Running away from a conflictHow can I keep the nature and capacity of NPCs hidden to generate a fear of the...
Why can't I set the 'prototype' of a function created using 'bind'?
How do I narratively explain how in-game circumstances do not mechanically allow a PC to instantly kill an NPC?
Performance and power usage for Raspberry Pi in the Stratosphere
Can you prevent a man in the middle from reading the message?
Is the Maximum Use License for Everybody (MULE) a FOSS license?
Are all power cords made equal?
How do I avoid the "chosen hero" feeling?
Protagonist constantly has to have long words explained to her. Will this get tedious?
In a post apocalypse world, with no power and few survivors, would Satnav still work?
How to wrap a figure in exam document?
Why is Acetic acid (pKa = 4.76) stronger than carbonic acid (pKa = 6.36)?
Players preemptively rolling, even though their rolls are useless or are checking the wrong skills
How do I add a strong "onion flavor" to the biryani (in restaurant style)?
How bad is a Computer Science course that doesn't teach Design Patterns?
What is wrong with my use of "find -print0"?
Does Plato's "Ring of Gyges" have a corrupting influence on its wearer?
Taking an academic pseudonym?
Can't figure out a htaccess rule
Is this Article About Possible Mirrored Universe Junk Science?
How can I handle players killing my NPC outside of combat?
Disk space full during insert, what happens?
Quick Way to Extrude Line to Make Ledges?
Can you help me solve this algebra problem?
What is an explicit bijection in combinatorics?
Running away from a conflict
How can I keep the nature and capacity of NPCs hidden to generate a fear of the unknown?Weapon/Armor Ratings vs NPCs using the Teamwork/Mobs ruleCan a character choose to be taken out?Do all players have to agree to accept or deny a group compel?Sneak attacks in Fate CoreCan I use non-aspects as narrative permissions?What mechanisms have been used to make magic risky?Does the GM have to pay a fate point to Declare a Story Detail?How do you handle changing the nature of conflict?How would you run a Crisis of Faith in Fate Core?
$begingroup$
This might be an easy one, but i had a situation where a rogue character fought against a guard who shouted to the other guards to come and help. The rogue got a boost and wanted to trip the guard and run away.
It didn't seem like conceding, really, and it's not taken out..
Is there a way to let the character leave the conflict without having to let the NPC choose their fate?
fate-core conflicts
edited 1 hour ago
Jadasc
41.8k4112194
asked 2 hours ago
Jo the JockerJo the Jocker
1624
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This might be an easy one, but i had a situation where a rogue character fought against a guard who shouted to the other guards to come and help. The rogue got a boost and wanted to trip the guard and run away.
It didn't seem like conceding, really, and it's not taken out..
Is there a way to let the character leave the conflict without having to let the NPC choose their fate?
fate-core conflicts
edited 1 hour ago
Jadasc
41.8k4112194
asked 2 hours ago
Jo the JockerJo the Jocker
1624
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This might be an easy one, but i had a situation where a rogue character fought against a guard who shouted to the other guards to come and help. The rogue got a boost and wanted to trip the guard and run away.
It didn't seem like conceding, really, and it's not taken out..
Is there a way to let the character leave the conflict without having to let the NPC choose their fate?
fate-core conflicts
edited 1 hour ago
Jadasc
41.8k4112194
asked 2 hours ago
Jo the JockerJo the Jocker
1624
$endgroup$
This might be an easy one, but i had a situation where a rogue character fought against a guard who shouted to the other guards to come and help. The rogue got a boost and wanted to trip the guard and run away.
It didn't seem like conceding, really, and it's not taken out..
Is there a way to let the character leave the conflict without having to let the NPC choose their fate?
fate-core conflicts
fate-core conflicts
edited 1 hour ago
Jadasc
41.8k4112194
asked 2 hours ago
Jo the JockerJo the Jocker
1624
edited 1 hour ago
Jadasc
41.8k4112194
asked 2 hours ago
Jo the JockerJo the Jocker
1624
edited 1 hour ago
Jadasc
41.8k4112194
edited 1 hour ago
Jadasc
41.8k4112194
edited 1 hour ago
Jadasc
41.8k4112194
41.8k4112194
asked 2 hours ago
Jo the JockerJo the Jocker
1624
asked 2 hours ago
Jo the JockerJo the Jocker
1624
asked 2 hours ago
Jo the JockerJo the Jocker
1624
1624
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Technically, this is conceding the conflict. If the opposition (the GM) accepts it, then the conflict ends on the player's terms. If they (you?) don't accept, then the conflict continues. Now the PC must defeat the opposition by taking them out.
