Ask a simple question, Awakened edition

[Suleri Drals]

I reopen the thread : (Original author : Archmage Joda)

To restart :

Q1 : Camelot was created by Imperium Rite or Practice ?

[Falcon777]

Hello, I’m currently playing an acanthus in a home game. Was having a light debate with our ST over Fate and direct damage spells with Only dots in fate

It appears that all other spheres of magic have a way of applying direct damage at 3 4 and 5 dots. Fate on the other hand seems to be alone in that it does not have an explicit rote in 2e spelled out that does direct damage. I was suggesting that it makes sense that I could use my third dot in fate to inflict bashing damage by using fraying effects to effect their fate, perhaps causing misfortune and damaging them indirectly (such as tripping and twisting an ankle, or a cutting of their destiny which hurts their lifeline). My ST suggested that while these are feasible things to do with Fate they require other spheres, such as forces for convenient physics shenanigans, or to damaging their destiny and indirectly hurting them it would require death spheres.

I’m not perfectly rules savvy, so please forgive my ignorance. I think they are correct in the examples I listed, but is it possible to do direct damage with fate alone? And what does that magic look like?

Thanks

Brassfist

Well, first of all the fact that you use the terminology of sphere's indicates that you (or the ST) may have some hold overs from Ascension, which is a completely different game. Awakening, especially 2e, requires far, far fewer conjunctional Arcana to achieve what it wants to do and we use the proper term of Arcana (plural) or Arcanum (singular).

That being said, Fate is the one Arcana that does seem to have a problem with dealing direct damage. Now, some people have said that you can just use Fraying and Unraveling to do direct damage using any of the Arcana (Unmaking doesn't do damage, it destroys entirely), but the problem is that you'll notice that not all the other arcana's direct damage spells work off of Fraying and Unraveling. Forces is probably the prime example where Weaving and Patterning are typically used instead.

Now, I think you can and ought to be able to hurt someone with Fate, just not directly. That's the thing about Fate, it's practically entirely about indirect causes and effects. So I would still allow Fate to hurt someone in the heat of battle, you'd just have to have the ST fluff it differently with the possibility that the damage isn't immediate. For instance, you cast a Fate Unraveling spell on an enemy and when their buddy next fires their auto rifle, one of the bullets ricochets into him, dealing potency lethal damage. Or you cast a Fate Fraying spell with a duration longer than one turn and the next time your enemy tries to attack you they end up tripping and hurting themselves, dealing potency bashing damage. That sort of thing. If nothing is happening in the scene and absolutely nothing in the environment could hurt the person under any circumstance whatsoever, then....yeah, I'd say Fate can't do direct damage there. But in that instance you're probably the one attacking first, so...eh, better to curse them instead. Now you'll want to notice that I said "absolutely nothing in the environment could hurt the person under any circumstances whatsoever..." The reason I said that is that Fate can cause just about anything to happen given enough time, so if there is a potential hazard in the area but it isn't currently dangerous, then Fate could make it both dangerous and more specifically to the person you've cursed. You just have to fluff it so that the hazard seems random. So yeah, creativity is your ST's friend in the instance of Fate damage spells.

Realistically speaking, thought, direct damage spells are not the way you want to fight anyways. Beyond some Storytellers saying that you can only risk Wisdom loss due to spellcasting, magic is far more useful in hampering your enemies and giving you a (or several) advantages such that your opponents won't want to commit violence against you, will flee, will throw down their weapons and beg for mercy, or some other end to the fighting. So an example of using a spell to give yourself an advantage would be to grant yourself the 8 again on firearms/brawl/weaponry rolls while also having Mage armor up. Your enemies will find it hard to hurt you while you end up just blowing their brains out/choking them out/cutting them to pieces so quickly their heads spin (sometimes in more than one way).

[Kvark]

Hello, I’m currently playing an acanthus in a home game. Was having a light debate with our ST over Fate and direct damage spells with Only dots in fate

It appears that all other spheres of magic have a way of applying direct damage at 3 4 and 5 dots. Fate on the other hand seems to be alone in that it does not have an explicit rote in 2e spelled out that does direct damage. I was suggesting that it makes sense that I could use my third dot in fate to inflict bashing damage by using fraying effects to effect their fate, perhaps causing misfortune and damaging them indirectly (such as tripping and twisting an ankle, or a cutting of their destiny which hurts their lifeline). My ST suggested that while these are feasible things to do with Fate they require other spheres, such as forces for convenient physics shenanigans, or to damaging their destiny and indirectly hurting them it would require death spheres.

I’m not perfectly rules savvy, so please forgive my ignorance. I think they are correct in the examples I listed, but is it possible to do direct damage with fate alone? And what does that magic look like?

