First SotC game tonight: questions!

[Hans]

Ok, running this for the first time tonight, and have a few questions, so...

* Fate points for compels - the bit that bothers me is this line on page 45, in the example:

...in which case the GM takes the point, and the scene proceeds with everyone present.

What does that penultamate phrase ("GM takes the point") mean?  I thought that this was how compels NOT initiated by a character (lets call them story compels) work:

• GM takes a fate point from the "supply" (big pile of glass beads in the center of the table).
• GM waves point in front of player and says "You know you want it...do X".
• Player may decide to do X, and takes the point and puts it into his own pile.
• Player may decide not to do X, and gives the GM a point.  The GM puts BOTH points back into the supply.

The above quote makes it seem like the GM has some way to GAIN a point from a compel the player rejects.  I'm not sure what the GM "taking the point" would mean, since the GM's supply for story compels is essentially infinite.

* The number of fate points in a particular session seems to be a closed economy.  The only way new points come into the game DURING a session is via story compels, which the GM is in control of, otherwise they get handed around or spent.  Does this sound right?  Is there another way points come into the session I have missed?  If this is so, those who have GMed before please advise me on the relative merits of a liberal infusion of fate points versus a restricted supply.

* The minion rules are such that they could be used in a more abstract fashion to represent the overall strength and quality of the minions and not necessarily be directly tied to numbers.  For example, Caleb Sykes, mercenary general, might have 48 soldiers, but functionally these 48 soldiers act as 12 Fair (Physical) Minions.  Any thoughts on this?  I can see how it could get a bit silly if you tied the stress boxes directly to numbers (you marked off two boxes, that's 12 soldiers you've taken out!) but the principle seems sound.

* When running a pick-up game, I can see how coming up with aspects for characters and scenes on the fly might strain even a clever GM's imagination.  What do you that have GMed the game think about making up NPC or scene aspects "in the moment"?  The advantage is that you don't have to strain yourself at the beginning, but I could see the downside being the players might feel put upon of the GM keeps coming up with exactly the aspect necessary to make a nasty compel or get a +2 in just the right circumstance.  Also, it somewhat confuses the "guessing" aspects thing versus assessment/declaration actions to discover/force aspects.

* How many stunts are reasonable for NPC's?  I note that many of the example "mastermind" type characters have a lot more than 5 stunts.  It seems like this is a good way to balance out the challenge of a particularly powerful NPC versus multiple PC's, but not having run the game yet, I'm not sure what is overkill.  Any stunts I should be particularly wary of, whose in game effect is far in excess of what it seems like at first glance?

Any other advice (beyond the fantastic advice provided in the game book) would be appreciated for a first time GM of this game.

[iago]

Ok, running this for the first time tonight, and have a few questions, so...

* Fate points for compels - the bit that bothers me is this line on page 45, in the example:

...in which case the GM takes the point, and the scene proceeds with everyone present.

What does that penultamate phrase ("GM takes the point") mean?  I thought that this was how compels NOT initiated by a character (lets call them story compels) work:

• GM takes a fate point from the "supply" (big pile of glass beads in the center of the table).
• GM waves point in front of player and says "You know you want it...do X".
• Player may decide to do X, and takes the point and puts it into his own pile.
• Player may decide not to do X, and gives the GM a point.  The GM puts BOTH points back into the supply.

The above quote makes it seem like the GM has some way to GAIN a point from a compel the player rejects.  I'm not sure what the GM "taking the point" would mean, since the GM's supply for story compels is essentially infinite.

Yes.  The two statements aren't incompatible.  The GM takes (i.e., takes from the player, i.e., receives it as the custodian of the infinite supply of glass beads in the center of the table, i.e., puts it in the infinite supply) the point.

* The number of fate points in a particular session seems to be a closed economy.  The only way new points come into the game DURING a session is via story compels, which the GM is in control of, otherwise they get handed around or spent.  Does this sound right?  Is there another way points come into the session I have missed?  If this is so, those who have GMed before please advise me on the relative merits of a liberal infusion of fate points versus a restricted supply.

Yeah, that's essentially it.  Though I tend to treat "named" NPCs as having their own supply of fate points (for tagging and invoking their own aspects), while the GM has an infinite supply only for compels.

* The minion rules are such that they could be used in a more abstract fashion to represent the overall strength and quality of the minions and not necessarily be directly tied to numbers.  For example, Caleb Sykes, mercenary general, might have 48 soldiers, but functionally these 48 soldiers act as 12 Fair (Physical) Minions.  Any thoughts on this?  I can see how it could get a bit silly if you tied the stress boxes directly to numbers (you marked off two boxes, that's 12 soldiers you've taken out!) but the principle seems sound.

Yep, that's fine.

* When running a pick-up game, I can see how coming up with aspects for characters and scenes on the fly might strain even a clever GM's imagination.  What do you that have GMed the game think about making up NPC or scene aspects "in the moment"?  The advantage is that you don't have to strain yourself at the beginning, but I could see the downside being the players might feel put upon of the GM keeps coming up with exactly the aspect necessary to make a nasty compel or get a +2 in just the right circumstance.  Also, it somewhat confuses the "guessing" aspects thing versus assessment/declaration actions to discover/force aspects.

I tend to make up most of them on the fly -- essentially a lot of my "named" NPCs are created during play using the "on the fly" character creation method.

Sure it does.  You don't have to USE the "guessing" aspects thing.  And it's kind of neat if the players are actually declaring aspects onto your NPC.

* How many stunts are reasonable for NPC's?  I note that many of the example "mastermind" type characters have a lot more than 5 stunts.  It seems like this is a good way to balance out the challenge of a particularly powerful NPC versus multiple PC's, but not having run the game yet, I'm not sure what is overkill.  Any stunts I should be particularly wary of, whose in game effect is far in excess of what it seems like at first glance?

On this I defer to the others.  I just try to run the numbers and get a sense of an opponent that would be able to "handle" multiple player characters at the same time.

[Hans]

Thanks Fred.

[epweissengruber]

And Hans ... I will get my book back ...when?

Seriously, good luck running it.  I have had nothing but fun.  We can compare notes.

Steal some of our characters if you want:

http://roleplayers.meetup.com/261/messages/boards/view/viewthread?thread=2653996

[Hans]

And Hans ... I will get my book back ...when?

Doh!  I mean...it's in the mail, yeah, that's it.