The trick here is realising that taking someone out does not mean murdering or beating the crap out of them. It means somehow rendering them unable to take part in the conflict. When someone's trying to run away, this may well mean that the taken out pursuer (the guard in your example) loses track of the quarry (the rogue).
Frame the action properly and it will make more sense. The objective of the rogue is to get the f* out of there. The objective of the guards is not to let the rogue do that.
The "attack" of the rogue doesn't involve hurting the guards. The rogue "attacks" the objective of the guards by running away with Athletics. The guards may try to "defend" their objective of not letting the rogue get away by giving chase with Athletics, or pinning them down with Shoot etc. What's being attacked or defended isn't bodies, but objectives in the conflict.
If the guards are taken out, they eat dust and return empty handed. If the rogue is taken out, then she is cornered with nowhere to run.
answered 47 mins ago
edgerunneredgerunner
15.1k13980
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I haven't gotten the impression the opposition needs to accept the concession; the Fate Core section on conceding mentions accept nowhere. You just do it, then work out how it'll unfold. I'm not sure if that's a holdover from previous editions of Fate, but it sounds like your first paragraph should be updated to reconcile with Fate Core concessions. (There's negotiation and the GM gets to veto it if it doesn't make sense like any other mechanic, but that's not relying on a conditional acceptance.)
$endgroup$
– doppelgreener♦
36 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
When the hurting stops, the conflict stops.
Sounds like starting a chase contest to me! This is a completely fine thing to do if you don't have to have total narrative control of your opponents to get what you want, which in this case I'm assuming is just "get away":
Transitioning to a Contest or Challenge
You may find yourself in a conflict scene where the participants are no longer interested in or willing to harm one another, because of some change in the circumstances. If that happens, and there’s still more to resolve, you can transition straight into a contest or challenge as you need. In that case, hold off on awarding the end-of-conflict fate points and whatnot until you’ve also resolved the contest or challenge.
In an earlier example, Cynere managed to get a vault door open so the three PCs could escape an endless horde of temple guardians. They all decide to run and try to lose them.
Now, the guardians and the PCs have mutually opposing goals but can’t harm one another, so now it’s a contest. Instead of running the next exchange, Amanda just starts setting up for the chase.
Fate SRD, Conflicts
Assuming you're alone, you can break and run from combat at any time circumstances would permit. You can probably even keep the "trip and fall" boost as a penalty to the guards' first action in the chase contest, assuming they're interested in pursuing you.
Now there's just the problem of deciding stakes for the contest. "You get away clean" vs "they capture you" or "they corner you and you have to fight", maybe? Anyway, once you hash that out, you can do a quick race to 3.
answered 19 mins ago
GlaziusGlazius
13.9k22475
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "122"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f141795%2frunning-away-from-a-conflict%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Technically, this is conceding the conflict. If the opposition (the GM) accepts it, then the conflict ends on the player's terms. If they (you?) don't accept, then the conflict continues. Now the PC must defeat the opposition by taking them out.
The trick here is realising that taking someone out does not mean murdering or beating the crap out of them. It means somehow rendering them unable to take part in the conflict. When someone's trying to run away, this may well mean that the taken out pursuer (the guard in your example) loses track of the quarry (the rogue).
Frame the action properly and it will make more sense. The objective of the rogue is to get the f* out of there. The objective of the guards is not to let the rogue do that.
The "attack" of the rogue doesn't involve hurting the guards. The rogue "attacks" the objective of the guards by running away with Athletics. The guards may try to "defend" their objective of not letting the rogue get away by giving chase with Athletics, or pinning them down with Shoot etc. What's being attacked or defended isn't bodies, but objectives in the conflict.
