Profile cover photo
Profile photo
Petr Mazak (Sirien)
sirien (/maelstrom/gamecon/d20.cz/MUVS...)
sirien (/maelstrom/gamecon/d20.cz/MUVS...)
About
Petr's posts

*POLEMIC ON WEIGHT OF POOR DICE ROLLS*
Here's an idea: "-4", "-3" and "-2" results do not really exist in Fate

This is something I'm thinking about for some time now. I like metagame points which give players some control over the result. But Fate has too many of them with regards to an option to reroll.

Dice roll is an important moment in RPG - it is the moment when something gets resolved or when outcome of conflict exchange gets determined. And I have an intuitive feeling, that when player rolls "-4", the reaction should be very loud and scared FUCK!, but instead of that, it is usually just calm and annoyed "damn it."

There are no "-4", "-3" and "-2" dice result - there is just one result and that is "so low I will spend 1 FP to reroll" (ok, in case of "-2", player sometimes just takes +2 - nevertheless the result is the same - 1 resource is spent and result changes). And players can achieve this through both fate points or free invocations or boosts.

So...

I was thinking about some ways to return the weight back to dices. Here is what I've got (these are just ideas so far, I didn't have an opportunity to test any of these):

*1 - No rerolls on "-4"* - when dice show "-4", it hurts, period. You may spend fate points to get +2s to diminish the effect, but you can not reroll this result.

*2 - 1 more invoke on "-4"* - when dice show "-4" and you want to interact with it, you have to spend 1 more invoke to do so. (So reroll is for 2 invocations/boost, two rerolls or reroll and another +2 is for 3 invocations)

These two options give more weight to "-4" result, but "-2" and "-3" remain still very similar (ok, "-2" doesn't always ends up with reroll, sometimes there is +2, but still...)

*3 - automatic price on "-3" and "-4"* - when dice show "-3" or "-4", you automatically pay the price no matter the final result. "-3" gives minor price, "-4" means significant price. So even if you succeed, you pay something (success with style diminishes the price for 1 level, although SwS with such roll doesn't seem very probable, does it...) If you lose and decide to succeed for cost, you pay the cost twice.

--

What effects do you thing this is going to have? (in regards to game flow and FP economy?)

Do you have some other ideas how to solve this?

What are your experience with "-4", "-3" and "-2" dice results, do they differ or not?

EDIT: please feel free to comment even without reading the already existing discussion.

*RULES INTERPRETATION POLEMIC*

Let's have some fun with rule clarification "flame" :)

Jon is in firefight, armed with some automatic gun. He is standing in the room (which is 1 single zone) beside doors and his enemies are outside behind french window (different zone). Jon decides to take following action: He starts shooting with intent to kill some enemies outside while he moves through the room and kneels behind some sofa.

What happens in system terms?

1) Jon rolls Attack, he makes his free move inside his zone and that's it. If he wants to get cover, he has to drop Attack and do Create an Advantage instead.
2) Jon rolls Attack, he makes his free move inside his zone and gets aspect "covered" with free invoke he can spend (once, and then the cover loses it's importance, no matter he is still behind that sofa)
3) Jon rolls Attack, he makes his free move inside his zone and gets aspect "covered" without any free invokes. He gets +2 against shooting from garden anyway, because aspects are always true and he is in cover (he can later take CA to get free invokes for that aspect and use them to improve it's effect)
4) Jon has to divide his roll between Attack and CA (on environment). If he succeeds, he gets his cover as free invokes.
5) Jon has to divide his roll between Attack and CA (on environment). If he succeeds (without style, let's not complicate it too much), he gets his cover which is giving him +2 but no free invokes
6) Jon has to divide his roll between Attack and CA (on environment). If he succeeds, he gets his cover which is giving him +2 and a free invoke on it on top of that

The obvious problem here is:

Fiction first: Jon shoots (which is his primary action and intention) and makes fairly simple move (few steps in straight direction and kneeling down), which logically results in him being in cover. He should be able to attack and get cover. Such approach logically creates domino effect resulting in everybody going for such actions (taking covers while shooting) and forces the need to evaluate covers and such even outside standard CA/aspects framework.

System first: Jon has to decide between shooting (Attack) and cover (CA). This keeps things mechanically smooth and simple, but it somehow forces fiction to go according to system dictate and it limits the possibilities.

---------------

Let's assume, that the scene is described in a more detail than just with some vague zones like "this rectangle is Living room, this rectangle is Garden". May be somebody even draw it down with some larger stuff like some tries, furniture and so on. May be the group even uses "DnD 4e battlegrid zones rules" from +Fred Hicks blog.

There are no movement restricting aspects on place. All shooting was so far Attack action, no "cover fire" aspects were created so far

Game is trying to keep some semi-realistic genre and feeling. Cool looking actions are allowed (it's not gritty style), but nothing too fancy. Group is using more or less vanilla Fate Core rules without any significant changes or addons.

Jon is a fairly competent combat character (relevant aspects, skills like Shoot, Athletics, Notice and such on reasonable level, some related stunts...)

+Piráti právě sem byl zaúkolován tátou, že vám mám vzkázat velký a zásadní černý puntík.

Ve svém důchodovém stáří se odhodlal k zásadnímu kroku překonat své konzervativní předsudky a volit jemu přirozeně podezřelou Pirátskou stranu a s překvapením zjistil, že Piráti na Praze 6 nepostavili žádného svého kandidáta.

Teď mi brečel do telefonu, že te mu tím podrazili nohy a chudák nemá koho volit a nejspíš skončí z trucu u jakési "strany živnostníků" nebo jak si řikaj.

c-c-c... 

Question about Duel (Toolkit p. 168-9) rules

What are the effects of full defense (you give up your turn and take +2 for defense action for the rest of the exchange) on Duel?

