May play Fastasycraft. Need some information on how the game plays

[ArawnNox]

He only had Resolve V.

It was the Resiliance VII with Veteran II that made things interesting.

Well, that and the Bow chain, a stunning fist attack, and Swift Attack.

That he triggered the GM Death Blossom (A Dramatic Scene) wasn't in your favor either.

I do wish the game was face to face. The look on your face when just as you were about the jump him from behind he ran to the otherend of the corridor and started wailing on the giant had to be priceless. 

For the curious:

Tsuto Kaijutsu
The Heroes of Sandpoint's first encounter with the Tsuto.
The rematch

Yeah, I was kinda like >.<
Badass Moment: Denied!

[Psion]

That's my point. Lethal damage should be better than subdual/stress at some point other than fighting certain specific kinds of undead. There's a reason why armies go to war with swords and not saps or quills. There's a reason why, if my home is invaded, I want a shotgun. Lethal damage is supposed to be SCARIER than otherwise.

I'm beginning to see a major unselling point for me here. I love the flexibility of npcs, and that's a major selling point. But if subdual and/or stress is BETTER in the vast majority of the cases, then I'm beginning to suspect I'm having second thoughts on the game.

Make subdual and stress a viable option,  but not BETTER, and that's another story.

If all you got out of the posts in the other threads is that "its only bad against undead", I don't think you really gave the discussion a fair shake. Between the flexibility of NPCs and campaign qualities, you make the efficacy of stress damage exactly what you want it to be. There are more options (many which I mentioned, many offered by others) to tweak the experience.

If you feel like a certain NPC is the sort that would not be susceptible, give them resolve as a signature skill, damage defiance or immunity to stress damage. These can be things perfectly normal humans can have.

If you think lethal damage should be scary overall, try the fragile heroes, deadly combat, or hewn limbs qualities.

But as I discussed there, I have a stress damage monkey that I was I bit scared would take over the game. But I really didn't have to use campaign qualities at all to keep him in check. There were some combats in which his presence was really telling, and some not so much. And this was without resorting to numerous undead creatures or any uses of damage defiance or immunity to stress damage.

[Morfedel]

That's my point. Lethal damage should be better than subdual/stress at some point other than fighting certain specific kinds of undead. There's a reason why armies go to war with swords and not saps or quills. There's a reason why, if my home is invaded, I want a shotgun. Lethal damage is supposed to be SCARIER than otherwise.

I'm beginning to see a major unselling point for me here. I love the flexibility of npcs, and that's a major selling point. But if subdual and/or stress is BETTER in the vast majority of the cases, then I'm beginning to suspect I'm having second thoughts on the game.

Make subdual and stress a viable option,  but not BETTER, and that's another story.

If all you got out of the posts in the other threads is that "its only bad against undead", I don't think you really gave the discussion a fair shake. Between the flexibility of NPCs and campaign qualities, you make the efficacy of stress damage exactly what you want it to be. There are more options (many which I mentioned, many offered by others) to tweak the experience.

If you feel like a certain NPC is the sort that would not be susceptible, give them resolve as a signature skill, damage defiance or immunity to stress damage. These can be things perfectly normal humans can have.

If you think lethal damage should be scary overall, try the fragile heroes, deadly combat, or hewn limbs qualities.

But as I discussed there, I have a stress damage monkey that I was I bit scared would take over the game. But I really didn't have to use campaign qualities at all to keep him in check. There were some combats in which his presence was really telling, and some not so much. And this was without resorting to numerous undead creatures or any uses of damage defiance or immunity to stress damage.

Take a "special" npc who's human. No special rules or defenses against either stress or lethal, no special campaign qualities to modify it. Which damage type will take the npc out faster?

I understand I can tweak things ad nauseum. Frankly, I can do that with any game, though I realize that FC is made more like a toolkit. What I'm asking is, at it's default level, before any kind of tweaking is added, how do the two compare in efficacy?

Because there is a reason why, on the battlefield, people carried axes and swords rather than saps or harshly worded threats. I want the game to reflect that, as it's default, and if, before adding qualities or defenses, lethal damage isn't as likely to end combat as subdual damage, then YES, I think it's a problem with the system. I can add in qualities after the fact, but I just don't think it's realistic to have to do so in the first place.