If the guards are taken out, they eat dust and return empty handed. If the rogue is taken out, then she is cornered with nowhere to run.
answered 47 mins ago
edgerunneredgerunner
15.1k13980
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I haven't gotten the impression the opposition needs to accept the concession; the Fate Core section on conceding mentions accept nowhere. You just do it, then work out how it'll unfold. I'm not sure if that's a holdover from previous editions of Fate, but it sounds like your first paragraph should be updated to reconcile with Fate Core concessions. (There's negotiation and the GM gets to veto it if it doesn't make sense like any other mechanic, but that's not relying on a conditional acceptance.)
$endgroup$
– doppelgreener♦
36 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Technically, this is conceding the conflict. If the opposition (the GM) accepts it, then the conflict ends on the player's terms. If they (you?) don't accept, then the conflict continues. Now the PC must defeat the opposition by taking them out.
The trick here is realising that taking someone out does not mean murdering or beating the crap out of them. It means somehow rendering them unable to take part in the conflict. When someone's trying to run away, this may well mean that the taken out pursuer (the guard in your example) loses track of the quarry (the rogue).
Frame the action properly and it will make more sense. The objective of the rogue is to get the f* out of there. The objective of the guards is not to let the rogue do that.
The "attack" of the rogue doesn't involve hurting the guards. The rogue "attacks" the objective of the guards by running away with Athletics. The guards may try to "defend" their objective of not letting the rogue get away by giving chase with Athletics, or pinning them down with Shoot etc. What's being attacked or defended isn't bodies, but objectives in the conflict.
If the guards are taken out, they eat dust and return empty handed. If the rogue is taken out, then she is cornered with nowhere to run.
answered 47 mins ago
edgerunneredgerunner
15.1k13980
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I haven't gotten the impression the opposition needs to accept the concession; the Fate Core section on conceding mentions accept nowhere. You just do it, then work out how it'll unfold. I'm not sure if that's a holdover from previous editions of Fate, but it sounds like your first paragraph should be updated to reconcile with Fate Core concessions. (There's negotiation and the GM gets to veto it if it doesn't make sense like any other mechanic, but that's not relying on a conditional acceptance.)
$endgroup$
– doppelgreener♦
36 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Technically, this is conceding the conflict. If the opposition (the GM) accepts it, then the conflict ends on the player's terms. If they (you?) don't accept, then the conflict continues. Now the PC must defeat the opposition by taking them out.
The trick here is realising that taking someone out does not mean murdering or beating the crap out of them. It means somehow rendering them unable to take part in the conflict. When someone's trying to run away, this may well mean that the taken out pursuer (the guard in your example) loses track of the quarry (the rogue).
Frame the action properly and it will make more sense. The objective of the rogue is to get the f* out of there. The objective of the guards is not to let the rogue do that.
The "attack" of the rogue doesn't involve hurting the guards. The rogue "attacks" the objective of the guards by running away with Athletics. The guards may try to "defend" their objective of not letting the rogue get away by giving chase with Athletics, or pinning them down with Shoot etc. What's being attacked or defended isn't bodies, but objectives in the conflict.
If the guards are taken out, they eat dust and return empty handed. If the rogue is taken out, then she is cornered with nowhere to run.
answered 47 mins ago
edgerunneredgerunner
15.1k13980
$endgroup$
Technically, this is conceding the conflict. If the opposition (the GM) accepts it, then the conflict ends on the player's terms. If they (you?) don't accept, then the conflict continues. Now the PC must defeat the opposition by taking them out.
The trick here is realising that taking someone out does not mean murdering or beating the crap out of them. It means somehow rendering them unable to take part in the conflict. When someone's trying to run away, this may well mean that the taken out pursuer (the guard in your example) loses track of the quarry (the rogue).
Frame the action properly and it will make more sense. The objective of the rogue is to get the f* out of there. The objective of the guards is not to let the rogue do that.
The "attack" of the rogue doesn't involve hurting the guards. The rogue "attacks" the objective of the guards by running away with Athletics. The guards may try to "defend" their objective of not letting the rogue get away by giving chase with Athletics, or pinning them down with Shoot etc. What's being attacked or defended isn't bodies, but objectives in the conflict.
