Re: [FateRPG] Items as Aspects and Not
- On 2/3/2003, in <mid:20030203214847.GK17565@...> Iago was seen
> On Mon, 03 Feb 2003, GameKnight wrote:Agreed. Here's what might have happened if the GM declines
>> Aspect: Enchanted Staff  
>> The GM describes the keep that the PCs have entered, and
>> they that are suddenly surrounded by armed guards asking
>> them to turn over all their weapons if they want to see
>> the King. All the PCs begin taking off and dropping the
>> plethora of deathware they are carrying, but the wizard
>> tells the GM he wants to keep his staff handy. The GM
>> shakes his head and says that they want him to drop it as
>> well. The player forks over two FPs and says, "You
>> wouldn't deprive an old man of his walking stick, would
>> you?" The GM smiles and tells the player they let him keep
>> his staff.
> Good example -- and a Great move by the player to convince
> the GM to let him pay off the involuntary invocation; the
> GM isn't required to accept, is my only point, but it's a
> fluid and negotiable thing in the best of cases.
The player forks over two FPs and says, "You wouldn't deprive an old
man of his walking stick, would you?" The GM smiles and says, "Nice
try wizard, but we are under strict orders. No swords, no knives, and
no sticks..." Then the GM gives the PC 2 FPs for losing the staff.
Odds are it won't be long before the wizard is soon re-equipped with
GameKnight GameKnight -at- attbi -dot- com
"There's a certain inefficiency in constantly questioning me on things
you've already made up your mind about." -Spock, stardate 1514.0.
- gameknight@... wrote:
> Aspect: Enchanted Staff  This fits in with the diea of using FP to provide minor coincidences.
> The GM describes the keep that the PCs have entered, and they that are
> suddenly surrounded by armed guards asking them to turn over all their
> weapons if they want to see the King. All the PCs begin taking off and
> dropping the plethora of deathware they are carrying, but the wizard
> tells the GM he wants to keep his staff handy. The GM shakes his head
> and says that they want him to drop it as well. The player forks over
> two FPs and says, "You wouldn't deprive an old man of his walking
> stick, would you?" The GM smiles and tells the player they let him
> keep his staff.
Personally I wouldn't distinguish between Aspects and other items here -
if I thought the player came up with a good rationale, I'd allow him to
spend 2-3 FP to keep any item. But there'd be situations where it
wouldn't be allowed.
However, the person who has spent an Aspect on his item will recover his
item much more easily, in one of those barely probable coincidences that
happen in adventure fiction. As in the example in FATE itself, where the
next guard the PCs meet after the players escape from prison happens to
be carrying the players Aspect sword.
- Just for fun (I'm doing this from memory, so if I left something out,
feel free to chime in :)
Aspect: Stormbringer  
Moans, Sucks Souls, Bestows Strength, Aura of Fear, Treacherous
Skills taken by Elric:
Wield Demonsword +2
' ' ' ' ' ' ''"""""""""""'' ' ' ' ' '
Seeya, I believe in a God that doesn't need heavy financing.
Jim ~ Fletch
- FateRPG@yahoogroups.com writes:
>This works out great on paper, but there is an underlying assumption...
>(and it comes up in the text) that an item bought with skills is a
>lesser item than one bought with an aspect and I'm now finding myself
>wondering if that bias is fair. Skill points are a signifigant
I've been thinking about this post by Rob for a while - sorry for the delay.
I guess Items-as-Skills don't have to necessarily be less powerful than Items-as-Aspects - they are just less dramatically important to the character. That is, if the character weilds Excalibur as a Item-as-Skill, then he doesn't get Fudge points
for losing access to it, no coincidences will get it back into his hands, etc.
You could also go the same route with relationships (Contact, Ally, Minion). A Minion could be a powerful, Gandalf or Elminster-like patron. However, from a dramatic perspective he just doesn't matter as much to the PC as a Contact or Ally would.
I'm a little iffy on "penalizing" a character too much for taking the Items-as-Skills approach. If a player is spending a Skill on something, that still is an investment on the Player's part. It signals how valuable this player thinks a certain
part of his character concept is. At the very least, I wouldn't take an Item-as-Skill away without due compensation (giving back the Skill point investment, changing it to something else, etc.).
Thinking of it this way, there are three tiers of "idea investment" in Fate. From least to most important, these would be investing in something as just a skill, investing in something as an Aspect, and investing in something as an Ally and Skill.
Contacts are powerful, but Allies should mean much more to a character.
Anyway I thought I'd share.
- FateRPG@yahoogroups.com writes:
> and investing in something as an Ally and Skill.grrr ... That should read "investing in something as an Aspect plus Skills"
- This didn't produce any responses (okay, there was one).
Too daunting? Not an interesting exercise? No sourness or
disappointment here, I'm just curious. :)
On Mon, 03 Feb 2003, Iago wrote:
> Okay... homework assignment, for the interested.
> 1) Take your favorite RPG off the shelf that fits the
> following requirements:
> * Has specialized items (like +1 magic swords, or
> * Has a notion of "advantages" and "disadvantages"
> * Isn't Fudge
> What is it?
> 2) Turn to a page of character generation instructions
> or equipment or magic items or what have you in your
> selected RPG that qualifies for the first bullet
> point above.
> Convert those items (or what have you) into Fate
> 3) Turn to a page of character generation instructions
> in your selected RPG that qualifies for the second
> bullet point above.
> Convert the advantages or disadvantages found there
> into Fate terms.
> 4) For the things you've implemented as Aspects, write
> up a short blurb on possible voluntary and
> involuntary invocations of that aspect. For example:
> Vol: A valuable coin or item is sitting in the
> middle of the room. A Greedy character
> would be drawn to it more quickly, and
> could get rerolls to be the first to lay
> hands upon it.
> Invol: A valuable coin or item is offered
> as payment for a dangerous job. The GM
> suggests that the Greedy character can't
> possibly pass up this opportunity, and
> offers the appropriate number of fudge
> 5) Share your results with this list. :)
Fred Hicks <iago AT iago DOT net>