Dresden Files RPG, Nugar style
- Thread starter Nugar
- Start date
So I figured it might be good to get some discussion going about last nights game. What worked, what didn't.
Obviously the big sticking point is combat. While a lot of the delay was understanding the rules, with 10 people in the game, combat has a real chance of getting bogged down. I think that in addition to knowing what you want to do, you should go ahead and figure out what all the numbers involved are. So that a turn can consist of "I do this. !fate, I have these modifies, here's my score." All very quick. For mages, figuring out all the shifts ahead of time would save a lot of time.
Secondly, on the combat itself. Combat is designed around recurring antagonists. Not only is defeat somewhat nebulous, but the very nature of consequences being distinguished only by time. If the antagonists are non-recurring, the severe and major consequences are essentially free hit points. One way to house rule this might be something along the lines of "an NPC cannot take consequences that would last longer than he appears. Though maybe give them an extra minor consequence in return.
However this leaves mooks somewhat weak in comparison to players. And with 10 players,a combat challenge could mean a lot of opponents. Which might be the other problem. 20 people is going to really bog things down. A few big antagonists seems better, but I'm not sure how well Fate handle's lopsided numbers. (the defense/offense roles would favor one skillsful person over several nonskillful, however the limited HP and bumping tracks makes the death of 1000 paper cuts a real threat)
I think splitting the groups up for non-major scenes would probably be a fairly good idea. Groups of five or so sounds a lot more manageable.
Obviously the big sticking point is combat. While a lot of the delay was understanding the rules, with 10 people in the game, combat has a real chance of getting bogged down. I think that in addition to knowing what you want to do, you should go ahead and figure out what all the numbers involved are. So that a turn can consist of "I do this. !fate, I have these modifies, here's my score." All very quick. For mages, figuring out all the shifts ahead of time would save a lot of time.
Secondly, on the combat itself. Combat is designed around recurring antagonists. Not only is defeat somewhat nebulous, but the very nature of consequences being distinguished only by time. If the antagonists are non-recurring, the severe and major consequences are essentially free hit points. One way to house rule this might be something along the lines of "an NPC cannot take consequences that would last longer than he appears. Though maybe give them an extra minor consequence in return.
However this leaves mooks somewhat weak in comparison to players. And with 10 players,a combat challenge could mean a lot of opponents. Which might be the other problem. 20 people is going to really bog things down. A few big antagonists seems better, but I'm not sure how well Fate handle's lopsided numbers. (the defense/offense roles would favor one skillsful person over several nonskillful, however the limited HP and bumping tracks makes the death of 1000 paper cuts a real threat)
I think splitting the groups up for non-major scenes would probably be a fairly good idea. Groups of five or so sounds a lot more manageable.
Also uhm, intent. Like I didn't want to use my magic on the dog directly, but Nugar assumed I did and so I had to/did instead of doing what I wanted.
Not a big deal this time, but in game when I need to save those fate points...
Admittedly this can work both ways, as an example I was involved in a PvP shakedown combat in my real life scion game. Basically a King of the Hill scenario. I was coming in from the east, someone else was coming from the west. He went up the West slope, mine was a more careful ascent up a NE ridge.
The other player told the GM in secret that he was going to stop just short of the top of the hill and set up an ambush.
The GM facilitated that: So for instead of stopping on top of the hill--which we were told was wooded, I went to the other side and into an ambush.
I would say more but I need to walk the dog right now.
Not a big deal this time, but in game when I need to save those fate points...
Admittedly this can work both ways, as an example I was involved in a PvP shakedown combat in my real life scion game. Basically a King of the Hill scenario. I was coming in from the east, someone else was coming from the west. He went up the West slope, mine was a more careful ascent up a NE ridge.
The other player told the GM in secret that he was going to stop just short of the top of the hill and set up an ambush.
The GM facilitated that: So for instead of stopping on top of the hill--which we were told was wooded, I went to the other side and into an ambush.
I would say more but I need to walk the dog right now.
One thing I noticed that several people were trying to do things that were, in essence, multiple actions in one turn.
Putting an Aspect on something is a Manuever. That is one action. Aiming to put 'In My Crosshairs/Sights' on something is an action. That takes one turn.
Actually using that Aspect to improve an Attack is a second action. That takes place on your next turn.
Also, I believe we were using the word 'tagging' incorrectly. Tagging refers to that one freebie use of an aspect you get if you discover or cause the aspect. After that, it's invoking the aspect and costs fate points.
