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

Re: [FateRPG] Stunts with more Oomf

Expand Messages
  • Jeff Johnston
    I m really hoping they wind up closer to the high-end stunts from SotC (like Master of Disguise) or the stuff Rob posted here:
    Message 1 of 23 , Mar 6, 2013
      I'm really hoping they wind up closer to the high-end stunts from SotC (like Master of Disguise) or the stuff Rob posted here: http://rdonoghue.blogspot.com/2013/02/my-kind-of-stunts.html. There's other ways to get a bonus to your roll, but stunts like that let you do things that Skills and Aspects don't.

      On Mar 6, 2013, at 1:34 AM, Hollis McCray <ascensionschild@...> wrote:



      On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 9:59 PM, loconius2 <loconius@...> wrote:
       

      It was mentioned that stunts will have more weight and oomf to them in the fate core book. can you give some examples of what these will be? directing me to one of the other play test docs is fine; i suspect that the Storm magic in the magic suppliment is kind of what stunts were going to amount to


      I think that's going to be part of the revised draft that's due later this week. However, it's also been stated that stunts are really best 'balanced' against the game you're playing. A game where you're playing godlings runs on a different dynamic than low fantasy.
      --
      Hollis McCray
      aka The Fifth Wanderer

      ascensionschild@...

      "GMing is like herding cats. Wet, angry cats who are pumped full of LSD and methamphetamines." - Stolen from some forum sig somewhere
    • Jonathan Lang
      On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 4:18 AM, Jeff Johnston wrote: I m really hoping they wind up closer to the high-end stunts from SotC (like Master
      Message 2 of 23 , Mar 6, 2013


        On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 4:18 AM, Jeff Johnston <drnuncheon@...> wrote:
         

        I'm really hoping they wind up closer to the high-end stunts from SotC (like Master of Disguise) or the stuff Rob posted here: http://rdonoghue.blogspot.com/2013/02/my-kind-of-stunts.html. There's other ways to get a bonus to your roll, but stunts like that let you do things that Skills and Aspects don't.

        IMHO, a big part of the issue here is that people generally think of Stunts in terms of what they aren't (i.e., if they're not an Aspect and they're not a Skill, then they're a Stunt) rather than what they are.  As written in the current draft, what Stunts are is fairly specific: they're a tool to enhance your Skills.  (Note that "enhance" isn't synonymous with "grants a bonus to", although that is one of the options; don't overlook "adding a new Action to a Skill" and "Creating a Rules Exception".)  IMHO, this is a mixed bag: it gives a clearer definition for Stunts, but it limits what you can do with them.  

        Taking a look at Rob's article, it isn't that his sample stunts don't hook into any mechanics in particular; I see some very clear mechanical hooks in every Stunt that he lists.  The trend that I'm noticing in said Stunts is that they're more closely associated with Aspects than with Skills: in particular, all of the Stunts build off of something that the Tempo RPG (which I'm utterly unfamiliar with) calls "Affinities", which strike me as being analogous to Aspects.  

        I would like to see Aspect-based Stunts in Fate Core; and for the most part, Rob's article does a good job of illustrating how they might work.  I wouldn't want to do this instead of Fate Core's approach of Skill-based Stunts, mind you; there's a time and place for both, IMHO. 

        Likewise, another trend that I noticed in Rob's article is that his Stunts take the form of "Creating a Rules Exception": every one of them can be thought of as "use your Aspect in a way that isn't covered by the usual rules for Aspects".  Which I have no problem with: I love the options that this makes available.  What I would have a problem with, though, would be changing Fate Core to say that all Stunts must work this way.  Instead of redefining Fate Core's Stunts so that they're all "Create a Rules Exception for Aspects", I'd rather expand the scope of the definition to include Aspect-based Stunts as well as Skill-based Stunts; and if a particular GM finds that he prefers Aspect-based Stunts over Skill-based Stunts or Create Rules Exception Stunts over Add a Bonus Stunts, then he can choose to focus on that kind of Stunts in his games.  That's the advantage of the do-it-yourself nature of Stunts: you get to decide what you're going to do with them — and conversely, what you're not going to do with them.  