I mostly hope for answers from players who actually are using (or at least used) Duel rules so they have personal experience or from players who are very good "system analysts" (mumly true gamers&power players mumly), but I will welcome everyone's opinion really.

My concern is: The whole point of the Duel is, that only one side has the upper hand, so the second is forced to do other actions then attack. As such it forces one side of the duel to employ different actions than just Attack / Defend.

But if the side without upper hand gives up on her turn and takes full defense (to get the advantage and to increase her chances for success with style and overtaking the upper hand), than it will work in completely opposite direction - Duel will encourage only Attack/Defense actions.

On the other hand, the side with upper hand can take advantage on other side's passivity and create an advantage before performing attack. If defender will continue with his passivity, the side with upper hand can actually stack several CA actions (thus several free invokes) before going for attack. That would be boring on its own, but it would in result force defender into some other action since full defense turns to be inferior tactics.

I need to know which of this is going to be true in actual game, because I'm writing 1th version of my specific rules and right now I do not have much chances to test it on my own on more players (and I want to get it right on first attempt). I'm thinking about writing a rule which prohibits success with style from full defense to overtake upper hand, but I'm very hesitant if it is a good or very bad idea.

Thanks for opinions. 

Post has shared content
Kdysi dávno se RPG překládaly "komunitně" ve smyslu toho, že si parta lidí sedla a společně něco přeložila. Ty časy jsou pryč, ale je hrozně hezké vidět, že překlady jako takové nezmizely, jen místo party lidí naráz je dělají převážně jednotlivci sami a komunita je "jen" podporuje popř. jim radí s místy, kde si o pomoc řeknou.

Zajímavé je, že zatímco tím původním způsobem vznikaly překlady krátkých příruček (desítky stran), dnes jako jednotlivci dokáží lidé na Kostce dělat překlady "velkých" her (stovky stran), navíc troufám si říct ve výrazně lepší kvalitě (věcně, jazykově a v neposlední řadě graficky).

Máme DnD 5e a Fate Core - na cestě je Dungeon world a v různém stavu rozpracování jsou GURPS 4e, Burning wheel a Pathfinder.

Budoucnost RPG u nás zjevně rozhodně není nijak zvlášť černá :)
Překlad Dungeon World

...od Artena. Resp. jeho první část - celá "příručka hráče". Zbylé jsou přislíbeny a budou následovat :)

(prozatím v PDF exportu z Wordu, ale s tím pak nakonec ještě něco uděláme, žádný strach)

Post has shared content
...a DnD je komplet :)
Kompletní preklad Dungeons and Dragons 5e MONSTER MANUAL

...čímž je ShadoWWWův epický quest u konce a poprvé v historii máme DnD v češtině v kompletní podobě všech tří základních příruček!

(Příručka hráče a Příručka DMa při té příležitosti prošly další vlnou drobných korekcí)

Post has shared content
...a tak jsme Kostku konečně přenesli i na sociální sítě, abyste jí měli ještě víc poruce. Ostatně, stejně půlku informací a novinek berete jen z nich, tak proč vám nevyjít vstříc, že?

Tak nás prosím prosím followněte a hlavně sharujte, ať se to dostane k co nejvíc lidem, které to může zajímat :)
Bylo načase se tu konečně ukázat, že? Takže, tady jsme :)

A prosíme, dejte vědět všem okolo, koho to může zajímat, že tu jsme :) (Gurney spustil nějakou vyděračskou kampaň s koťátkama, ale ta je kvůli FB, tady na G+ jsme v civilizovanější společnosti, že?)

Co sem budeme dávat? Zejména nově publikované články. Sem tam možná i nějaké ty novinky ze scény, akce atp. nebo tematické fun věci, možná i nějaké sbírky starších článků... prostě tak nějak to, co se u nás děje.

Ale ne všechno, co se u nás děje :) Určitě bude mít smysl dál chodit i přímo k nám, ať už kvůli diskusím, komunitě nebo dalším věcem.

PS - pokud by G+ profil Kostky dostal víc +1 a follow než dostane lajků a friendů na FB, tak by to bylo naprosto awesome!

Let's have some fun!

Fate System Toolkit p. 104-5:

target of a spell is the person ... it’s being cast on. ... subject, a person which will be the focus of the spell’s effect on the target. For example, a love spell to make Jake fall for Andy would be cast on Jake (the target) focused on Andy (the subject).

Annoyance: The target rubs people the wrong way. If the spell has a subject, then the target of the spell is more easily annoyed by that subject.

So, how does this spell works?

Let the fight begins...

Post has attachment
Core / FAE stunt conversion issue

+Fred Hicks new publication: http://www.rpgnow.com/product/177639/Fate-Accelerated-Core-Conversion-Guide says:

Stunts created in Accelerated could be dropped into Core and vice-versa, after making modifications respective to how the circumstances of application are defined (the points of attachment to skills or approaches) because at the end of the day their method of construction is identical—it’s just laid more bare in gearhead-friendly Core, while elided behind convenient templates in Accelerated.

Well... I dare to disagree. A lot.

I was making some F-Core example characters for our Czech community where I was showing some edgy things you can do with basic rules and I played with stunts a lot, of course (=I wasn't using just bonuses, but I was creating stunts targeting/triggering consequences and so on)

Then I wanted to convert these characters into FAE to show the same. And I found, that it is nearly impossible - simple conversion was simply out of table. To keep the character itself, I would have to remake them again from a scratch, mostly because of stunts, which required complete remake into different stunts to get the same result / impression.


Do you have any experience with this? Anyone tried that as well with the same / different result as I had?

Thanks for sharing

Post has attachment
Video
Photo
September 30, 2013
2 Photos - View album
Wait while more posts are being loaded