Thanks

Brassfist

Fate is kind of unique in that it is, almost by definition, intangible and at the periphery. I don't know what a direct-damage fate spell would look like. I think Fate operates on a pretty unique level with the hexes and boons and it's probably appropriate that it can't be used to directly damage someone.

I would rule it this way: a spell with instant cast time is meant, mostly, to resolve in a turn (3 seconds). If someone is actively doing something that has a meaningful risk of hurting them within the next three seconds, I'd say it falls in the purview of fate to cause that catastrophe. If someone is running, you could make them stumble and trip, for example (maybe roll Dexterity + Athletics to resist, as they normally would). But if someone is not actively participating in an activity that could actually cause them physical harm in the next turn, I'd say it's probably outside the purview of Fate to make that happen.

[Brassfist]

Hello, I’m currently playing an acanthus in a home game. Was having a light debate with our ST over Fate and direct damage spells with Only dots in fate

It appears that all other spheres of magic have a way of applying direct damage at 3 4 and 5 dots. Fate on the other hand seems to be alone in that it does not have an explicit rote in 2e spelled out that does direct damage. I was suggesting that it makes sense that I could use my third dot in fate to inflict bashing damage by using fraying effects to effect their fate, perhaps causing misfortune and damaging them indirectly (such as tripping and twisting an ankle, or a cutting of their destiny which hurts their lifeline). My ST suggested that while these are feasible things to do with Fate they require other spheres, such as forces for convenient physics shenanigans, or to damaging their destiny and indirectly hurting them it would require death spheres.

I’m not perfectly rules savvy, so please forgive my ignorance. I think they are correct in the examples I listed, but is it possible to do direct damage with fate alone? And what does that magic look like?

Thanks

Brassfist

[Falcon777]

Thanks, Satchel!

Eh, #4 was like if you could say yes to numbers 2 or 3 but not require the "if" portion. Like, resonance "degrading" but also "infecting" the rest of your mana, if that makes sense.

Which basically means that you can ignore it, given the answers to the rest of the questions.

[Satchel]

1. Is that particular bit of mana separate from the rest of his pool?

It takes up the same amount of "space" in the pool as Mana he got from oblations or Obsessions, but I'd say it's probably worth keeping track of how much Resonant Mana of which types a character has.

2. If so, does the resonance "degrade" over time if he doesn't use that bit of mana?

Probably not, at least in a direct mechanical sense.

3. If not, does the resonance "infect" the rest of his pool?

Likewise probably not, although retaining/cycling Mana with the same Resonance/from the same external source may have narrative effects.

4. Is it possible that there are combinations that I haven't considered?

I don't know what this means.

5. What does resonance actually mean?

The metaphysical energies that precipitate emotions, images, or themes in their vessels and surroundings, propagated along ley lines and fed upon by spirits and goetia.

[Falcon777]

So tass and mana can have resonance, right? And when a Mage "consumes" the mana/tass it's in his pattern, right? So:
1. Is that particular bit of mana separate from the rest of his pool?
2. If so, does the resonance "degrade" over time if he doesn't use that bit of mana?
3. If not, does the resonance "infect" the rest of his pool?
4. Is it possible that there are combinations that I haven't considered?
5. What does resonance actually mean?

And yes, I have recognized that this could be a Mystery, just wondering if there's an official understanding.

[Neos01]

When your Nimbus goes off, you're at the epicenter. Do you think you could craft a spell to have it go off somewhere else? How would you do it?

A prime weaving spell i think

[Mrmdubois]

When your Nimbus goes off, you're at the epicenter. Do you think you could craft a spell to have it go off somewhere else? How would you do it?

[lnodiv]

*shrugs* Either way, it is less concrete.

It's an important distinction, though. In 1E, it was a theory - there were Mages (possibly even a majority of them) that believed that Atlantis was a semi-literal origin story.

In 2E, it's a myth and a metaphor, and any Mages that genuinely believe that the events described in that myth took place even remotely literally are liable to be fairly...touched.

[Michael]

A heard that the Fluff of Awakening changed in 2 Edtion. Who did it change?

That not a remotely simple question.

[Taldorblackfire]

*shrugs* Either way, it is less concrete.

[Mrmdubois]

Not a theory, a myth.

[Taldorblackfire]

Atlantis is mostly just an accepted theory versus being a pretty concrete thing. Most mages have a combined belief that things were better sometime in the past with their own background. Meaning it is much more open for the ST to do whatever they feel fits best. I personally always considered it a theory myself and just used it to make some cool moments where the characters found relics that might have been from the fabled city.

[Konradleijon]

A heard that the Fluff of Awakening changed in 2 Edtion. Who did it change?