        Note also that this is largely unrelated to the question of how much oomph a Stunt has: you can add oomph to Stunts within their existing definition, by broadening the scope of sample "Add a Bonus" and "Add an Action" Stunts and by defining flashier sample "Create Rules Exception" Stunts.  From a comment that Lenny made, I suspect that this is what's going to happen; we'll know for sure once the next draft is out.  

        We'll also see whether the beefed-up Stunts are now worth a point of Refresh.  I'll be OK if they aren't; but then, I tend to think that Refresh as a cost works best when restricted to Extras, with regular Stunts being "paid for" with Stunt slots and maybe Skill levels.  I certainly think that it makes more sense to be able to pick up a new Stunt at a Significant Milestone instead of having to wait for a Major Milestone: even the Stunts that Rob describes don't strike me as the sort of thing where you should have to wait for a potentially life-changing event to get them.

        In summary, I agree with the sentiment of wanting to do things with Stunts outside their current definition; but not to the exclusion of the current definition.  Were it me, I'd broaden the definition of Stunts to include other options, but I'd keep the existing options alongside them.  

        --
        Jonathan "Dataweaver" Lang
      • Leonard Balsera
        ... This is a pretty fair summary of what I *think* the final spread will look like - my editor and I have finished kibbutzing over the revisions, so I ll be
        Message 3 of 23 , Mar 6, 2013
          On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 4:13 PM, Jonathan Lang <dataweaver@...> wrote:
          From a comment that Lenny made, I suspect that this is what's going to happen; we'll know for sure once the next draft is out.  

          This is a pretty fair summary of what I *think* the final spread will look like - my editor and I have finished kibbutzing over the revisions, so I'll be able to look at them as a whole soon and see how the view from 500 feet up looks.
           
          We'll also see whether the beefed-up Stunts are now worth a point of Refresh. 

          I suspect opinions will vary as sharply as they did the first time around. Nature of the beast.

          But, we've got some riffing on stunts coming in Toolkit that Core's pagecount just couldn't support, so hopefully that's helpful. 

          --
          Leonard Balsera, Fate System Developer for Evil Hat Productions
          lbalsera@...
          www.evilhat.com
          https://www.facebook.com/EvilHatProductions
        • Bill Johnson
          Ok, I know if you concede it is negotiated by everyone at the table and if you are taken out the one taking you out decrees your fate. What if it was you who
          Message 4 of 23 , Mar 6, 2013
            Ok, I know if you concede it is negotiated by everyone at the table and if you are taken out the one taking you out decrees your fate. What if it was you who takes yourself out? In other words, a suicide?

            I have a villain who my pc's are about to attack. I don't want this person to become a prisoner and it is time they were removed from the board. So, if she puts a gun to her head and pulls the trigger, doing enough damage to kill herself, can I declare her as taken out and she is dead, or is this a concession and I am stuck with players who get her as they will refuse to let her die?
          • Bryce Perry
            That sounds more like a story than a conflict. When you arrive in the villain s lair you find her slumped over her desk, a gunshot wound in her skull and a
            Message 5 of 23 , Mar 6, 2013
              That sounds more like a story than a conflict. "When you arrive in the villain's lair you find her slumped over her desk, a gunshot wound in her skull and a still smoking gun in her hand."

              On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 7:25 PM, Bill Johnson <keryth@...> wrote:
               

              Ok, I know if you concede it is negotiated by everyone at the table and if you are taken out the one taking you out decrees your fate. What if it was you who takes yourself out? In other words, a suicide?

              I have a villain who my pc's are about to attack. I don't want this person to become a prisoner and it is time they were removed from the board. So, if she puts a gun to her head and pulls the trigger, doing enough damage to kill herself, can I declare her as taken out and she is dead, or is this a concession and I am stuck with players who get her as they will refuse to let her die?


            • Jonathan Lang
              I m pretty sure those guidelines apply to what happens when player characters ge taken out, the idea being that your fate is in the hands of your allies —
              Message 6 of 23 , Mar 6, 2013
                I'm pretty sure those guidelines apply to what happens when player characters ge taken out, the idea being that your fate is in the hands of your allies — whereas when you're Taken Out, your fate is in the hands of your enemies.  This, I think, is the core premise.  I've been in games that feature PvP (player versus player): in such conflicts, when someone Concedes or is Taken Out, there's always a negotiatng process: but when you Concede, the players on the opposing team are excluded from the negotiations; and when you're Taken Out, your own team is excluded from the negotiations (the GM, being the GM, is never excluded, and always has the final say if negotiations break down).  