If the guards are taken out, they eat dust and return empty handed. If the rogue is taken out, then she is cornered with nowhere to run.
answered 47 mins ago
edgerunneredgerunner
15.1k13980
answered 47 mins ago
edgerunneredgerunner
15.1k13980
answered 47 mins ago
edgerunneredgerunner
15.1k13980
answered 47 mins ago
edgerunneredgerunner
15.1k13980
15.1k13980
$begingroup$
I haven't gotten the impression the opposition needs to accept the concession; the Fate Core section on conceding mentions accept nowhere. You just do it, then work out how it'll unfold. I'm not sure if that's a holdover from previous editions of Fate, but it sounds like your first paragraph should be updated to reconcile with Fate Core concessions. (There's negotiation and the GM gets to veto it if it doesn't make sense like any other mechanic, but that's not relying on a conditional acceptance.)
$endgroup$
– doppelgreener♦
36 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I haven't gotten the impression the opposition needs to accept the concession; the Fate Core section on conceding mentions accept nowhere. You just do it, then work out how it'll unfold. I'm not sure if that's a holdover from previous editions of Fate, but it sounds like your first paragraph should be updated to reconcile with Fate Core concessions. (There's negotiation and the GM gets to veto it if it doesn't make sense like any other mechanic, but that's not relying on a conditional acceptance.)
$endgroup$
– doppelgreener♦
36 mins ago
$begingroup$
I haven't gotten the impression the opposition needs to accept the concession; the Fate Core section on conceding mentions accept nowhere. You just do it, then work out how it'll unfold. I'm not sure if that's a holdover from previous editions of Fate, but it sounds like your first paragraph should be updated to reconcile with Fate Core concessions. (There's negotiation and the GM gets to veto it if it doesn't make sense like any other mechanic, but that's not relying on a conditional acceptance.)
$endgroup$
– doppelgreener♦
36 mins ago
$begingroup$
I haven't gotten the impression the opposition needs to accept the concession; the Fate Core section on conceding mentions accept nowhere. You just do it, then work out how it'll unfold. I'm not sure if that's a holdover from previous editions of Fate, but it sounds like your first paragraph should be updated to reconcile with Fate Core concessions. (There's negotiation and the GM gets to veto it if it doesn't make sense like any other mechanic, but that's not relying on a conditional acceptance.)
$endgroup$
– doppelgreener♦
36 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
When the hurting stops, the conflict stops.
Sounds like starting a chase contest to me! This is a completely fine thing to do if you don't have to have total narrative control of your opponents to get what you want, which in this case I'm assuming is just "get away":
Transitioning to a Contest or Challenge
You may find yourself in a conflict scene where the participants are no longer interested in or willing to harm one another, because of some change in the circumstances. If that happens, and there’s still more to resolve, you can transition straight into a contest or challenge as you need. In that case, hold off on awarding the end-of-conflict fate points and whatnot until you’ve also resolved the contest or challenge.
In an earlier example, Cynere managed to get a vault door open so the three PCs could escape an endless horde of temple guardians. They all decide to run and try to lose them.
Now, the guardians and the PCs have mutually opposing goals but can’t harm one another, so now it’s a contest. Instead of running the next exchange, Amanda just starts setting up for the chase.
Fate SRD, Conflicts
Assuming you're alone, you can break and run from combat at any time circumstances would permit. You can probably even keep the "trip and fall" boost as a penalty to the guards' first action in the chase contest, assuming they're interested in pursuing you.
Now there's just the problem of deciding stakes for the contest. "You get away clean" vs "they capture you" or "they corner you and you have to fight", maybe? Anyway, once you hash that out, you can do a quick race to 3.
answered 19 mins ago
GlaziusGlazius
13.9k22475
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
When the hurting stops, the conflict stops.