In term of inflicting aspects on something, that is a conflict, so there is a roll off; your skill versus what Nugar decides your target defends with. If the result is a win for the defender, the aspect does not take. If it's a tie, the aspect is temporary; it disappears after it has been tagged once. If the attacker wins, the aspect stays until something is done to get rid of it.
Putting an Aspect on something is a Manuever. That is one action. Aiming to put 'In My Crosshairs/Sights' on something is an action. That takes one turn.
Actually using that Aspect to improve an Attack is a second action. That takes place on your next turn.
Also, I believe we were using the word 'tagging' incorrectly. Tagging refers to that one freebie use of an aspect you get if you discover or cause the aspect. After that, it's invoking the aspect and costs fate points.
In term of inflicting aspects on something, that is a conflict, so there is a roll off; your skill versus what Nugar decides your target defends with. If the result is a win for the defender, the aspect does not take. If it's a tie, the aspect is temporary; it disappears after it has been tagged once. If the attacker wins, the aspect stays until something is done to get rid of it.
Both of these were linked to an initial problem. Which is we didn't start in combat time. It was originally going to be people do as they want, non-combat time (hence having multiple actions was not a problem). However as it became clear that a lot of people wanted to try stuff, it got more and more confusing.
What I'm seeing in the use of temporary aspects, is that this system heavily supports teamwork and tactical thinking againgst a superior opponent.
Such as...
Most of the characters use maneuvers to apply temp. aspects to soften up the target, then someone 'tags' off all of these aspects for a garaunteed hit and/or massive damage. Maneuvering seems to play a bigger part of conflicts then attacking does.
Also towards the end there, we found out that some of us were using different versions of the books, with some different rules and rule desriptions.
Such as...
Most of the characters use maneuvers to apply temp. aspects to soften up the target, then someone 'tags' off all of these aspects for a garaunteed hit and/or massive damage. Maneuvering seems to play a bigger part of conflicts then attacking does.
Also towards the end there, we found out that some of us were using different versions of the books, with some different rules and rule desriptions.
Right. The problem is maneuvers also require a roll.
So some back napkin theory crafting here.
-4/4 both have a 1 in 81 chance
-3/3 both have a 4 in 81
-2/2 10 in 81
and -1/1 16 in 81
Which leaves 0 with a 19 in 81
Which means (assuming 10 combatants) about 2 of us are going to get a +2 or higher a round, and another 2 are going to get +1. (it's actually slightly lower, but if you assume people automatically reroll -4 and -3, it's very close)
So a big bad with a superb dodge roll. Assuming that we all have a 4 in our respective "tagging" ability (not necessarily). We can tag it four times... yeah +8 to one person would defiantly do it.
Now let's assume we split that bonus up between two people (to account for weapon bonuses, etc). Assuming both roll a +0, and add four damage for assumed average weapons damage/aspect fate bonuses and we get....
7 damage per per, or 14 total. And the other eight can still work on maneuvers.
Then again, let's assume this bastard has supernatural toughness, and reduce that to two 5 damage attacks a round. The bastard has eight boxes of physical stress, plus 12 soakable via consequences. Which means it would take about 6 attacks, or three rounds to kill him.
On the other hand, if the toughness was mythic , we'd be having two 4 damage attacks, and he'd have 10 boxes. So we'd be looking at 10 attacks, or 5 rounds.
Not bad, considering it's extremely unlikely that they'd be able to take one of us out in a round. Course this assumes a 4 skill in whatever skill, it we assume only about half of us have the 4, and the rest have a 3, the number of successful tags drops to 3.
Though all of this assumes optimal use of combat, which isn't going to happen. (for example, for optimal results Mark should have transfered his tag to Vlad, who was the best sniper. But he didn't because he doesn't like/trust Vlad.)
Theorycrafting, wizards are probably the best choice early in the fight, magic can do a lot of damage (though I'm not sure about this, how much can our wizards shift. Later in the fight, our heavy mortal hitters are probably optimal. Both because they don't have stress for their attacks, and because they're going to be more flush on fate points, which means they can take advantage of the consequences the monster's have racked up.
So some back napkin theory crafting here.
-4/4 both have a 1 in 81 chance
-3/3 both have a 4 in 81
-2/2 10 in 81
and -1/1 16 in 81
Which leaves 0 with a 19 in 81
Which means (assuming 10 combatants) about 2 of us are going to get a +2 or higher a round, and another 2 are going to get +1. (it's actually slightly lower, but if you assume people automatically reroll -4 and -3, it's very close)
So a big bad with a superb dodge roll. Assuming that we all have a 4 in our respective "tagging" ability (not necessarily). We can tag it four times... yeah +8 to one person would defiantly do it.
