Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 37 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #259997
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    I’d suggest making it even simpler. Make the temporary talent gain like archetype talents – gain the talent as long as it isn’t limited, foundation, racial (unless you are that race), or of a higher tier. Very little checking required and it’s only temporary. It would be good to quantify how temporary (single use or Scene or some other duration) – I think I’ve usually heard of it being single use (which seems right to me).

    #260006
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Proposal:

    Spend a Fate Chip to perform a desperate or cinematic act that has no associated rule but that is realistic for your character and the setting. The GM has final authority on what is and is not allowed.

    and another one:

    Spend a Fate Chip to use a Talent, Spell, or Combat Maneuver of your Tier or lower that you do not currently possess for one action or gain an additional use of a Talent that you have already used this scene.

    Both of those are limited to once per session.

    John

    #260097
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Spend a Fate Chip to use a Talent, Spell, or Combat Maneuver of your Tier or lower that you do not currently possess for one action or gain an additional use of a Talent that you have already used this scene.

    thank you john for putting this down in a more rules like format. i had offered up both these ideas as separate options in one of 1st few posts, but i know i’m not the best at getting my thoughts out in a clearest of ways at times. the only difference i would recommend is that since it is a fate pt you are using the pc should actually be able to use a fate to gain access to an ability/spell…etc up to one tier higher then themselves. matt flinn and I agreed that this was a feasible and acceptable use of the “do the impossible” for our local game group. especially if you looked at it from the idea that a tier 5 maneuver should be to complex for a novice t1 hero to perform, however a t2 maneuver while diffcult would not be out of the realm of the t1’s abilities especially if fate stepped in to give said abilities a little bit of a boost.

    #260100
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Fixed:

    Spend a Fate Chip to use a Talent, Spell, or Combat Maneuver that you do not currently possess up to one Tier higher than yours for one action or gain an additional use of a Talent that you have already used this scene.

    #260102
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    So if we were to go with a version where a player can spend a fate point (or two if we are doing this as a modified version of ‘Doing the Impossible’) to gain access to a talent he/she qualifies for, as a Chronicler, am I now responsible to check the rule books the player’s character sheet as to confirm that the qualification is met? If so, this has the potential to slow down game play. I would rather see this axed that going through the trouble.

    I personally trust the players here, unless it sounds like total BS they are trying to pull.

    #260107
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    It isn’t one he qualifies for in my proposal. It’s not doing the improbable if he already qualifies for the talent/spell etc.

    John

    #260109
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Spend a Fate Chip to perform a desperate or cinematic act that has no associated rule but that is realistic for your character and the setting. The GM has final authority on what is and is not allowed

    Spend a Fate Chip to use a Talent, Spell, or Combat Maneuver that you do not currently possess up to one Tier higher than yours for one action or gain an additional use of a Talent that you have already used this scene.

    i personally like both these options. the first has started to lay down a foundation as to what is acceptable as for as doing the impossible. only issue i see with it is that leaves it open for interpretations as to what is “realistic” but it does have the all important part in there that says the final outcome it up to the judge. now all that needs to be done is get judges on the same note. i think more so at the major con, then local game days. since the cons require more judges to work in conjunction with each other

    what can i say about the second one. i really like it. its logical, concise as to what its intent is. this one differently has my vote

    #260114
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    So if we were to go with a version where a player can spend a fate point (or two if we are doing this as a modified version of ‘Doing the Impossible’) to gain access to a talent he/she qualifies for, as a Chronicler, am I now responsible to check the rule books the player’s character sheet as to confirm that the qualification is met? If so, this has the potential to slow down game play. I would rather see this axed that going through the trouble.

    there two things here, if your doing the impossible to gain access to a talent i don’t think it should have to be one that you would normally have access to, its the impossible so by spending a fate you can access any of them within the limits of the rule. secondly i don’t see any reason what so ever as to why 2 fate would need to be spent on one action. in my mind spending more fate does not signify a greater benefit. also i believe that fate point use it limited to only once per an action, unless you are the last man standing of course ( now to be honest i’m not finding this rule in the book, (last man standing is there) but i’m sure i have seen/heard it somewhere .

    #260117
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    …so i believe that fate point use it limited to only once per an action…

    as far as i can find this is a rule that only certain people go by I cant find it in the books

    #260123
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    i couldn’t find it either, but i’m damn sure that i have both heard and read it. i just cant place where it was.

    #260132
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    i couldn’t find it either, but i’m damn sure that i have both heard and read it. i just cant place where it was.

    I Know that Harvesters and Campaign Staff have upheld it and I know I’ve upheld it, but for the life of me I can’t find a reference to it either. The closest thing I can find is under the ‘reroll option’ it says you must take the new roll, which could imply no more fate spent.

    John

    #260139
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    glad im not the only one…thought there for a minute i was going crazy

    #260144
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    yeah I’ve had that “rule” quoted at me more than once and I’ve disagreed with it every time

    #260149
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    It probably came about by extrapolating the re-roll use, which is pretty clear you can only try it once.

    #260165
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Ok everyone

    I have a compromise..

    FOR NOW.. it’s out of the game

    BUT… once we have the campaign guide done, with GM guidance for its abdication.. it will come back.. at which point we will wait and see…

    if we see it continues to be an issue.. its gone.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 37 total)
  • The forum ‘Proposed Errata/FAQ Discussion’ is closed to new topics and replies.