Whom am I going to be more scared of, someone attacking me with a harshly phrased threat, someone who attacks me with, well, a sap or whip, or someone who comes at me with a battleaxe? If stunning people and knocking them out were easier than inflicting potentially lethal wounds, our battlefields throughout history would have looked a great deal different than it actually did.

And I don't think it's badwrong fun to ask the game to, as it's default, reflect that realism just a bit more, is it?  What I want to know is simple: If I have a game with a normal human - defined as a special npc - with no particular defenses against any type of damage, and no particular campaign qualities - which kind of damage is more likely to end the combat, or will they be equally likely?

If it's equally likely, I'm FINE with that. But if the stress/subdual damage is more likely, then that, to me, IS a problem.

And btw, someone being knocked out by a verbal threat dealing stress is... well, I don't want to be insulting, as I DO like FC overall, and I don't want to offend anyone, but it's ridiculous. Frightening them, getting them to surrender or flee, or enraging them, or... sure. But knocking them out? Come on, seriously?

[Morfedel]

Actually, this kind of disturbs me a little. I've seen discussion of this before, where people were concerned that subdual damage and stress damage sucked. But when I see arguments that it's actually BETTER than lethal damage, well... uh... that's just wrong. Being more afraid of being knocked out by, oh, being argued unconscious or something similar, than being stabbed to death by a sword, seems wrong to me.

Stress and subdual do need their place, but they shouldn't be BETTER than lethal attacks either.  And that kinda bothers me just a tad.

They aren't always better, and even if they are, so what?

Remember that NPCs an PCs work differently. Against Standard NPCs lethal, subdual, and stress are all the same.

Against Specail Characters (PCs and NPCs) at higher levels, with their large vitality pools, knocking your opponent out via subdual or stress is often faster. This is a good thing. It means that non-lethal combat remains viable against the PCs. It give your players incentive to capture villains rather then just hacking them to bits.

I disagree, because while we make some concessions for purposes of gaming (magic in the system, game mechanics to represent injury, etc),  there should be just a little bit of realism in combat. And there's a reason why, in combat, people use lethal weapons, not nonlethal ones - its because the lethal ones, in a real life-or-death situation, the lethal weapons are just flat-out superior, and have been throughout history.

and I don't think it's wrong to expect the system to reflect that without having to explore specific npc defenses or campaign qualities to remedy that.

[Morfedel]

Actually, this kind of disturbs me a little. I've seen discussion of this before, where people were concerned that subdual damage and stress damage sucked. But when I see arguments that it's actually BETTER than lethal damage, well... uh... that's just wrong. Being more afraid of being knocked out by, oh, being argued unconscious or something similar, than being stabbed to death by a sword, seems wrong to me.

Stress and subdual do need their place, but they shouldn't be BETTER than lethal attacks either.  And that kinda bothers me just a tad.

They aren't always better, and even if they are, so what?

Remember that NPCs an PCs work differently. Against Standard NPCs lethal, subdual, and stress are all the same.

Against Specail Characters (PCs and NPCs) at higher levels, with their large vitality pools, knocking your opponent out via subdual or stress is often faster. This is a good thing. It means that non-lethal combat remains viable against the PCs. It give your players incentive to capture villains rather then just hacking them to bits.

But should trying to capture an enemy NPC really be objectively better than attempting to kill them? That's hardly an experience that's mirrored in real life.

HERE HERE!!!!

[Morfedel]

But should trying to capture an enemy NPC really be objectively better than attempting to kill them? That's hardly an experience that's mirrored in real life.

It's not real life.

It's a role playing game. One that specifically aims for a 'cinematic' experience.

Capturing the PCs is far better then killing them. Immeasurably better.

I'm not talking pcs, I'm talking npcs.

And roleplaying should be at least somewhat realistic. Magic in the game, check. Someone yelling at them being more effective than stabbing them - seriously, wtf?

[Morfedel]

Also, at higher levels, as many will point out, its a better idea to use attacks/abilities that inflict stress or subdual damage on Special NPCs as that will take them down faster than whittling through their pool of VPs.