                I think a similar premise would work here: when an NPC Concedes, his fate is left in the hands of the GM and any PC allies he might have (in this case, just the GM); when he's Taken Out, his fate is left in the hands of the GM and his PC opponents (i.e., everyone).  That said, do this only if you want him to put up a fight before Conceding, and if you're willing to take the risk (however small) of him being Taken Out before he gets a chance to Concede (which might happen if the players know he's potentially suicidal).  Otherwise, jus have the suicide take place before combat can begin, possibly even just before the players arrive on the scene.  

                On Mar 6, 2013, at 5:25 PM, Bill Johnson <keryth@...> wrote:

                 

                Ok, I know if you concede it is negotiated by everyone at the table and if you are taken out the one taking you out decrees your fate. What if it was you who takes yourself out? In other words, a suicide?

                I have a villain who my pc's are about to attack. I don't want this person to become a prisoner and it is time they were removed from the board. So, if she puts a gun to her head and pulls the trigger, doing enough damage to kill herself, can I declare her as taken out and she is dead, or is this a concession and I am stuck with players who get her as they will refuse to let her die?

              • Jonathan Lang
                ... And some riffing on Skills; and it won t surprise me if you do some riffing on Aspects, too. In effect, a big book of officially endorsed house rules.
                Message 7 of 23 , Mar 6, 2013
                  Leonard Balsera wrote:
                   

                  But, we've got some riffing on stunts coming in Toolkit that Core's pagecount just couldn't support, so hopefully that's helpful. 

                  And some riffing on Skills; and it won't surprise me if you do some riffing on Aspects, too.  In effect, a big book of officially endorsed house rules.  Have I mentioned how much I'm looking forward to the Toolkit?  
                • PK Levine
                  ... It s a concession, and in this case the deal the NPC is making with the GM is that she s fine being defeated, but doesn t want to be captured alive. So
                  Message 8 of 23 , Mar 6, 2013
                    On Wednesday, March 06, 2013 08:25:08 pm Bill Johnson wrote:
                    > Ok, I know if you concede it is negotiated by everyone at the table and if
                    > you are taken out the one taking you out decrees your fate. What if it was
                    > you who takes yourself out? In other words, a suicide?
                    >
                    > I have a villain who my pc's are about to attack. I don't want this person
                    > to become a prisoner and it is time they were removed from the board. So,
                    > if she puts a gun to her head and pulls the trigger, doing enough damage
                    > to kill herself, can I declare her as taken out and she is dead, or is
                    > this a concession and I am stuck with players who get her as they will
                    > refuse to let her die?

                    It's a concession, and in this case the "deal" the NPC is "making with the GM"
                    is that she's fine being defeated, but doesn't want to be captured alive. So
                    this is her way of conceding the conflict on her terms.

                    PK
                  • Jonathan Wells
                    ... I was once in a gaming table argument about how hard it is to stop someone from committing suicide. But we got the most memorable quote from the campaign
                    Message 9 of 23 , Mar 6, 2013

                      On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 7:26 PM, Bryce Perry <sandchigger@...> wrote:

                      That sounds more like a story than a conflict. "When you arrive in the villain's lair you find her slumped over her desk, a gunshot wound in her skull and a still smoking gun in her hand."


                      I was once in a gaming table argument about how hard it is to stop someone from committing suicide. But we got the most memorable quote from the campaign out of it: "They don't expect me to stab myself in the head!" 


                      --
                      Jonathan Wells
                      wells.jonathan@...
                    • Jonathan Lang
                      ... I once won a campaign by having my character suicide: I had lured the big bad onto my boobytrapped ship and taunted him; he could have fled the ship and
                      Message 10 of 23 , Mar 6, 2013
                        In "General FATE question - Taking out ones self", PK Levine <pkitty@...> wrote:

                        > On Wednesday, March 06, 2013 08:25:08 pm Bill Johnson wrote:
                        >> Ok, I know if you concede it is negotiated by everyone at the table and if
                        >> you are taken out the one taking you out decrees your fate. What if it was
                        >> you who takes yourself out? In other words, a suicide?
                        >>
                        >> I have a villain who my pc's are about to attack. I don't want this person
                        >> to become a prisoner and it is time they were removed from the board. So,
                        >> if she puts a gun to her head and pulls the trigger, doing enough damage
                        >> to kill herself, can I declare her as taken out and she is dead, or is
                        >> this a concession and I am stuck with players who get her as they will
                        >> refuse to let her die?
                        >
                        > It's a concession, and in this case the "deal" the NPC is "making with the GM"
                        > is that she's fine being defeated, but doesn't want to be captured alive. So
                        > this is her way of conceding the conflict on her terms.

