Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Quality Aspects

Expand Messages
  • bachelornewtling
    ... based ... now ... aspects ... will ... Sounds like we would be drifting back a little to older ideas for the aspects, I have Soldier of the Empire 2
    Message 1 of 6 , Jun 7, 2008
      --- In FateRPG@yahoogroups.com, "thelorddiggus" <lorddiggus@...>
      wrote:
      >
      >
      > Got a rough idea for weighting aspects -- varying numeric bonus --
      based
      > on character relevance or power of placement. Aspects as they are
      now
      > would be Fair +2, Average ones would allow a re-roll or +1. Good
      aspects
      > offer +3 and Great ones +4, each with the re-roll option. Compels
      will
      > be correspondingly difficult with quality as well.

      Sounds like we would be drifting back a little to older ideas for
      the aspects, I have "Soldier of the Empire 2" versus your "Last of
      the Rebel lords 1". I get a bigger bonus and probably win.

      > Character Relevance: Thogresh the Landstander is a feral warrior
      of the
      > north. Aspects: Friend of Beasts (+1), Stranger to Civilization
      (+2),
      > Large with Mighty Thews (+3). The warrior's awesome buffness is
      most
      > important to him, so gives a bigger punch when invoked or
      compelled

      When we did a norse PC for a one-off, he had "Built like a bear of
      the North" as an Aspect. I always thought it was the best aspect I'd
      ever seen.

      > Placement power: A savage look from Thogresh as his thick hand
      comes to
      > rest on the haft of his axe gives the town guards pause. Intimidate
      > skill manuevers to place "Promise of Pain" on the guards.
      Thogresh's
      > skill beats the guard's Resolve by 3, so the aspect is Good, +3
      when
      > tagged/compelled.

      I kinda like the sound of this, though it might be a bit powerful.

      Perhaps have excess successes in this case mean the aspect can be
      free-tagged multiple times istead of just once.

      I'll have to organise a session and try these ideas out.

      Bach
    • Nathaniel Lee
      What, exactly, would the difference be between having one Great Aspect, worth +4 to invoke, which required you to drop another Aspect completely and which
      Message 2 of 6 , Jun 7, 2008
        What, exactly, would the difference be between having one Great
        Aspect, worth +4 to invoke, which required you to drop another Aspect
        completely and which costs two Fate points to invoke, and simply
        having Thogresh be both [Mightily Thewed] and fond of remarking ["Ha!
        These puny half-men of the lowlands!"] when he spots what he considers
        weakness?

        At that point, you have two separate Aspects, with more variety of
        compels, which can still allow you a +4 on a single
        strength/intimidation related roll.

        I think my real question is "Why reinvent the wheel?"
      • thelorddiggus
        ... Nah. There s no invoke/tag limit, just a stronger invoke/tag. ... You forgot to say, Until NOW! :D ... Let me know what comes of it. ... Not reinventing,
        Message 3 of 6 , Jun 8, 2008

          "bachelornewtling" <gungungungungun@...> wrote:

          > Sounds like we would be drifting back a little to older ideas for
          > the aspects, I have "Soldier of the Empire 2" versus your "Last of
          > the Rebel lords 1". I get a bigger bonus and probably win.

          Nah. There's no invoke/tag limit, just a stronger invoke/tag. 

          > When we did a norse PC for a one-off, he had "Built like a bear of
          > the North" as an Aspect. I always thought it was the best aspect I'd
          > ever seen. 

          You forgot to say, "Until NOW!" :D 


          > I kinda like the sound of this, though it might be a bit powerful.
          > Perhaps have excess successes in this case mean the aspect can be
          > free-tagged multiple times istead of just once.
          > I'll have to organise a session and try these ideas out.

          Let me know what comes of it.

          "Nathaniel Lee" <thefearedavocado@...> wrote:

          > What, exactly, would the difference be between having one Great
          > Aspect, worth +4 to invoke, which required you to drop another Aspect
          > completely and which costs two Fate points to invoke, and simply
          > having Thogresh be both [Mightily Thewed] and fond of remarking ["Ha!
          > These puny half-men of the lowlands!"] when he spots what he considers
          > weakness?
          >

          > At that point, you have two separate Aspects, with more variety of
          > compels, which can still allow you a +4 on a single
          > strength/intimidation related roll.
          >
          > I think my real question is "Why reinvent the wheel?"
          >

          Not reinventing, adding treds to the wheel. This allows aspects to make more detailed statements

          I'm thinking I'll have the Greats cost 1FP like the others. The loss of another aspect and refresh point are strong enough balancers.

        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.