Sounds like starting a chase contest to me! This is a completely fine thing to do if you don't have to have total narrative control of your opponents to get what you want, which in this case I'm assuming is just "get away":
Transitioning to a Contest or Challenge
You may find yourself in a conflict scene where the participants are no longer interested in or willing to harm one another, because of some change in the circumstances. If that happens, and there’s still more to resolve, you can transition straight into a contest or challenge as you need. In that case, hold off on awarding the end-of-conflict fate points and whatnot until you’ve also resolved the contest or challenge.
In an earlier example, Cynere managed to get a vault door open so the three PCs could escape an endless horde of temple guardians. They all decide to run and try to lose them.
Now, the guardians and the PCs have mutually opposing goals but can’t harm one another, so now it’s a contest. Instead of running the next exchange, Amanda just starts setting up for the chase.
Fate SRD, Conflicts
Assuming you're alone, you can break and run from combat at any time circumstances would permit. You can probably even keep the "trip and fall" boost as a penalty to the guards' first action in the chase contest, assuming they're interested in pursuing you.
Now there's just the problem of deciding stakes for the contest. "You get away clean" vs "they capture you" or "they corner you and you have to fight", maybe? Anyway, once you hash that out, you can do a quick race to 3.
answered 19 mins ago
GlaziusGlazius
13.9k22475
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
When the hurting stops, the conflict stops.
Sounds like starting a chase contest to me! This is a completely fine thing to do if you don't have to have total narrative control of your opponents to get what you want, which in this case I'm assuming is just "get away":
Transitioning to a Contest or Challenge
You may find yourself in a conflict scene where the participants are no longer interested in or willing to harm one another, because of some change in the circumstances. If that happens, and there’s still more to resolve, you can transition straight into a contest or challenge as you need. In that case, hold off on awarding the end-of-conflict fate points and whatnot until you’ve also resolved the contest or challenge.
In an earlier example, Cynere managed to get a vault door open so the three PCs could escape an endless horde of temple guardians. They all decide to run and try to lose them.
Now, the guardians and the PCs have mutually opposing goals but can’t harm one another, so now it’s a contest. Instead of running the next exchange, Amanda just starts setting up for the chase.
Fate SRD, Conflicts
Assuming you're alone, you can break and run from combat at any time circumstances would permit. You can probably even keep the "trip and fall" boost as a penalty to the guards' first action in the chase contest, assuming they're interested in pursuing you.
Now there's just the problem of deciding stakes for the contest. "You get away clean" vs "they capture you" or "they corner you and you have to fight", maybe? Anyway, once you hash that out, you can do a quick race to 3.
answered 19 mins ago
GlaziusGlazius
13.9k22475
$endgroup$
When the hurting stops, the conflict stops.
Sounds like starting a chase contest to me! This is a completely fine thing to do if you don't have to have total narrative control of your opponents to get what you want, which in this case I'm assuming is just "get away":
Transitioning to a Contest or Challenge
You may find yourself in a conflict scene where the participants are no longer interested in or willing to harm one another, because of some change in the circumstances. If that happens, and there’s still more to resolve, you can transition straight into a contest or challenge as you need. In that case, hold off on awarding the end-of-conflict fate points and whatnot until you’ve also resolved the contest or challenge.
In an earlier example, Cynere managed to get a vault door open so the three PCs could escape an endless horde of temple guardians. They all decide to run and try to lose them.
Now, the guardians and the PCs have mutually opposing goals but can’t harm one another, so now it’s a contest. Instead of running the next exchange, Amanda just starts setting up for the chase.
Fate SRD, Conflicts
Assuming you're alone, you can break and run from combat at any time circumstances would permit. You can probably even keep the "trip and fall" boost as a penalty to the guards' first action in the chase contest, assuming they're interested in pursuing you.
Now there's just the problem of deciding stakes for the contest. "You get away clean" vs "they capture you" or "they corner you and you have to fight", maybe? Anyway, once you hash that out, you can do a quick race to 3.
answered 19 mins ago
GlaziusGlazius
13.9k22475
answered 19 mins ago
GlaziusGlazius
13.9k22475
answered 19 mins ago
GlaziusGlazius
13.9k22475
answered 19 mins ago
GlaziusGlazius
13.9k22475
13.9k22475
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Role-playing Games Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f141795%2frunning-away-from-a-conflict%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
