If he wants to have something he made or fixed before, that's a declaration or invocation for effect.
I'd probably treat it as similar to rolling Resources to see if you have X expensive thing.
(Which is probably the most common way to get a good weapon.)
The player is very keen to get as much as he can out of the game without breaking the rules, so part of this is an exploration of what you can and can't do with a stunt.
@JonathanHobbs Posting it to the G-Plus community, as you've done, should get some good commentary, but I believe the Fate Core rules text is pretty well set now.
Hmm hey all you 3.5 familiar guys, What would you say a good class would be for a Rogue who needs to fight Demons.(I Have the same question about dragons, cant seem to find a class for that. I dunno if im lookin in the wrong book or what.)
also as a completely unrelated comment. I Hate the Swarm Subtype, and all creatures with it in 3.5
DM has told us Demons will be present but Im playing a Dragonborn and he did go out of his way to have Bahamut send a Level 1 rogue a message about Said Demons. making me think he may pull something.
Im probably being paranoid but how often would a DM use a God to communicate a message to an unimportant Dragonborn follower about Demons instead of Dragons.
> After 1st level, a player cannot take on additional flaws unless the DM specifically allows it (for examples of times when doing this might be appropriate, see Character Traits, above). (UA91)
> If the DM allows it, players may add traits to their characters after 1st level. The DM might allow a player to assign a trait to her character after she has roleplayed the character in a manner consistent with the trait in question, or after a traumatic or life-changing experience. (UA86)
> If the DM includes this option, a character should gain a new trait no more frequently than once every five levels. (same paragraph as above)
That gives a potential total of two flaws at level 1, up 1 every five levels.
Im going to scope the waters using facebook to ferret out my GM's intent covertly. See if he is going to; as a DFRPG player might put it "compel" My "Servant of Bahamut" aspect.
Like Combat Expertise and Chink in the Armor. CE is lackluster but is needed for CitA.
Chink in the Armor is nice.
Mountain Plate? Pfft.
Dragonstalker Pairs nicer with ranger than it does rogue mysteriously. Yea Rogues get way more sneak attack die than Rangers(Because None.) but thematically it screams Ranger.
Im just tired of every drow ranger being a Dual Weilding Fanboy Drizzt Wannabe.
I Love the books dont get me wrong but Repetitive Immitation is annoying. because they never get it Right. Nor do they need to Copy Someone elses character instead of making their own personality.
I wonder, Was Captain Ahab a Ranger/Great Captain with favored enemy Whale?
@Magician I'm getting my greasy fingers all over their agency.
And they like it.
They expect me to narrate and describe and dictate, and I oblige, all before we realize this isn't how it's done in FATE. We face/palm, move on, and repeat.
@BESW When we play more narrative games in our group, it's still often me who comes up with descriptions, outcomes and cool events. Simply because I'm the best at it by virtue of having been a GM for over a decade.
@shatterspike1 Mhm. Of course, they ran into the conundrum that you can either play to defy the Master, or play to defeat the Master, but not really both.
You're supposed to be able to specialize in one, maybe two, roles per character, so that only as a group can you be fully functional and able to face down whatever threat comes your way.
MLWM tries to divide roles similarly: one person defies the Master, and other defeats him.
The difference being that MLWM has hardwired the roles into the mechanics at such a basic level that trying to be good at both winds up backfiring horribly.
Heck, that hobo was so powerful he erased the only sympathetic character trait of the Founder of Time Lord Technology and Society, the man whose ego was so big he's the reason aliens (including humans) look like Time Lords.
Always a pity when that happens. I had the same problem with my swordmage recently - I'm fond of the character, but our other D&D GM moved away after one game, so I never get to play him.
@BESW ...it's pretty old now; this was early 90s RP, and arguably the first of the really freeform plot-driven RPGs. It feels like a modern indie game, but was actually by WotC - classic Jonathan Tweet design.
I think that would be possible. You'd need to keep Everway's basic approach, but replace the fortune deck resolution system with a AW-style move system.
Hmmm... possible; Everway/AW mechanics lend well to adaptation. (I've seen Everway used for superheros and Star Wars, so gothic horror ought to be easy.)
And AW's define-through-play ought to work well in urban environments; if you need more structure, something like how Dresden Files handles citybuilding ought to work.
I'd love to find a way to keep Everway's character creation intact though; IMO the art card system was the finest character creation mechanic ever conceived.
(BESW: Everway's character creation was "pull five art cards that you like out of the big deck of fantasy art. Then tell your character's background story with those scenes.")
Would need a lot of work to set that up for WoD though.
I'd agree; a more standard deck would be called for here. But if you're going with AW's move system it's not required anyway.
I think you have to be careful how loose you get with this; the more initially undefined the _setting_, the more you need the _characters_ to have some story structure to work from. The characters will tend to generate the setting around them.
If there's any interest in the character design, you shouldn't have any problem with cool character emerging through play - your players will take care of that.
But it's important to note that everway's extremely flexible points-based character creation only works well because the player already has a background concept to hang the powers off. Otherwise the points system creates a paralysing amount of freedom - with anything being possible, it's hard for the player to pick a direction.
Characters are defined the same way, with a set of pithy statements that are used to describe the character's personality, interaction with the world, and relationships.
Then there's a game currency used to purchase abilities, but abilities are only available if the character phrases justify them.
I'm familiar with a very few systems: D&D 3.5/4e (and by extension PF), DitV, SG-1 d20, MLWM, DFRPG/FATE Core/FAE, and a teeeensy bit of oWoD Mage and CoC 6th Ed. Most anything else is, at best, "I saw the manual once or twice."
When you consult your accumulated knowledge about something, roll+Int. ✴On a 10+, the GM will tell you something interesting and useful about the subject relevant to your situation. ✴On a 7–9, the GM will only tell you something interesting—it’s on you to make it useful. The GM might ask you “How do you know this?” Tell them the truth, now.
This is how a move is structured
A lot of moves are common to all classes (called either Basic or Special Moves)
And then there's Class Moves and Advanced Moves, both specific to classes
For example, the Ranger has a pet, and the druid can shapeshift
Heck, FATE has two separate mechanics for Players to Declare Things to be True, and its core mechanic is a form of metacurrency used to enable player agency rather than character agency.