                        I once won a campaign by having my character suicide: I had lured the big bad onto my boobytrapped ship and taunted him; he could have fled the ship and survived its destruction, but instead opted to attack me. I died; but in so doing, I prevented him from escaping. Many lives were saved as a result. In Fate terms, I conceded the fight; but the terms of my concession were that he wouldn't have time to escape the trap before it went off.

                        The moral of the story is that there are times when a character's best course of action will be one that gets him killed. Fate has the flexibility to allow for this instead of having a built-in assumption that all characters will want to live, no matter what. Yes, the common assumption is that a Concession will usually leave you alive while being Taken Out _might_ get you killed; but that's not baked into the rules.
                      • Darren Hill
                        ... I m not sure that s a concession in Fate terms. Imagine how that would play out, Okay, I ve just taken a consequence, I m losing the fight. Let me offer
                        Message 11 of 23 , Mar 8, 2013
                          On 7 March 2013 04:46, Jonathan Lang <dataweaver@...> wrote:
                           
                          I once won a campaign by having my character suicide: I had lured the big bad onto my boobytrapped ship and taunted him; he could have fled the ship and survived its destruction, but instead opted to attack me. I died; but in so doing, I prevented him from escaping. Many lives were saved as a result. In Fate terms, I conceded the fight; but the terms of my concession were that he wouldn't have time to escape the trap before it went off.

                          I'm not sure that's a concession in Fate terms. Imagine how that would play out, "Okay, I've just taken a consequence, I'm losing the fight. Let me offer you a concession."
                          The enemy who is getting close to defeating you says, "Okay, let's hear it."
                          You, "you kill me, but it takes long enough that you can't escape, and so you die with me."
                          The enemy: "Wut? Uh, no, let's continue the fight."
                          And so you continue the fight, but use delaying tactics, and your GM allows you to create a goal with a progress track: keep the villain busy, long enough so that after he kills me, he cant escape.
                          The villain naturally tries to kill you or escape before you can win that goal, but you *succeed*, allowing him to kill you too late to save himself.
                        • GalacticCmdr
                          I agree, that is not a concession. You cannot take victory away from the winner via concession. You can only dictate the terms of your loss. Chip
                          Message 12 of 23 , Mar 8, 2013

                            I agree, that is not a concession. You cannot take victory away from the winner via concession. You can only dictate the terms of your loss.

                            Chip

                            On Mar 8, 2013 4:35 AM, "Darren Hill" <darren0hill@...> wrote:
                             



                            On 7 March 2013 04:46, Jonathan Lang <dataweaver@...> wrote:
                             
                            I once won a campaign by having my character suicide: I had lured the big bad onto my boobytrapped ship and taunted him; he could have fled the ship and survived its destruction, but instead opted to attack me. I died; but in so doing, I prevented him from escaping. Many lives were saved as a result. In Fate terms, I conceded the fight; but the terms of my concession were that he wouldn't have time to escape the trap before it went off.

                            I'm not sure that's a concession in Fate terms. Imagine how that would play out, "Okay, I've just taken a consequence, I'm losing the fight. Let me offer you a concession."
                            The enemy who is getting close to defeating you says, "Okay, let's hear it."
                            You, "you kill me, but it takes long enough that you can't escape, and so you die with me."
                            The enemy: "Wut? Uh, no, let's continue the fight."
                            And so you continue the fight, but use delaying tactics, and your GM allows you to create a goal with a progress track: keep the villain busy, long enough so that after he kills me, he cant escape.
                            The villain naturally tries to kill you or escape before you can win that goal, but you *succeed*, allowing him to kill you too late to save himself.
                          • Chester Mealer
                            It s important to remember the concession is offered to the player/gm not the character. It s perfectly reasonable that the GM decides the NPC is too focused
                            Message 13 of 23 , Mar 8, 2013
                              It's important to remember the concession is offered to the player/gm not the character. It's perfectly reasonable that the GM decides the NPC is too focused on killing your character, especially if you've been particularly upsetting, to think about escaping.