Actually, this kind of disturbs me a little. I've seen discussion of this before, where people were concerned that subdual damage and stress damage sucked. But when I see arguments that it's actually BETTER than lethal damage, well... uh... that's just wrong. Being more afraid of being knocked out by, oh, being argued unconscious or something similar, than being stabbed to death by a sword, seems wrong to me.

Stress and subdual do need their place, but they shouldn't be BETTER than lethal attacks either.  And that kinda bothers me just a tad.

Heh. I can sort of understand. But then, I remind you of the underlying philosophy that "it's your game."

I don't like the idea of unconsciousness as a result of stress myself, so I treat any "KO" failures as a result of stress (once all shaken/toughness is gone) to be "routed", which is like frightened except you can't recover from it; if you can't flee then surrender.

Which makes a lot of sense. I have great respect for the crafty crew here, honestly I do, and overall I like what I've seen of FC so far. But I really kinda wonder why they decided stress from someone yelling at them or threatening them should result in unconsciousness, because that's just not how it works in real life.

And while, yes, it's a game, it doesn't work that way in movies or novels either. In fact, I've never seen it work in ANYTHING like that prior to this game, and it is just.... not accurate to anything I've been exposed to.

Finally part II: Don't be THAT worried about it. Though you can make an annoying stress damage monkey, typically it's not going to beat out physical punishment unless the target is particularly resistant to physical punishment. Agains standard NPCs, stress damage is about equivalent to real damage. But typical stress damage does 1d6. That's the same as an improvised weapon without a strength bonus.

Is that so? If so, then I'll be more relieved. Like I said, I haven't played or run the game, I don't own the book yet. I'm responding to comments I've read, and have been looking for some answer that eases my concerns.

[Morfedel]

I disagree, that subdual and stress being faster / better is a good thing. For one, it's not realistic. Granted, this is a fantasy game, but when a foe should be quaking in his boots more from a subdual weapon than a lethal one that will kill him, well, that's a bit TOO unrealistic for me.

It's unrealistic that it's easier to knock someone out or break their nerve then to kill them? Really?

Breaking their nerve isn't the same thing as knocking them out with a threat! And as for knocking someone out, actually, YES, it IS easier to kill them. There is a freakin good reason why battlefields throughout history uses lethal attacks, and not some subdual equivalent. Hurting, maiming, and mortally wounding opponents was far easier to do than just knocking them out, without actually doing some serious long term harm in the process.

Otherwise, our modern battlefields today would be using tasers and not gunfire. Killing in warfare is freakin easy. Armies want to win the battles and the wars, regardless of how they do it. They use the most effective method. That ain't knocking the foes en masse unconscious, my friend.


[quoteAlso, I'd have to see if I can find the reference, but a friend of mine once showed me an industry article discussing how the average person found a stun-gun's warning discharge more intimidating then a knife.[/quote]

Shit, I'd rather be tased than stabbed any day. I'll live through the former, and dying from a knife wound is freakin easy.

Oh, and realism is overrated.

That's an opinion, not a fact.

So tell me, if Subdual or Stress is faster agains specials, and the same against standards, why would you even bother with lethal attacks, barring those creatures that are immune to stress/subdual?

Because you envision your character using a sword or a bow or an axe.[/quote]

So a less desirable mechanical option should be chosen just for appearances sake?

Because the GM can and will adapt if you're being cheesy.

And there's something wrong with expecting the rules to be a bit more balanced between the two in the first place?

Because you're looking to have fun, not just build the most efficient combatant in order to 'win'.

I'm not a power gamer, and most of my friends aren't either, but it breaks verisimilitude when the more desirable weapon isn't the ones that were the scariest on the battlefield of history, it breaks the sense of immersion. When I make a warrior who's intended to be the deadliest swordsman in the kingdom, and some other guy makes the deadliest, I don't know, user of the sap or other subdual weapon, and that guy can be consistently more effective against the average "special" human because of the rules, yeah, that's a problem.

For me anyway.

Because there's a lot of moving parts to 'faster'. Damage Defiance reduces it all by half. Cagey lets them automatically make saves. NPCs can and often do have higher Resistance then Health. Faster is relative since it will still take a minimum of five attacks to remove a special NPC via Subdual or Stress. Lethal can do it in one.

