Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Question about Fortune for NPC's and being Taken Out.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Question about Fortune for NPC's and being Taken Out.

    I was wondering if NPCs are able to use Fortune points to change the results of their Die rolls?

    I did not notice anything that specifically prohibits it, but it does seem like the potential for a lot of fiddling at the table.

    I also wondered if "Dying" was the default condition after being taken out if the attacker chooses not to pick one.


  • #2
    I am a mere newbie, so take everything I say with however big a pinch of salt you wish... but from the many other systems I have used, I would say..

    I would probably differentiate here between minions and more significant adversaries. For minions I would not use fortune for altering rolls. And note the sidebar on P210 , suggesting minor adversaries are treated with Fortune of Zero anyway! Note the assessment of Minor here is slightly different from the Threat Level, in my opinion. Nameless goons, mooks, minions, whatever label you prefer, but these are the 'extras' of the movie (I think the book calls them 'minor NPCs'), and are distinct form more significant adversaries ('major NPCs' with their own individual narrative heft and perhaps even blessed with a name!) This distinction also comes up around pages 191-192, where there is a clear distinction between minor and major NPCs, especially in the discussions on initiative and morale.

    Even if you ignore the sidebar , minor threat level adversaries tend to have rather low fortune, so spending on altering the roll consumes a very large part of their pool leaving them very vulnerable.

    So TLR, I would say NO for 'minor NPCs'. And it is your call with of the adversaries are nameless minor NPCs.

    For Major NPCs, I would err towards saying they could do this... and more so the more 'major' they are. You want your players to remember that arch-enemy? Have him achieve a dramatic and fortunate success with a flamboyant stunt that beats them! They'll remember that! But even then, I would generally err on the side of only doing so at moments of high drama, and/or related to the NPCs favoured stunts or talents.

    My intention in summary, is to have low fortune (not quite zero, but probably single figure) for minor NPCs, and generally not use it for altering dice rolls . For major NPCs, I will have larger Fortune, and more generally consider use of it to alter dice rolls when I think it will make for high drama, fit the vibe I want for the adversary etc. In most cases therefore, during an action scene, I'll be spending very little time worrying about this... for minor NPCs none, and it'll be pretty obvious and organic when a major NPC needs to do it.

    I hope :-)



    Re Dying, that is a curious question. If the attacker does not choose, I would say it is up to you as GM, but only worry about it if it is narratively important. If so, do what best suits the narrative.

    Comment


    • #3
      That's more or less how i was thinking of running NPCs. Major NPC's can change rolls in their favour, but minor NPC's cannot. If I'm being honest, I don't really like changing their rolls to the detriment of the players as it feels a bit sneaky.

      One of my games is using the Expanse rules for a non-canon game, as they are a bit more streamlined than the full Modern AGE. I added in some of the adversaries from Modern AGE. They have a health score instead of fortune, so I was leaving adversaries with "fortune" but only allowing it to function as a health pool. (My game also uses the Fear rules from the Modern AGE companion, but I'm using them like Stress from Free Leagues Alien RPG or Tuesday Night Game's Mothership).

      Comment

      Working...
      X