                              It's not like your character is stopping the fight and saying let's talk. The concession is that the NPC wins the fight, the terms of the concession are that it happens 1 second too late to escape. If I were the gm, I'd probably want to adjust things to come up with a way to see if you could last long enough to keep him occupied, but I'd think it is a legitimate concession.

                              Chester Mealer


                              On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 6:21 AM, GalacticCmdr <galacticcmdr@...> wrote:
                               

                              I agree, that is not a concession. You cannot take victory away from the winner via concession. You can only dictate the terms of your loss.

                              Chip

                              On Mar 8, 2013 4:35 AM, "Darren Hill" <darren0hill@...> wrote:
                               



                              On 7 March 2013 04:46, Jonathan Lang <dataweaver@...> wrote:
                               
                              I once won a campaign by having my character suicide: I had lured the big bad onto my boobytrapped ship and taunted him; he could have fled the ship and survived its destruction, but instead opted to attack me. I died; but in so doing, I prevented him from escaping. Many lives were saved as a result. In Fate terms, I conceded the fight; but the terms of my concession were that he wouldn't have time to escape the trap before it went off.

                              I'm not sure that's a concession in Fate terms. Imagine how that would play out, "Okay, I've just taken a consequence, I'm losing the fight. Let me offer you a concession."
                              The enemy who is getting close to defeating you says, "Okay, let's hear it."
                              You, "you kill me, but it takes long enough that you can't escape, and so you die with me."
                              The enemy: "Wut? Uh, no, let's continue the fight."
                              And so you continue the fight, but use delaying tactics, and your GM allows you to create a goal with a progress track: keep the villain busy, long enough so that after he kills me, he cant escape.
                              The villain naturally tries to kill you or escape before you can win that goal, but you *succeed*, allowing him to kill you too late to save himself.


                            • Hollis McCray
                              ... Also, remember that a concession has to make sense in terms of the story as well. If you want your character to go out in a blaze of glory, that s
                              Message 14 of 23 , Mar 8, 2013
                                On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 6:16 AM, Chester Mealer <cdm014@...> wrote:
                                 

                                It's important to remember the concession is offered to the player/gm not the character. It's perfectly reasonable that the GM decides the NPC is too focused on killing your character, especially if you've been particularly upsetting, to think about escaping.

                                It's not like your character is stopping the fight and saying let's talk. The concession is that the NPC wins the fight, the terms of the concession are that it happens 1 second too late to escape. If I were the gm, I'd probably want to adjust things to come up with a way to see if you could last long enough to keep him occupied, but I'd think it is a legitimate concession.


                                Also, remember that a concession has to 'make sense' in terms of the story as well. If you want your character to go out in a blaze of glory, that's fine-but there has to be a reasonable way for him to pull off the concession you're shooting for.
                                --
                                Hollis McCray
                                aka The Fifth Wanderer

                                ascensionschild@...

                                "GMing is like herding cats. Wet, angry cats who are pumped full of LSD and methamphetamines." - Stolen from some forum sig somewhere
                              • GalacticCmdr
                                Yes, but under Conceding the Conflict (p.171 Dec4 Preview). It says quite clearly that You can t use this privilege to undermine the opponent s victory,
                                Message 15 of 23 , Mar 8, 2013
                                  Yes, but under "Conceding the Conflict" (p.171 Dec4 Preview). It says quite clearly that

                                  "You can't use this privilege to undermine the opponent's victory, either"

                                  Now if the BBG victory condition was to kill the player no matter what it takes - then this concession makes sense. The player offered a concession that does not snatch away the BBG's victory. However, if the BBG simply wanted to defeat the player - and it was the player that was willing to defeat him at all costs; then this is not really a concession.

                                  It does make for a very good story - but it just does not feel like a concession. To be honest, it really depends on what victory the BBG wanted when this Conflict was engaged.

                                  I like the idea before about using the Fractal and making the explosives a character. Give it an attack around the player's level. Have it cycle between CAA and Attack.



