerability to your character, and The Catch doesn't suffice if the thing hurting you wouldn't normally be a threat.

Yeah, probably, but that's a Compel for the Catch showing up at all, more than it is for taking damage from it per se. A Changeling attacked by a bunch of folks with iron weapons probably gets a Compel for that whether he takes any damage or not. You certainly don't get one FP per hit or anything.

[Tedronai]

You don't get paid for individual attacks with weapons satisfying your catch because you've already been paid in Refresh.
You do get paid in that example for the group of enemies showing up if they are new opposition that's being introduced by the compel, not if they're previously introduced opposition that is merely 'showing up' in the scene.

[johntfs]

Again, just taking damage from a Catch isn't usually a Compel, and seems to usually inflict either standard attack damage (maybe with a Weapon rating of some sort) if they're an attack or one stress per turn as per Environmental Effects if that's what they are (ala sunlight). Compels/invokes for effect mostly come in when things other than damage happen (being repelled by crosses or garlic for example).

Which is where we're kind of circling back around to the reason I introduced Banes in the first place.

To me, a Catch is an equalizer.  A supernatural being hit with its Catch will take damage like a regular mortal and heal from that damage just as slowly as a mortal.  Compels from Catches take the form of "Oh, crap, he's got iron/garlic/silver.  He could actually hurt me with that."

Banes are the next level of that.  A Bane doesn't just equalize a conflict, it tips the conflict in favor of the wielder of the Bane.  Think of a mortal with a sword fighting a Black Court Vampire.  At that level, all else being equal, figure the mortal is probably in trouble.  Suppose the fight (taking place in a mall) ends up near a pizzaria and the mortal smears his sword with garlic.  Suddenly things become a little more equal because while the vamp can hurt the mortal, the mortal now has a much better chance of hurting the vamp as well.  Now suppose that a certain wizard's spells has a little too much umph to it and it burns the roof off the building letting sunlight blaze into every corner of the place.  Now, not only is the vamp fighting a mortal who can hurt him (because Banes are also Catches and negate the effects of toughness powers), he's having to do while on fire and burning to ash.

[Sanctaphrax]

It's not a stupid idea, but it would be very difficult to implement correctly.

Because DFRPG basically doesn't do negative abilities. Every rebate-granting Power works by modifying another Power to make it less good.

So you're proposing the addition of something really new to the game. And it's something that, in other games, has often been done badly.

I'm not optimistic about your chances of getting Banes to work well.

[johntfs]

While they're new to the game, Banes aren't new to the world.  We see Harry employing Banes against various beings quite often.  If Harry can burn a Black Court vampire's face off with a balloon full of holy water, the players in the game should reasonably be able to do the same thing.

That said, what do you think of the Bane system I proposed.  I tried to build it in such a way that it could be applied to player-level characters but wouldn't overbalance them.  I don't want to create something like:

Player 1: I'm playing a Clued-in Mortal Cop
Player 2: I'm playing Summer Changeling
Player 3: I'm playing a novice wizard
Player 4: I'm playing a Master Black Court vampire with Kemmlerian necromancy, but don't worry, I've got a lot of Banes.

[Sanctaphrax]

Honestly, I don't like your rules.

Partly because I'm not sure I understand them. Partly because their damaging effect is mixed in with a Power-disabling effect. Partly because the process through which they inflict damage seems oddly convoluted. And partly because their costing method seems complicated and sloppy to me.

I'd go with something like:

BANE [+varies]
Description: There exists something that hurts you. Maybe you're a vampire that can't stand the sun or something.
Musts: If you have a Toughness Power, you must have a Catch or Limitation that prevents that Power from working against the effects of this Power.
Skills Affected: Endurance.
Effects:
Bane. Pick a thing. Then pick a number X. You get a Refresh rebate according to a formula that takes into account X and how often you will face that thing.
Increased Damage. Any physical attack that makes use of your bane adds X to its weapon rating. An attack which uses it especially strongly add 2X to its weapon rating instead, while an attack which uses it especially weakly adds X/2 to its weapon rating instead.
Hostile Environment. When you are exposed to an environment which contains a small amount of your bane, you face an accuracy X weapon 0 physical attack against your Endurance each exchange. Environments which contain moderate amounts of your bane and large amounts of your bane inflict accuracy 2X and 3X attacks respectively. Being totally immersed in your bane inflicts an accuracy 4X attack.

[johntfs]

Honestly, I don't like your rules.

Partly because I'm not sure I understand them. Partly because their damaging effect is mixed in with a Power-disabling effect. Partly because the process through which they inflict damage seems oddly convoluted. And partly because their costing method seems complicated and sloppy to me.