Ok, THIS is the kind of information I'm looking for? If lethal can do it in one, and outdo subdual damage, without special rules, campaign qualities, or npc qualities JUST to make it work, that's the information I need! See, remember, I haven't played FC, don't own it, so I still don't have all the information.

So tell me more about this. How does Lethal do it?

[Morfedel]

But what about the PCs fighting the archenemies? I suddenly have this vision of Luke Skywalker dueling Darth Vader, and forgoing the light saber for a sap or somesuch.

As an aside, a compelling argument can be made that the RotJ final battle between Luke and Vader is all Stress damage. Neither really *hurts* the other--even the hand-chop hardly matters, as it wasn't even a meat hand. Instead, the whole thing's *meant* to be stress damage, as neither wants to actually kill the other. Luke pushes Vader all the way to Shaken IV (with a critical Stress attack stunning him for one round and one hand short--prompting the Emperor to intervene), and the process weakens Vader's will sufficiently to be persuaded to kill the Emperor.

As a further aside, I direct you to the "I am not left-handed" duel between Westley and Inigo in The Princess Bride. It could be argued that this fight is also all Stress damage, culminating in a Terminal Situation where an action-die expenditure renders Inigo immediately unconscious. It could also be argued that it's entirely subdual damage (perhaps via extensive use of the Tire action), with the last clout to the head topping off the Fatigued grades.

Better? Not particularly. More fun? Way yes, says I.

Others have said that it's ultimately on you to figure out how to dress up the ability, because in broad daylight on paper it certainly looks cheesy, and I completely agree. And on some level that's probably the single biggest thing a newcomer has to get used to in FC--you have to flavor your abilities, because the game's not going to do it for you, and playing it vanilla is going to produce some odd-looking results (which become much less odd-looking if you can get your imagination involved).

That's an interesting take on things.

[ArawnNox]

Okay, you're building a mountain out of a molehill. Seriously.

Play the game. Don't think about balance or if something feels "real" enough. This is not a combat simulator, it's a table-top roleplaying game.

I was daunted by all the rules and systems at first, but once you actually play the game and see it in action, those problems will largely disappear.

If you want an answer to your hypathetical, a "normal human" will, chances are, still drop at the same rate regardless of damage type. Why? Because his VP will depend on his TL, as will his saves. It will still take a minimum of 5 hits to drop him from subdual/stress damage, inflicting 1d6 at a time with tire/threaten. Even though it does more damage. Lethal damage is harder to calculate for this because theres so many different weapons with different additional effects. But, for the sake of argument, we'll roll with a 1d6 modified by strength. He could still drop the NPC in about as many hits.

What is really more likely to happen at higher levels is the special NPC will be given a few levels of fatigued/shaken while the party's fighters take him down.

Sorry if I sound aggressive, but I figured it was time for some "tough love" as you didn't seem to be listening.

[Morfedel]

Realize I'm not trying to be difficult, insulting, or anything along those lines. I'm trying to make sure I grasp things correctly.

IF subdual / stress is better than lethal in a vacuum (IE, if there are no particular campaign qualities that modify things, and no npc qualities to enhance defenses to one or the other, etc), then I'm not sure I'd be fond of the game, because to me, it just flat out doesn't make sense.

Anyway, if I can get past that, then I THINK I'll be picking it up at some point.

[Morfedel]

Okay, you're building a mountain out of a molehill. Seriously.

Play the game. Don't think about balance or if something feels "real" enough. This is not a combat simulator, it's a table-top roleplaying game.

I was daunted by all the rules and systems at first, but once you actually play the game and see it in action, those problems will largely disappear.

If you want an answer to your hypathetical, a "normal human" will, chances are, still drop at the same rate regardless of damage type. Why? Because his VP will depend on his TL, as will his saves. It will still take a minimum of 5 hits to drop him from subdual/stress damage, inflicting 1d6 at a time with tire/threaten. Even though it does more damage. Lethal damage is harder to calculate for this because theres so many different weapons with different additional effects. But, for the sake of argument, we'll roll with a 1d6 modified by strength. He could still drop the NPC in about as many hits.

What is really more likely to happen at higher levels is the special NPC will be given a few levels of fatigued/shaken while the party's fighters take him down.

