Sotc- Minion-induced consequences

[AXUM]

Hello!

Minions, minions, those pesky minions!

How do minions "profit" from PCs' consequences if they can't trigger 'em for lack of FP to spend?

For instance, let's say a PC's suffering from an Attack consequence of "shoulder wound" & the minion wants to stab him there - can he Tag for free (even if the consequence wasn't done by a Maneuver) or should the GM incite a Compel?


Thanks
Da' da Ax

[Mel White]

Hmmm...I normally give minions a small pool of Fate Points that they could spend, even if that is not in the rules.  So a dozen minions not in a group with a leader might have 2-3 Fate Points.  They have aspects--'Fanatic Followers'; 'They're Everywhere', etc.
I would think minions without Fate Points would at least be able to tag new aspects and consequences once--the first time--for free.
Mel

[AXUM]

Hello!


Thanks for the response - I would think that a GM compelling aspects every exchange would become tiresome & unbalancing wouldn't it?

So, those House Rules would be one day implemented as official, say in the Second Edition  of SOTC?


Da' Ax

[Mel White]

Hi,
I can't speak to what may or may not become official in future editions of SOTC, although the new Dresden Files game when it comes out will, I believe, incorporate lots of lessons-learned from SOTC. 

As far as compels go, some GMs play according to the mantra, 'start every scene with a compel'.  It's an interesting question to explore.  To a large extent, character Aspects can be seen as flags indicating what the players want to see in the game.  So if the GM is not compelling those aspects, then the players are not getting the stories or plots that they would like. 
Although re-reading your question, I realize we may be using the same term to mean different things.  The GM compels an aspect to limit a character's choices in some way (p.10).  Players can invoke their character's aspect for various bonuses (p. 11).  The GM and players can tag aspects of other characters (or scene aspects, etc), for various uses (p 11-12). 
The GM tagging a player character aspect every exchange probably would be tiring and unbalancing, assuming the Fate Points to pay the cost of each tag came from the GM's infinite Fate Point pool.  That's why I think it's important that NPCs, if they have Fate Points, have a fixed amount from which to pay for their invocations and tags.  There is some balance built-in, though, in that any Fate Point spent to tag a player character's aspect goes to that player character.  So a savvy player might refrain from spending any Fate Points for a couple of exchanges, collect Fate Points spent by opponents tagging his own aspects, and then use that pool of FP to improve his own attack. 

I like to use NPC fate points to invoke their own aspects in order to improve their attacks.  I try to avoid spending NPC aspects in defense--although sometimes I can't help myself!  But in general I don't like to turn a PC's success into a failure by spending fate points.  It brings 'em down. 

Mel

[AXUM]

Hello!


Continuing this line:
...But, as far as I know, aren't Compels & Tags kinda the same - if they are detrimental to the "victim".  Both getcha in trouble & both reward ya with at least 1 FP, or is there a difference I'm totally unaware of?

Also,
if a Minion get's tagged "detrimentally" s/he should receive a FP, right?  I guess the Minion could use the FP to Tag an opponet's Aspect (consequence) him/herself too (among the other uses of a FP), right?

Another thought has crossed my mind - what about the GM utilising "enviromental" Compels which the PC has no control over, like: "the sun in your eyes", which aren't due to a maneuver or "NPC-created" aspects (I came upon this whilst reading REH - the main character couldn't see the coming shot because "the sun was in his eyes." This was due to a purely plot-driven decision by REH: he wanted the main character simply taken out), wouldn't this be abusing the rules or is it a standard SOTC trope?


Thanks
AX

[Mel White]

Hi,
Yes, compels and tags (and invokes ;-) have similarities--that's why the terms are often interchanged.  But they are different.  The GM compels aspects, in order to shape the plot; players invoke their own aspects in order to gain some advantage (re-roll, bonus to the dice, power a stunt, narrative control, etc.) and the GM, through NPCs, and players tag other characters aspects for similar bonuses.  But I don't want to get wrapped around the terminology.  If the GM and players are spending Fate Points and using aspects to shape the plot, get bonuses, etc., then everyone is taking advantage of all the uses of aspects.

I let minions use FP the same way anyone else can.  I believe it's been pointed out that minions aren't normally supposed to have aspects and fate points.

I like to start each scene in SOTC by identifying the 'scene aspects' that are present.  Those aspects can then be used just like any other.  So if the scene had the aspect 'bright sun' or something similar, then tagging it for a bonus to the dice or even narrative control would be fine to me.  I would usually not use a scene aspect to compel a character--compels are meant to come from each character's own aspects--recall that those aspects are flags for what the player wants to see in the game.  That being said, I have used aspects created by maneuvers to then compel the character, such as when thugs have created an aspect 'grabbed by thugs'. I might then offer a FP for the character to be whisked off to the villain's lair.     

Mel