                                  Chip


                                  On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 8:38 AM, Hollis McCray <ascensionschild@...> wrote:
                                   



                                  On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 6:16 AM, Chester Mealer <cdm014@...> wrote:
                                   

                                  It's important to remember the concession is offered to the player/gm not the character. It's perfectly reasonable that the GM decides the NPC is too focused on killing your character, especially if you've been particularly upsetting, to think about escaping.

                                  It's not like your character is stopping the fight and saying let's talk. The concession is that the NPC wins the fight, the terms of the concession are that it happens 1 second too late to escape. If I were the gm, I'd probably want to adjust things to come up with a way to see if you could last long enough to keep him occupied, but I'd think it is a legitimate concession.


                                  Also, remember that a concession has to 'make sense' in terms of the story as well. If you want your character to go out in a blaze of glory, that's fine-but there has to be a reasonable way for him to pull off the concession you're shooting for.
                                  --
                                  Hollis McCray
                                  aka The Fifth Wanderer

                                  ascensionschild@...

                                  "GMing is like herding cats. Wet, angry cats who are pumped full of LSD and methamphetamines." - Stolen from some forum sig somewhere




                                  --
                                  “Irreverence is the champion of liberty and its only sure defense. True irreverence is disrespect for another man’s god.” – Mark Twain

                                • Bill Johnson
                                  Well, we ve strayed a bit far from my original question. What I was looking for is not about a PC taking themselves out, but an NPC. This is the bad guy if one
                                  Message 16 of 23 , Mar 8, 2013
                                    Well, we've strayed a bit far from my original question. What I was looking for is not about a PC taking themselves out, but an NPC. This is the bad guy if one episode, not my BBG. However, this is someone I REALLY don't want my PCs capturing and interrogating, but I also don't want to kill their ambush they have planned either.

                                    Any suggestions? I was asking originally because I thought that I might have a dramatic. "For the Master" statement then bang, villain dead in the middle of combat

                                    Sent from my iPhone

                                    On Mar 8, 2013, at 7:21 AM, GalacticCmdr <galacticcmdr@...> wrote:

                                     

                                    I agree, that is not a concession. You cannot take victory away from the winner via concession. You can only dictate the terms of your loss.

                                    Chip

                                    On Mar 8, 2013 4:35 AM, "Darren Hill" <darren0hill@...> wrote:
                                     



                                    On 7 March 2013 04:46, Jonathan Lang <dataweaver@...> wrote:
                                     
                                    I once won a campaign by having my character suicide: I had lured the big bad onto my boobytrapped ship and taunted him; he could have fled the ship and survived its destruction, but instead opted to attack me. I died; but in so doing, I prevented him from escaping. Many lives were saved as a result. In Fate terms, I conceded the fight; but the terms of my concession were that he wouldn't have time to escape the trap before it went off.

                                    I'm not sure that's a concession in Fate terms. Imagine how that would play out, "Okay, I've just taken a consequence, I'm losing the fight. Let me offer you a concession."
                                    The enemy who is getting close to defeating you says, "Okay, let's hear it."
                                    You, "you kill me, but it takes long enough that you can't escape, and so you die with me."
                                    The enemy: "Wut? Uh, no, let's continue the fight."
                                    And so you continue the fight, but use delaying tactics, and your GM allows you to create a goal with a progress track: keep the villain busy, long enough so that after he kills me, he cant escape.
                                    The villain naturally tries to kill you or escape before you can win that goal, but you *succeed*, allowing him to kill you too late to save himself.

                                  • Jeffrey Hosmer
                                    Well, the first thing I would do is ask the players, Hey, do you mind if he commits suicide, right here, right now? If no one objects, then BANG. He s dead.
                                    Message 17 of 23 , Mar 8, 2013
                                      Well, the first thing I would do is ask the players, "Hey, do you mind if he commits suicide, right here, right now?"  If no one objects, then BANG.  He's dead.  No need to roll.
                                       
                                      If someone objects, then give them a chance to stop the villain.  Using the challenge rules should be able to handle that.  If they succeed, they stop him (wrestle the gun away, knock him out, etc.)  If they fail, he commits suicide. 
                                       
                                      IMHO, this comes under "Do you really need to roll for this?"