Sorry if I sound aggressive, but I figured it was time for some "tough love" as you didn't seem to be listening.

I AM listening. But mostly people are saying "You're wrong" rather than explaining the mechanical differences that makes them the same. I had to ask the question because I remember seeing a thread some, oh, months ago, one person complaining that subdual/stress sucked, and the people came on saying "no, its actually BETTER than lethal!"

And THAT's what bothered me. I'm fine if they are equal. I'm not fine if lethal is worse. And the responses I got didn't tell me anything. That's a far cry difference between 1) responses not telling me what I'm looking for, and 2) Not listening.

I'm sorry if it seems I'm being difficult. I'm not intentionally trying to be. But at the same time, if you read my last couple responses, you will also see that I finally said I saw some comments that DID give me a bit of what I'm looking for.

[Morfedel]

OK: I guess what I'm looking for is this: taken in a vacuum, comparing the two, how do they compare mechanically that makes them equal?

Does that make sense? I want to understand how they are equal prior to my throwing in all kinds of specific qualities and rules tweaks and all. Maybe that's my problem: people are telling me they work, but I'm getting "you can use quality x or y," and I want an "in vacuum" comparison.

[Coyote0273]

OK: I guess what I'm looking for is this: taken in a vacuum, comparing the two, how do they compare mechanically that makes them equal?

Does that make sense? I want to understand how they are equal prior to my throwing in all kinds of specific qualities and rules tweaks and all. Maybe that's my problem: people are telling me they work, but I'm getting "you can use quality x or y," and I want an "in vacuum" comparison.

People can talk and explain and detail all they want, but the only way you're really going to understand how it works is to actually play it. Stress and Subdual isn't BETTER, its DIFFERENT. In some cases its better, in others its pointless, and still others its equal. I've run this game for a year and a half now, and I've had more problems with people one shotting my boss with an arrow and a lucky crit than making a bad guy pass out from yelling at them.

[Krensky]

Breaking their nerve isn't the same thing as knocking them out with a threat! And as for knocking someone out, actually, YES, it IS easier to kill them. There is a freakin good reason why battlefields throughout history uses lethal attacks, and not some subdual equivalent. Hurting, maiming, and mortally wounding opponents was far easier to do than just knocking them out, without actually doing some serious long term harm in the process.

Baring 'freak accidents' if someone starts punching you, you will fall unconscious before you die.

Otherwise, our modern battlefields today would be using tasers and not gunfire. Killing in warfare is freakin easy. Armies want to win the battles and the wars, regardless of how they do it. They use the most effective method. That ain't knocking the foes en masse unconscious, my friend.

No, it's weapons of mass destruction.

Many military weapons were not designed for lethality. A wounded soldier is better for the opposing side then a dead soldier.

Oh, and realism is overrated.

That's an opinion, not a fact.

An informed one, though.

Ok, THIS is the kind of information I'm looking for? If lethal can do it in one, and outdo subdual damage, without special rules, campaign qualities, or npc qualities JUST to make it work, that's the information I need! See, remember, I haven't played FC, don't own it, so I still don't have all the information.

So tell me more about this. How does Lethal do it?

Critical hits.

It is impossible, in a vacuum, to give a definitive answer. There is no such thing as a 'vanilla' special NPC. Their numbers are defined (for the most part) by the PC's average party level and by the role they take in game.

Then the issue is that the PC doing the damage can have a much higher impact then the actual number of points. Heck, above level 14 any competent Soldier could one shot a special by using One in a Million and Most Deadly with whatever options he chooses to boost his typical damage to 10 points a hit.

As for the stress leads to unconscious, thing. The Threaten action seems to be the source of you issue. Since just seeing eldritch horrors from beyond space and time also do stress. So does being on fire. So does seeing your friends get eaten by the dragon.

That said, it's up to the GM (and maybe the players. depends on the table) to describe what happens. Rather then think of it as unconsciousness, which is an easy thing to write as the rule. But what failing a damage save really means is that the standard NPC is rendered hors de combat. They may be dead, they may be unconscious, they may be gibbering in the corned, or they may be fleeing for the hills.

The same more or less applies to Specials.