I've been reading through my PDF of Spirit of the Century and I'm eagerly waiting for a chance to run a game. However, I have a few questions about the rules on Aspects and Consequences:
1) To get to the point where a character is Taken Out of a conflict (assuming the character doesn't concede), it looks like you have to overflow the character's stress chart four times: three times to generate consequences, and once for the final Taken Out result. It seems as if it would take quite a few exchanges of rolls to get to this point. Doesn't this draw out conflicts between significant characters to extreme lengths? Or does it play out fairly quick in actual play?
2) If a PC suffers a consequence during a conflict, then what, as a GM, am I allowed to do with this consequence if I choose to compel it? Can I only use it to discourage courses of action ("Your character is Bruised and probably can't leap into that passing truck, unless you pony up a fate point") or can I use it to give the NPC's rerolls or bonuses to rolls? Does a villain have to spend a fate point in order to tag a character's consequence aspect, or can I, as GM, compel a character's consequence aspect freely and at will?
3) A PC must spend a fate point in order to tag an opponent's aspect. However, as GM, I can compel a PC's aspect whenever I think is appropriate. So in a conflict between a PC and a significant NPC, does the villain need to spend a fate point in order to tag a character's aspect, or can I just compel the aspect freely? If the villain needs to spend a fate point, then what happens in a conflict between PC's and minions, who have no fate points? Do the minions not get to take advantage of the PC's "Broken Wrist" consequence aspect?
Some of this may be just judgement calls on the part of the GM; however, I'd appreciate a little advice from the point of view of the creators.
Thanks,
Don
1) It can play out quickly, but that's why there are concessions. Most NPCs should be ready to give concessions -- or simply accept a taken out result immediately instead of taking a consequence -- when their stress tracks are overflowed. This is very much the cinematic sensibility that the Big Boss Guys Are Slow To Drop, but everything else (minions or quick-to-concede NPCs) ain't.
2) You're more expected to tag it for +2's and rerolls when acting against the person who has the consequence (just follow the tagging rules), but the rare compel ("you have a leg injury, it's unlikely you'll scale that cliff with it") is apt. The former originates from a specific NPC and thus should involve spending a fate point from that NPC's supply. The latter is GM-originated (usually) and thus a fate point is still involved, but originates from the GM's effectively limitless supply.
3) Villains have their own FP supply (just look at the character sheets provided for them in the book, which should include an indication of the number of FP they have). It's a question of things the villain is specifically doing to take advantage of a target's aspects, or whether it's "the story itself" (i.e., the GM) driving it, as to where the FPs spent come from.
Okay, makes sense to me. Thanks for the quick response!
Quote from: dbisdorf on September 13, 2006, 12:33:17 PM
1) To get to the point where a character is Taken Out of a conflict (assuming the character doesn't concede), it looks like you have to overflow the character's stress chart four times: three times to generate consequences, and once for the final Taken Out result.
Actually, I don't think this is right. To generate a consequence, all that is needed is for the target to either not have a Stress box available or to voluntarily choose not to fill in a Stress box. You don't have to fill in all five Stress boxes for each Consequence. You could take a guy out in five really good shots:
The first hit is a five-point hit, filling in the top Stress box.
The second hit is also a monster 5 pointer. Since that Stress box is already filled in, the target can either choose to be Taken Out or take a minor consequence.
Ditto for the third hit, but now must take a Moderate Consequence.
Ditto for the fourth hit, but now it's a Major Consequence.
On the fifth hit, the target has no more options and has to be Taken Out.
Is that right, oh Gurus? And is five shots the absolute minimum it would take to take out a dedicated character who refuses to concede at any point?
Hudson, you've got it right.
Is there ever a reason to take a Consquence other than fill in a Stress box, if you've got the option? Say you've taken a 3 point hit, and your 3 pt box is the only unfilled box on your Stress meter. Filling it in would leave all your boxes filled, but you'd still be in the fight. Can you think of any situation in which it would ever make sense to take even a Minor Consequence rather than fill in that box?
If not, that's fine. I only ask because of this line from pg 67 of SotC:
QuoteAny time a character takes stress, he may opt not to check off a box and
instead take a consequence. If the character takes a hit which he doesn't
have a box for, either because it's higher than the number of boxes on his
stress track, or because it rolls up past his last box, the character must take
a consequence.
Emphasis mine - along with the explanation of when a character
must take a Consequence, it implies there are time when you don't
have to take one, but you might want to anyway.
Thoughts/explanations?
That's as much an option for a GM to exercise as anything. A GM might want to use it as a method for controlling the pacing of a scene -- if a fight's dragging on long, he can always opt to have the bad guy take a couple consequences instead of waiting for the players to nickel and dime the stress boxes enough.
Make sense?
Yes. No real tactical reason for a player to take the option, I'm guessing, though.
Quote from: Hudson Shock on September 25, 2006, 01:50:32 AM
Yes. No real tactical reason for a player to take the option, I'm guessing, though.
