I can see, in my game, some intra-party conflict looming and I'm not keen on letting people burn fate points agaisnt other players. Spend yes but burn no. All I think is how annoying would ti be to spend a lot of time planning a 'murder' just for the recipient to go 'ha ha... fate point' and then nuke you? I'd be pissed off personally! I'd apply the same rule if the palyers somehow managed to do the same to a bad guy with 'Touched by the fates'.

Thoughts please.

If this has been done before im' sorry, could some kind soul post a link? :-)

funkwit81 said:

Reducing the fate point burning system is a perfectly good way of increasing the game lethality, and limiting the prevention of burning to being hit by someone with touched by the fates or equivalent isn't a bad way of doing it.

But then again, if you happen to be 'touched by the fates' more than the guy trying to kill you, maybe you should be able to get away. He tries to put a bolt round through the back of your head and somehow his aim is thrown off. Then the guy gets winged rather than splattered. That's what burning fate supposedly represent, the whim of the universe is on your side. But still, you don't just ignore the killing blow, it describes it as just barely surviving the attack. Depending on circumstances that may or may not do you a lot of good- if you're in an alley maybe the cops show up, or maybe the murderer stands over you as you struggle to crawl away and finishes the job.

funkwit81 said:

I am not following you with this thread. Are you saying you do not think players should be able to avoid other players from killing them by burning fate points? If so I would ask why are they killing themselves? There are alot better games out there for some pvp action. If you are saying you want to get rid of the whole concept of burning fate points in general, I guess just prepare for some massive casualties and have some character sheets ready for new characters every session.

I have the same problem with fate points as the OP.

This setting is rife with reasons for players to fight one another and I would really hate it if the ones who lost the fight are just gonna get away with it by spending fate points.

Nimon said:

I didn't think it was that complicated, I'm not planning on getting rid of fate points entirely, just not letting people burn them if they get ina fight with fellow Acolytes, they can spend them yes but burning them is a no no.

Imagine one of your group of acolytes, let's call him Bob, is slowly turning Radical. your inquisitor has authorised you to execute Bob if the situation warrants it. Bob is powerful and would probably fry you straight off if it was a fair fight. You spend a lot of time coming up with a plan to neutralise Bob, you put effort and in-game time into this plan, maybe spending some resources and,a t the culmination of all your efforts Bobs player turns around and just says "I'll burn a fate point'"then turns around and fries you?

I'd be mightly peeved. Also you may say well you can use fate points but then it simply comes down to who rolled the highest at Character Creation for Fate Points and that doesnt seem to reward planning and/or rolepalying to me, just whoever was luckiest way back when.

this situation may arise in my game and I'm not keen on either sitting through a farce of players burning fate point after fate point or saying "this isn't that kind of game" as it seriously limits roleplay opportunities.

Well, part of the issue here is that if you burn a fate point, it is implied that the character is still seriously injured. Its just enough for them to get away somehow, assuming their enemy doesn't keep attacking. Its not a sudden "I get back up with 1 wound" sorta deal (unless you're a sister of battle with that one late game talent).

Just say that "he wasn't actually dead when they buried his corpse" sorta deal. Perhaps he falls out a window, loses an arm, that sorta deal. Or gets horrifically burned, etc. Just keep an ear out for just what the players might actually do, and try to come up with a "you don't find a body," assuming that the player being killed will burn a fate point.

funkwit81 said:

If "bob" turned around and fried me could I not myself burn a fate point? Burning a fate point really just means you survived, you as the gm can determine how that player survives(he may be in a coma).

And yes, your initial post was hard to follow.

Nimon said:

But then it would just depend on how many fate points you had, ergo who rolled the highest number at Charcter creation and I'd rather reward roleplaying and planning than one lucky dice roll made months ago.

Also combined with the title of the thread I thought it'd be clear. Though I do admit all my lecturers have commented on how I can swing between crystal clear explanations to a really idiosycratic approach so I do apologise for the confusion caused.

As a player would you be happy to spend time and effory, and mayve some in game cash, on a plan to have ti negated so easily and then get in a battle of 'Who's got the most fate points'?

I'll comment on your first response to Nimon. If you are concerned about the random nature of fate points rolled at character creation, take away the roll and give everyone the same amount. You are within your rights as a GM to do so.

That is what our GM did, actually. So far, it hasn't been an issue.

Then again, I haven't rolled a bad Psych Phenom or Perils yet. Then we'll find out how wonky the FP system in intra-party conflicts are...

Asgard4tw said:

I may do that in future, though it removes one of the advantages of playing a void born, but it doesn't help me with my current quandry as the current group of players have done well to keep their characters alive so far.

Hi Funkwit,

is the player of Bob fine the fact that others are coming for him? And this scenario with "radical Bob" the real scenario you have in your group?

If so, let it happen and allow fate points.

If the loyalist wins, Bob will still have survived this somehow and given into the custody of the =I=...to return as a mind-cleansed.

If Bob wins...well he will either have to leave the cell QUICKLY. In that case, the loyalist burns the fate point to still be alive.

After all, pc turning on one another with deadly attempts will always lead to one of the pc leaving the party... if not even a player leaving the gaming table.

Hi Funkwit

I thought your original post was pretty clear actually. However my advice doesn't just concern fate points.

My thoughts are that intra-party conflict should be avoided. You will end up with unhappy players and could even lose some. In one campaign I played years ago, possibly the best I have ever played, the GM manufactured intra-party conflict after nearly two years playing our characters which ruined the game and left me with a bad taste in my mouth, not to mention a negative attitude towards gaming with those people again.

If you can't avoid it, then use a bit of common dog. If a dude is hog tied and the rest of the party hold him while he is 'executed' for heresy, then he is dead. Simple; but this will annoy players. If you want to involve fate points, perhaps you could try something like using the number of fate points each character has as a modifier in a contested roll, rather than the complete farce of having to shoot someone in the head five times! Should the 'victim' win, then they wake with a massive headache in a dumpster somewhere.

Better yet though, talk to the player who is going radical and determine how comitted the player is to the heretical course of action. If that fails, avoid breaking up the group by having the inquisitor man-up and perform the execution personally if necessary. This doesn't support the 'pawn of the inquissition' feeling of the game so much, but will help to keep things from getting too peronal between players.

That's my two cents.