Yeah, it was kind of complicated and sloppy.  My idea was to simulate various types of damage and power loss effects.  A Power loss Bane might be running water for wizards and other magic-users.  It doesn't really a wizard to be in running water (aside from the chance of catching a cold) but it prevents them from using their magic.  A damaging Bane might be sunlight or holy water for vampires.  Meanwhile Krytonite would be a Bane inflicting both damage and power loss.

I'd go with something like:[/quote]

BANE [+varies]
Description: There exists something that hurts you. Maybe you're a vampire that can't stand the sun or something.
Musts: If you have a Toughness Power, you must have a Catch or Limitation that prevents that Power from working against the effects of this Power.
Skills Affected: Endurance.
Effects:
Bane. Pick a thing. Then pick a number X. You get a Refresh rebate according to a formula that takes into account X and how often you will face that thing.
Increased Damage. Any physical attack that makes use of your bane adds X to its weapon rating. An attack which uses it especially strongly add 2X to its weapon rating instead, while an attack which uses it especially weakly adds X/2 to its weapon rating instead.
Hostile Environment. When you are exposed to an environment which contains a small amount of your bane, you face an accuracy X weapon 0 physical attack against your Endurance each exchange. Environments which contain moderate amounts of your bane and large amounts of your bane inflict accuracy 2X and 3X attacks respectively. Being totally immersed in your bane inflicts an accuracy 4X attack.
[/quote]

Under Musts, I'd note that a Catch is essentially a Bane where X is 0.  By definition all Catches are Banes.  I'd also note that the modifiers for ease of acquisition and secrecy that are applied to Catches should also be available for Banes.

Finally, just as a general thing, I'd point out that Banes are one of the few, if any, Refresh cost break modifiers that should be available to Pure Mortals.  A Bane could be used to simulate a person who has allergies to certain foods or insect venom.  Or a Bane could represent a person with some other health issue that places them at greater risk.  A person running into a burning, smoke-filled building to save a child is at risk.  If that person has emphysema, cystic fibrosous or other lung disease, that risk is far greater.

[Tedronai]

I'd also note that the modifiers for ease of acquisition and secrecy that are applied to Catches should also be available for Banes.

Such concerns are inherent factors to the question of 'how often will you face that thing?' upon which the discount for this proposed Bane would be based.

[Sanctaphrax]

Such concerns are inherent factors to the question of 'how often will you face that thing?' upon which the discount for this proposed Bane would be based.

Precisely.

Under Musts, I'd note that a Catch is essentially a Bane where X is 0.

No it isn't. The mechanical effect is completely different.

Narratively Banes and Catches will often be the same, but mechanically they differ greatly.

Yeah, it was kind of complicated and sloppy.  My idea was to simulate various types of damage and power loss effects.  A Power loss Bane might be running water for wizards and other magic-users.  It doesn't really a wizard to be in running water (aside from the chance of catching a cold) but it prevents them from using their magic.

Have you seen the Limitation custom Power?

Finally, just as a general thing, I'd point out that Banes are one of the few, if any, Refresh cost break modifiers that should be available to Pure Mortals.  A Bane could be used to simulate a person who has allergies to certain foods or insect venom.  Or a Bane could represent a person with some other health issue that places them at greater risk.  A person running into a burning, smoke-filled building to save a child is at risk.  If that person has emphysema, cystic fibrosous or other lung disease, that risk is far greater.

Eh, maybe. I'd rather use Aspects for mortal weaknesses. People with nut allergies generally don't face peanut bullets or enemies who fill their fortresses with cashew dust. So the need for a Power is less.

Bane. Pick a thing. Then pick a number X. You get a Refresh rebate according to a formula that takes into account X and how often you will face that thing.

Does anyone have any suggestions on what that formula should look like?

PS: I still like the "all rebates are from Power-modifiers" paradigm, so I probably won't use Bane when I play. Still going to try and get it right, though.

[Tedronai]

I have no idea whether or not it is balanced, but as far as providing a starting point, I would suggest importing the frequency chart from Limitation and applying the accompanying fractions to X to determine the rebate.
Modify for balance from there.

[Sanctaphrax]

If we just use X(Limitation Multiplier) for the rebate, then a BCV or a faerie can get 1 Refresh for X = 2. A demon or a werewolf can get 1 Refresh for X = 4. And a White Court Vampire or a Kryptonian can get 1 Refresh for X = 6.

That actually sounds appropriate-ish to me. Might get silly if X gets really big, though. Perhaps the rebate should be limited to +2.