None that I can see right off the bat... but hell, maybe someone will come up with a stunt where you get to do something awesome if you take a consequence first. :)
Consequences are aspects, right? So, a creative player could take a consequence instead of the box hit, then turn around and tag that aspect for a bonus.
Quote from: John Harper on September 25, 2006, 06:24:58 PM
Consequences are aspects, right? So, a creative player could take a consequence instead of the box hit, then turn around and tag that aspect for a bonus.
You'd have to be pretty creative, but I suppose it's possible. Hard to see "Sprained Ankle" or "Minor Concussion" being useful in a fight, though.
I take a "Bruised and Battered" consequence.
Then I invoke it and say to the GM, "This pain... only makes me madder!" Maybe the GM agrees. And there's my +2.
Remember the scene in Fight Club when Tyler lets the Mafia-type dude beat him to a pulp, then he grabs the guy and bleeds all over him and begs to use the basement space?
Yeah. That's some consequence tagging there. Big time.
Okay, yeah, that's awesome.
I'm thinking of starting a thread on rpg.net of examples of how SotC would handle examples from movies, books and real life. Frex, I can see the famouse Rope-a-Dope Ali/Foreman fight being handled by having Ali force an Endurance vs. Endurance (or possibly Ali's Endurance vs. Foreman's Fists) to put an "Exhausted" Aspect on Foreman that Ali then continually tagged for the rest of the fight.
The Fight Club example is perfect.
There's a swordfight in the first Amber novel by Zelazny where the protagonist cuts his opponent's arm. After a while, the blood loss starts to weaken his arm, and the protagonist starts to taunt him about it. I can clearly see that handled through Maneuvers of different types in SotC, whereas it's very hard to model in many (dare I say the vast majority) of other games.
In the comic Runaways, one of the characters has a magic staff that only appears after she bleeds. Most of the time, she has to get cut in a fight or cut herself in order to bring out the staff. Something like that would be a cool image for a pulp character. You'd take "Bleeding" as a minor consequence, and then draw your magical staff out of the wound.
Quote from: iago on September 26, 2006, 01:43:28 AM
I take a "Bruised and Battered" consequence.
Then I invoke it and say to the GM, "This pain... only makes me madder!" Maybe the GM agrees. And there's my +2.
I've just noticed that this mildly confllicts with the "Now You've Made Me Mad" stunt on pg 155 of the pdf:
Quote"Once per scene, the character may turn a wound he has taken into pure
motivation. After the character takes physical stress, spend a fate point and
the character gets to add the value of the wound (the original value, not the
box it was recorded in, if it rolled to a different box) to an action in the next
exchange taken against the person who inflicted the stress."
... in that Fred's idea is, overall, more powerful than the stunt. The stunt is usable once per scene, whereas Fred can Invoke his Bruised Aspect as often as he likes. They both require a FP. The Stunt will give a bigger bonus sometimes, but sometimes a smaller one. And lastly, the Stunt is usable only against the person who inflicted the Stress, whereas the Invoked Aspect is usable against anybody. If I, as a player, had taken "Now You've Made Me Mad" as a Stunt, I'd feel a little robbed by someone being able to Invoke an Aspect like this. And yet, I don't think that Invoking an Aspect like this is all that unreasonable.
This just goes back to my problem with the long list of Stunts. I think SotC is a fantastic game and I can't wait to run it. But, as I've stated before, I think Stunts could have been done better. As it is, there are just too many situations where, unless the GM has memorized all of the Stunts, he'll allow an Aspect use that steps on or nerfs a Stunt. I understand this won't bother many or most people, but it does bother me. I don't expect anything to change - I just wanted to be heard. Thanks.
Quote from: Hudson Shock on October 07, 2006, 03:50:12 PM
... in that Fred's idea is, overall, more powerful than the stunt. The stunt is usable once per scene, whereas Fred can Invoke his Bruised Aspect as often as he likes.
On the other hand, taking "Bruised and Battered" as a consequence means it can be tagged by other people - any time your opponent wants a bonus or a reroll against you, well, he's got that Bruised and Battered to use. NYMMM only requires a stress box be checked off, which means you're not making yourself vulnerable to do it - you have complete control of the situation.
J
True.
Yep. As was pointed out in the RPGnet thread, Aspects are more broad and easier to apply, but they're double-edged swords. Stunts never work against you.
Folks have already addressed this, but my intention with Now You've Made Me Mad is that you're going to use it with a 3, 4, 5, or more stress box, giving you a HUGE bonus for one FP. Consider a guy who's peaked Endurance at Superb. He has stress boxes numbered up through eight.
Now consider him having the Now You've Made Me Mad stunt. He fights and fights, and gets nailed, ultimately, with an 8-stress box checkoff hit.
Then he spends a fate point.
And gets +8 on his attack in response to it.
That's way powerful, and is the "zone" that I sorta expect the stunt to work in.