I think the phrase "void where prohibited" very much applies, there. ;-)
> > Likewise a vampire could have a flaw "Vulnerable to garlic", which
> > could be exploited...
>
> How would you use the the flaw in this manner?
I can't think of anything directly analogous that's come up in-game, so I'm slightly busking it here, but...
One way I like to treat Flaws is as in Ye Olde Pendragon "opposed traits" (passions, etc) schtick. ("I war against myself!") That is, use the player's own flaw in a contest with one of their own abilities. (Either in the sense that the Flaw 'resists' some action they try to carry out, or it 'attacks' them with some deleterious consequence if they fail.)
For (actual real...) example: our Uroxi tried to use his Diplomacy (!?!) on a bunch of Tarshite troops stationed near our tula. I had him roll opposed to his own Hate Lunars trait, before I even worried about how successful the overtures might have been on the soldier. (I know Hate Lunars isn't a Flaw per se (depending on whom one asks...), but a similar principle obtains.)
So in this case, if a vampire stumbles across a bulb of garlic casually, he might have to resolve a contest between "Vulnerable to garlic" and some appropriate resisting ability -- if any are going to be appropriate at all, might have to be the default. If a hero on the other hand brandishes some garlic at him menacingly in some self-conscious way, one might have the Vulnerability augment the attack (or, vice versa).
> > A player has his sword out and announces a normal attack, 10AP. The
> > vampire defends with "Cant be killed". The superior vampire
> > obviously wins and inflicts damage back on the attacker... how does
> > one rationalise such a result with a skill that is essentially an
> > invulnerability... why does it do damage? I can sort of see ways
> > but thought it useful to get other comments...
>
> I would play it up as a growing sense of despair and futility ("What
> are we going to do? We can't even HURT it, let alone kill it!").
> Add in some fatigue and the occaissional counterblow by the vampire.
> Eventually, the hero will be utterly exhausted and demoralized (i.e.
> AP 0), leaving the vampire to do whatever parting shot it wishes
> (leave, capture, eat, whatever).
Yes, indeed. I think the watch-word should be, as always, whatever seems the most narratively natural, in the context of the described action, and the pre-existing situation.
One might consider applying a handicap to the rating of the power, incidentally, if one wished the effect that the heroes lost less than the full effect of the APs bid, in order to a) make it somewhat easier to rationalise the scale of the effect, and b) to make it more drawn-out, so as to continue the agony... (i.e., rather than have them being defeated by the defence _alone_, which might otherwise happen if it has a higher rating than the vamp's other abilities.)
Cheers,
Alex.
Powered by hypermail