The manuscript is currently working its way through rewrites and edits. One of the areas currently under debate is whether or not armour should have Aspects.
Currently, armour is built entirely of stunts. A few readers have expressed wanting a better connection with their armour though an aspect or two on the armour itself. I feel like once players get a chance to build armours and flavor systems, they will have a good connection.
I'm still leaning towards no Aspect on the armour. Between the five
aspects of each character, scene aspects and the ones players drop by
creating advantage, I'm afraid that any flavor created by the Aspect
would get lost in the shuffle. Most players are going to have high
concepts they can use in battle reliably. If a player wants an aspect
like My Father's Armour, having that come up in the phase trio seems
like the best place to do it.
What do you think?
I think I agree with you, Rob. While armour aspects would be a way to tie the equipment to the character more intrinsically, the more flavorful aspects would be coming from the character and not the armour itself. On the other hand, I could see adding in some simple aspects, like the examples given for weapons in the Extras chapter of the current Fate Core draft. Scout armour is "Quick," while Dreadnought armour is "Protected," or something like that.
ReplyDelete@Michael: Calibur-N and Calibur-X are two models of armour that Arthur has access to...
ReplyDelete@Josh: I feel like those elements come out in the armour design.
I get the impression that armour is something that isn't going to change very often. Sometimes the character will be piloting it, sometimes they will not, but the acquisition of armour isn't going to be a common part of the game.
ReplyDeleteThis leads me to think of the armour as part of the character rather then a piece of equipment, so an aspect for the armour works perfectly well if it is an aspect on the character.
You could have an optional rule (for games wishing to emphasise the background of the armour) where either an additional phase is added or a phase is replaced with "The story of your armour" and the aspect that comes out of it has to relate to the armour (such as "Pilot of Experimental Mk VII Scout Armour" or "My armour has been in my family for 9 generations and seen a thousand battles").
I would be in favor of using one of the character's Aspects as a mech aspect. Not only does it reinforce the genre idea that a pilot and mech are linked, but it also means that a player's mech ties into their personality. The bruiser with a powerhouse mech will find themselves invoking (or compelling) the same Aspect even if they're not in a mech, because their mindset and problem-solving are affected by it.
ReplyDeleteI think I prefer linking it to a character aspect rather than giving aspects to the armour itself. The character should have an aspect like "Ninth Generation Knight" rather than something on the armour.
ReplyDeleteI think adding Aspects to armour should maybe be an option for advancement?
ReplyDeleteAnd if you were going to place aspects on armour, remember that such an aspect would be true regardless of the pilot. The Millennium Falcon might be a "Piece of Junk", and might fly like it in anyone's hands, but the aspect "Made the Kessel Run in a Fanwanked-Away Very Short Period of Time" is on Han Solo's character sheet, not the Falcon's.
So, here's a question which revolves around the center of Rob's inquiry, here:
ReplyDeleteWhere would the aspect "Voltron: Defender of the Universe!" live?
Or would it not?
Maybe that aspect is a created advantage from the PCs' stock transformation sequence?
ReplyDeleteI think I don't need to express my opinion on the topic again to rob :) but I might do so shortly for those of you who have not read my comments on previous posts. I am very much pro aspects for armours. In fact I think I was the first to mention it on here, tough I assume Rob did consider the idea before then.
ReplyDeleteTo make things short, take Robs example suit the broadsword.
Head: Death’s Head (Use Piloting for Intimidate)
Front: Kiloton Breastplate (+2 Fighting vs. Physique defense)
Back: Self-Repair Pack (Spend a Fate Point to bring a system back online)
Legs: Stabilization Spurs (+2 Physique when on solid footing)
Arms: Energy Gunblade (Use Fighting for Shooting attacks)
You could give it the "stalwart defender" model aspect which I think has obvious ways to be used. On the other hand with that death's head thing going on perhaps its more a "Executioner's custom" model. Which would give the same suit a very different feel and could be used in different ways.
Considering how big armour combat will probably feature in most peoples game, and how big an effect the above different aspects can have on that I feel make this additional aspect more then worth it.
Think about the many effects a player could get from spending a fate point on the aspect "advanced scout" model aspect.
But I can see what rob means with to many aspects floating around not doing anybody any good. this was kind of my problem with SotC. So as a balancing option perhaps allow location slots to get a model aspect instead of a stunt or skills? Mayhaps with one free use.
Honestly? Armor already has aspects. Five of them. They're right there in the names of the equipment. I wouldn't allow a player to invoke them individually, though; they're all sub-components of, for example, "I'm piloting a Mark II Sniper Armor".
ReplyDeleteSo if that sniper armor has Stabilization Spurs (normally boosting physique), sure, you can invoke that to boost a long-range sniper attack, on the basis that you've got a rock-steady firing platform. But you couldn't invoke the armor's Long Range Sensors on the same attack, because that's really the same aspect.
Of course, if you have on your sheet something like "My Family's Hereditary War Machine", well, that's an entirely different aspect, now isn't it?
As an added bonus, this tells you what kind of action it takes to get into your armor; it's a maneuver to establish that "I'm piloting a Mark II Sniper Armor" aspect - which then gets invoked for effect to give you all the benefits of being in armor.
I personally would really want an aspect on the armor itself. In most things with big stompy robots, named characters have recognizable machines with their own history. The stunts and skills tell us what the machine does, but it doesn't tell us it's history or look. These machines are a force unto themselves; being entrusted to your character. How has it served in the past? Who built it? Does it have an AI with a personality? This isn't a simple sword, it's a colossal expenditure and a marvel into itself. I would really want that brought forward and I would love to play through the players' introduction to the machines, treating them as if they were being introduced to major characters.
ReplyDelete