                                      On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Bill Johnson <keryth@...> wrote:
                                       

                                      Well, we've strayed a bit far from my original question. What I was looking for is not about a PC taking themselves out, but an NPC. This is the bad guy if one episode, not my BBG. However, this is someone I REALLY don't want my PCs capturing and interrogating, but I also don't want to kill their ambush they have planned either.

                                      Any suggestions? I was asking originally because I thought that I might have a dramatic. "For the Master" statement then bang, villain dead in the middle of combat

                                      Sent from my iPhone

                                      On Mar 8, 2013, at 7:21 AM, GalacticCmdr <galacticcmdr@...> wrote:

                                       

                                      I agree, that is not a concession. You cannot take victory away from the winner via concession. You can only dictate the terms of your loss.

                                      Chip

                                      On Mar 8, 2013 4:35 AM, "Darren Hill" <darren0hill@...> wrote:
                                       



                                      On 7 March 2013 04:46, Jonathan Lang <dataweaver@...> wrote:
                                       
                                      I once won a campaign by having my character suicide: I had lured the big bad onto my boobytrapped ship and taunted him; he could have fled the ship and survived its destruction, but instead opted to attack me. I died; but in so doing, I prevented him from escaping. Many lives were saved as a result. In Fate terms, I conceded the fight; but the terms of my concession were that he wouldn't have time to escape the trap before it went off.

                                      I'm not sure that's a concession in Fate terms. Imagine how that would play out, "Okay, I've just taken a consequence, I'm losing the fight. Let me offer you a concession."
                                      The enemy who is getting close to defeating you says, "Okay, let's hear it."
                                      You, "you kill me, but it takes long enough that you can't escape, and so you die with me."
                                      The enemy: "Wut? Uh, no, let's continue the fight."
                                      And so you continue the fight, but use delaying tactics, and your GM allows you to create a goal with a progress track: keep the villain busy, long enough so that after he kills me, he cant escape.
                                      The villain naturally tries to kill you or escape before you can win that goal, but you *succeed*, allowing him to kill you too late to save himself.




                                      --
                                      Jeffrey Hosmer
                                      jhosmer1@...
                                    • Chester Mealer
                                      She could in theory take herself out by attacking herself. Pg 166 says you *can* take stress or consequences to stay in the fight There is an implied
                                      Message 18 of 23 , Mar 8, 2013
                                        She could in theory take herself out by attacking herself. Pg 166 says "you can take stress or consequences to stay in the fight" There is an implied assumption that you want to do so, but it seems you can go straight to taken out. If the PC's stop her before she manages to do this, then they stopped her from being able to kill herself.

                                        You could always do it in story mode: Your ambush works and she's totally surprised, but before you can manage to get her to submit she shoots herself while shouting "The GM is railroading this scene." Fred and Lenny have both maintained the mechanics (including conflicts and being taken out) are there to serve the narrative, so if it's essential that she not be captured, just say that's what happens.

                                        Chester Mealer


                                        On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 9:47 AM, Bill Johnson <keryth@...> wrote:
                                         

                                        Well, we've strayed a bit far from my original question. What I was looking for is not about a PC taking themselves out, but an NPC. This is the bad guy if one episode, not my BBG. However, this is someone I REALLY don't want my PCs capturing and interrogating, but I also don't want to kill their ambush they have planned either.

                                        Any suggestions? I was asking originally because I thought that I might have a dramatic. "For the Master" statement then bang, villain dead in the middle of combat

                                        Sent from my iPhone

                                        On Mar 8, 2013, at 7:21 AM, GalacticCmdr <galacticcmdr@...> wrote:

                                         

                                        I agree, that is not a concession. You cannot take victory away from the winner via concession. You can only dictate the terms of your loss.

                                        Chip

                                        On Mar 8, 2013 4:35 AM, "Darren Hill" <darren0hill@...> wrote:
                                         



                                        On 7 March 2013 04:46, Jonathan Lang <dataweaver@...> wrote:
                                         
                                        I once won a campaign by having my character suicide: I had lured the big bad onto my boobytrapped ship and taunted him; he could have fled the ship and survived its destruction, but instead opted to attack me. I died; but in so doing, I prevented him from escaping. Many lives were saved as a result. In Fate terms, I conceded the fight; but the terms of my concession were that he wouldn't have time to escape the trap before it went off.

