[FADE v0.1] First Playest Doc available very soon

[gorckat]

absolutely- i like how the player can influence the mechanics of resolving the Crisis, and it promotes the story by possibly drawing out Crisis, adn it allows for things to get way crazy with 4+ point Crisises that can be broken down

if 4+ Crisis are possible (have to re-read that part), maybe there should be a limit on how far it can be broken down?

[Bailywolf]

There is a practical upper limit on Crisis points because they are equal to the number of cross-dice wich roll under the Trouble score in a given conflict.

For example, if you're trying to stop the Hell Queen from turning Ashville into a broiling pit and throwing the whole ballance between World and Otherworld into chaos, and you've got a Trouble of 5, and you pull out all the stops- using two Arts, an Arcana, and a Patron (7 cross-dice), and you throws 1, 3, 4, 4, 3, 6, 7, then you've just kicked off a 5 point Crisis (though, your Trouble score does drop to zero...).  

So... possble, but not likely.  

Hmm... even a three point Crisis might be pretty rare...

-B

[Doug Ruff]

Ben,

That looks really neat. I like the way that the scale of a Crisis is now directly related to the scale of the Trouble that caused it, and that the player has a choice between confronting the Crisis head-on, or ducking the full weight of the problem (which spreads the Scale of the Crisis.)

I also like very much you take on spending Trouble, and Favours. One small request: could you take a similar approach to balancing the side conflicts?

For example, could the GM spend 2 or 3 points of my Trouble to introduce a major complication into my character's life, and could I call for this myself?

Knowing that they can call on larger Favours in this way may encourage players to let rip a bit more with their cross traits, and makes Trouble less likely to overturn the character's balance - which would make it easier to keep D6s, if you wanted them still.

(Of course, too much assistance from outside could nerf the Crises, but I don't yet know how this would balance in play.)

[Bailywolf]

I think I'm going to stick with the ten siders from now on... and I did consdier chashing in more than one point of Trouble for big complications... but decided not to do it because I didn't want to totally negate the threat of Crisis having a Trouble score promises.  I think letting the player bleed one point per game session can keep things under wraps...  but really, I won't know until I sit down and actually run the numbers and figure out how often the typical character is going to throw a Crisis.  

-Ben

[Bailywolf]

I realized on the drive home last night that I need to tweak the success/fail thing a bit, otherwise someone with one die could never achieve even a qualified success in a conflict, and this should still be possible... so...

Successes minus Conflict Rank, and compare as follows:

2 "YES, AND" (2 Advantage)
1 "YES" (1 Advantage)
0  "YES, BUT" (no Advantage)
-1  "NO, BUT" (no Penalty)
-2 "NO" (1 Penalty)
-3 "NO, AND" (2 Penalties)

So, someone with a background which fits fairly well with a given situation (for typical difficulty) gets one die, and can then roll a "YES, BUT" success with it.  By grabbing situational advantages (brining a gun to a knife fight, for example), tapping Traits, or cashing in Advantages earned in past conflicts, a character can have many more dice.  

But with one die and a typical conflict, a character can at least get some kind of success.

-B