Now let's assume we split that bonus up between two people (to account for weapon bonuses, etc). Assuming both roll a +0, and add four damage for assumed average weapons damage/aspect fate bonuses and we get....
7 damage per per, or 14 total. And the other eight can still work on maneuvers.
Then again, let's assume this bastard has supernatural toughness, and reduce that to two 5 damage attacks a round. The bastard has eight boxes of physical stress, plus 12 soakable via consequences. Which means it would take about 6 attacks, or three rounds to kill him.
On the other hand, if the toughness was mythic , we'd be having two 4 damage attacks, and he'd have 10 boxes. So we'd be looking at 10 attacks, or 5 rounds.
Not bad, considering it's extremely unlikely that they'd be able to take one of us out in a round. Course this assumes a 4 skill in whatever skill, it we assume only about half of us have the 4, and the rest have a 3, the number of successful tags drops to 3.
Though all of this assumes optimal use of combat, which isn't going to happen. (for example, for optimal results Mark should have transfered his tag to Vlad, who was the best sniper. But he didn't because he doesn't like/trust Vlad.)
Theorycrafting, wizards are probably the best choice early in the fight, magic can do a lot of damage (though I'm not sure about this, how much can our wizards shift. Later in the fight, our heavy mortal hitters are probably optimal. Both because they don't have stress for their attacks, and because they're going to be more flush on fate points, which means they can take advantage of the consequences the monster's have racked up.
You need to remember that not only combat skills can add temp. aspects, and even then some of them might not be defendable via the usual skills, you could:
- Intimidate or Deceive a target into being afraid, confused or something similar.
- Lore, Investigate or Scholarship up on the subject to reveal a weakness ("Go for the eyes, Boo!").
- Pin down a target with suppression fire, or grapple the target.
Or a variety of other combinations, in this system, with its' lack of set modifiers, favours imaginative applications of skills and aspects.
- Intimidate or Deceive a target into being afraid, confused or something similar.
- Lore, Investigate or Scholarship up on the subject to reveal a weakness ("Go for the eyes, Boo!").
- Pin down a target with suppression fire, or grapple the target.
Or a variety of other combinations, in this system, with its' lack of set modifiers, favours imaginative applications of skills and aspects.
You've got a 3 hit mental stress track. Assuming one big spell.
+3 from the stress.
+1 from your "fair" conviction
+1 from your focus
That's a +5 weapon right there, that's not bad. Sure it's a one hit wonder, but the only person who can do better is Heathen, and that's using his one shot "explosive ammunition" stunt.
+3 from the stress.
+1 from your "fair" conviction
+1 from your focus
That's a +5 weapon right there, that's not bad. Sure it's a one hit wonder, but the only person who can do better is Heathen, and that's using his one shot "explosive ammunition" stunt.
Alrighty, everybody. Since we've finished our first official play session, we might as well post some feedback to it here. I know we had a long chat about it after the game was over, but, well, I didn't keep the chat log.
I enjoyed the game a great deal. Despite what others say, I really enjoy playing for roleplaying, not just for Rolling Dice. I always sucked at rolling anyway. And this seems like the perfect setting for a shitton of RP'ing.
I didn't feel like I got a lot to do, but that's on me. I was trying not to cut anyone else off when I got information from the other group, and so that info never really got out in a timely manner. That, and I just couldn't think of anything to do with my stats. Well, unitl the very end, where I got some decent ideas involving my Resources and Contacts skills.
If I could go back, I probably would have sent Derek with the other group when we split up. There was a lot of magical investigation in my group, while apparently there was very little (or none) in the other group.
What'd you all think of the session?
I enjoyed the game a great deal. Despite what others say, I really enjoy playing for roleplaying, not just for Rolling Dice. I always sucked at rolling anyway. And this seems like the perfect setting for a shitton of RP'ing.
I didn't feel like I got a lot to do, but that's on me. I was trying not to cut anyone else off when I got information from the other group, and so that info never really got out in a timely manner. That, and I just couldn't think of anything to do with my stats. Well, unitl the very end, where I got some decent ideas involving my Resources and Contacts skills.
If I could go back, I probably would have sent Derek with the other group when we split up. There was a lot of magical investigation in my group, while apparently there was very little (or none) in the other group.
What'd you all think of the session?
