- ... a radio taking a hit ... the result of a mild ... Well, for the most part I wouldn t different it, I let the player handle that. In Macross, it is rare forMessage 1 of 40 , Aug 2, 2007View Source
> > I see. I was thinking of using the pilots skill rating for stressa radio taking a hit
> > boxes. Then allow the Pilots to take consequences for their mecha just
> > as in normal combat. That way you could have things like comm systems
> > get shot up and put out of action. It will also make mecha operated by
> > main characters last longer than one piloted by minions. Very much
> > like in the series. You could even vary some mecha designs by giving
> > them an extra stress box or two.
> I find this very intriguing. How would you narrate/correspond, say,
> when the pilot takes a consequence? A radio hit or the ilk is justthe result of a mild
> consequence? I'd like to further pursue this angle.Well, for the most part I wouldn't different it, I let the player
handle that. In Macross, it is rare for a mecha to survie the pilot
(there is, I think, only ONE exception, and in SoaTC terms, we can
assume that either ROy was a Contact/Companion that Hikaru's Player
sold off, or that he was a PC who couldn't make the game anymore any
wanted to go out in style). Besides, it's not much fun to loose a PC
to a lucky cockpit hit. I mean, it's not like a character is going to
just take a few stress from a 55mm autocannon or missile.
FOr the most part, I'D just assume that the mecha is taking the damage
in the combat, rather than the pilot. IF we give PC mecha 5+Stress and
use either the Social Stress Track (Resolve) or make a new Mecha
Conflict Stress Track (using Piloting for extra boxes) then whenever
the mecha would run out of stress boxes, it takes a consequece, rather
than the pilot.
You could even work in an option to make a consequnce non-taggable, by
giveing a mecha some sort of permanent (until repaired) damage. For
instance, rather than taking a taggable consequnce like, say, head
lasers damaged, you could make the consequence non-taggable and just
say that the head lasers are destroyed/inoperable. You cold even
extend this to allow for mecha that get damaged in such a way that
they can't change modes.
IF a mecha is destroyed, the pilot is "taken out" too. In most cases a
PC would take a concession on a badly damaged craft to get out alive.
Probably anyone who got thier meech shot out from under them would
suffer a social conseqence (defeated).
If you wanted, you could even give pilots who are in "destroyed" mecha
a chance to eject and survive, with a chance of taking some injury
based on how bad the player blows the test.
This sort of approach opens up a few more ideas for potential stunts,
since it would allow for a lot of the personal combat stunts to be
reworked for mecha piloting. For instance, you could have stunts that
allow a mech to absorb an addtional consequnce, or reduce the stress
of a hit, or can use some of thier Firsts and Guns Stunts with thier
mecha, or earn an extra Fate point when they shoot down a enemy craft.
How does that look/sound?
- You re right that the radio wouldn t absolutely be unusable, but the rules *do* make attaching a Damaged Radio consequence, well, consequential. Looking atMessage 40 of 40 , Aug 24, 2007View SourceYou're right that the radio wouldn't absolutely be unusable, but the rules *do* make attaching a "Damaged Radio" consequence, well, consequential.
Looking at SotC, p45, first paragraph -- the one about how aspects might complicate a situation -- it says: "In come [sic] cases, complications may suggest that certain consequences are mandated, such as failing at a particular action – perhaps the character would succeed at a defense roll against a Deceit action, but his Gullible aspect is compelled, forcing a failure if accepted."
As I read it, if a mech has a damaged radio and the player tries to us it, the GM should compel the "Damaged Radio" aspect. If the player accepts the consequence, they get a fate point for having their options limited while mourning the loss of their radio. As an alternative, the GM could suggest that the character could spend a full action or more to jury-rig a radio, cannibalizing parts of other systems.
However, If the player is willing to pay the fate point to refuse the compel, is that such a bad thing? Maybe the GM requires a supplementary action to hot-fix the radio before it can be used. Maybe the radio wasn't completely destroyed after all; maybe the message is partially garbled on the receiving end. I think any of these options are more interesting that the radio being completely unavailable.
That having been said, if the radio being broken is an important plot point and the GM wants it to stay dead, the GM could employ the Escalation rules. However, I can see this being a slippery slope towards railroading.
Maybe I'm having trouble seeing what you're saying, because to me, having a damaged radio isn't a severe enough consequence to warrant the "wall of no".
P.S. Fred, I found a typo. See above.On 8/24/07, yasmine_bint_salim <yasmine_bint_salim@...> wrote:
--- In FateRPG@yahoogroups.com, "Chuck Durfee" <neontapir@...> wrote:
> That seems cumbersome. Would ruling that "consequences for a mech
> broken radio or gun) can't be removed without a Repair roll" keep
> you're looking for without introducing an extra class of
> imagine that a minor consequence could be repaired on-the-fly, a medium
> consequence jury-rigged in the field between encounters, and a
> might need a repair bay.
> -- Chuck
The major thing is that this would make the radio unsuable. With the
wayt SotC normally works consequences, there is no loss of ability,
just an aspect that can be tagged for effect. With this you could
loose certain abilities from a vehicle, such as being able to fire the
guns, or sensors.
The idea of making the consequence non-taggable was to compensate for
the more severe loss of an ability.
I waqs assuming that any vehicle consequence would remain until
repaired, anyway. Vehicle usually can't heal themselves.