                                        I'm not sure that's a concession in Fate terms. Imagine how that would play out, "Okay, I've just taken a consequence, I'm losing the fight. Let me offer you a concession."
                                        The enemy who is getting close to defeating you says, "Okay, let's hear it."
                                        You, "you kill me, but it takes long enough that you can't escape, and so you die with me."
                                        The enemy: "Wut? Uh, no, let's continue the fight."
                                        And so you continue the fight, but use delaying tactics, and your GM allows you to create a goal with a progress track: keep the villain busy, long enough so that after he kills me, he cant escape.
                                        The villain naturally tries to kill you or escape before you can win that goal, but you *succeed*, allowing him to kill you too late to save himself.


                                      • Brett Ritter
                                        ... As with others, I see this as a story event, not a Concession. As a player, I d be pretty ticked if the GM prevented me from getting what I wanted AND took
                                        Message 19 of 23 , Mar 8, 2013
                                          On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 7:47 AM, Bill Johnson <keryth@...> wrote:
                                          > Well, we've strayed a bit far from my original question. What I was looking for is not about a PC taking themselves out, but an NPC. This is the bad guy if one episode, not my BBG. However, this is someone I REALLY don't want my PCs capturing and interrogating, but I also don't want to kill their ambush they have planned either.

                                          As with others, I see this as a story event, not a Concession.

                                          As a player, I'd be pretty ticked if the GM prevented me from getting
                                          what I wanted AND took a Fate point for it. Such a reaction is un-fun
                                          and not what you wanted to do.

                                          Heck, if I, as GM, complicate the player's lives in a way they aren't
                                          allowed to prevent, I give THEM Fate points.

                                          I'm sure you can finagle some weird way to compel some campaign Aspect
                                          against the players to get them a FP and get you want you want, but I
                                          think the answer is far more simple: What makes for a better game? Do
                                          that. Rules are an aid, not a legal system.
                                          --
                                          Brett Ritter / SwiftOne
                                          swiftone@...
                                        • PK Levine
                                          ... Putting a gun in your own mouth and pulling the trigger isn t a conflict type of action -- it s a you just killed yourself one. IMO, if this is even an
                                          Message 20 of 23 , Mar 8, 2013
                                            On Friday, March 08, 2013 10:47:52 am Bill Johnson wrote:
                                            > Well, we've strayed a bit far from my original question. What I was looking
                                            > for is not about a PC taking themselves out, but an NPC. This is the bad
                                            > guy if one episode, not my BBG. However, this is someone I REALLY don't
                                            > want my PCs capturing and interrogating, but I also don't want to kill
                                            > their ambush they have planned either.
                                            >
                                            > Any suggestions? I was asking originally because I thought that I might
                                            > have a dramatic. "For the Master" statement then bang, villain dead in the
                                            > middle of combat

                                            Putting a gun in your own mouth and pulling the trigger isn't a "conflict" type
                                            of action -- it's a "you just killed yourself" one. IMO, if this is even an
                                            action, it's an Overcome action, not an Attack. I ruled it a concession
                                            earlier, but it's not really even that.

                                            Can the NPC shoot herself? Yes, as long as it makes sense.

                                            Do you have to offer anyone FP for it? No, it's just the action the NPC is
                                            taking; no aspects are getting involved here.

                                            Do you have to calculate stress levels and see if she's taken out? No, this
                                            isn't an attack -- it's death.

                                            Can the PCs stop it? Maybe, depends. If a PC has a valid way to oppose it,
                                            then it's now an Overcome action vs. active opposition. Let 'em try to stop
                                            it, sure, if it's fair.

                                            PK
                                          • Undead Trout
                                            I d treat it like a compel and offer a fate point to each player invested in keeping the villain from escaping justice. Anyone who refuses pays a fate point,
                                            Message 21 of 23 , Mar 8, 2013
                                              I'd treat it like a compel and offer a fate point to each player invested in keeping the villain from escaping justice. Anyone who refuses pays a fate point, but I'd just escalate and offer two. They can refuse again at cost, and I'd leave it there. Obviously if someone (or multiple someones) is willing to cough up two fate points, the Big Bad shouldn't get the easy out.



                                              --
                                              M. Schwartz  —  undead.trout@...
                                              ~  Always Something Fishy Going On™  ~
                                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.