Topic: Who is afraid of ...

[munchy]

I was wondering whether you let enemies ... and maybe even friends ... make RR vs. fear if a character changes into a werewolf form or gets himself worked up into a berserker rage? Both events take time resp. rounds which makes them quite dangerous if the enemies are able to just attack as normal. It must be quite horrible/terrible, whichever, to see someone's body to twitch and jerk transforming in jumps and rips into something horribly between man and wolf or to grunting, growling and shouting lose his temper.
Any thoughts on that?

[GrumpyOldFart]

I'm still a comparative beginner with HARP, but since I'm looking into the Dark Knowledge rules I think I'd use a variation of that to resolve those kinds of situations.

[Pat]

I would think it would be the old "familiarity breeds contempt" rule. The first couple of times I might impose a fear check (for friends) but it would soon become old hat and therefore be unnececessary. For foes, I would guess it would be dependant on level and possible experience. If they are high enough level their attitude would probably be "been there, done that and bought the t-shirt" therefore a fear check would be unnecessary but low level foes may have to make a fear check (if the GM wishes it).

[Mitchiban]

I would give them a higher difficulty number to resist the fear for first time stuff like that.  The Manuever difficulty penalty based on how shocking/alien you think it is above and beyond the actual horror of the creature or event.  A frothing beast of a half man half wolf could be scary enough but watching the change would be horrific.

I would think that your resistance total is your experience.  You have the option when advancing to raise your resistance so that is already covered.   If you have something scary in your world definately use it. 

I would throw in that exposure to the same source of the fear as Pat above metioned should grow old over time.   So drop down the manuever difficulty chart and look at the bonus you could give the characters and eventually if it becomes routine dont even have them roll. 

[RandalThor]

Mostly I would go with what Pat said, but it all depends upon the genre you are playing in. Is it horror? Is it action? Is it comedy? Is it an amalgam of 2 or more of them, plus others?

In other words: What is the tone of the campaign? If you are going for a Lovecraftian tone, then fear checks every time - with possible insanity checks thrown in. If the tone is more action-horror, then in the beginning, but eventually the characters/NPCs/etc.. would start to "get used" to it. If it is comedy, well then, anything goes! Whatever is silliest, I guess.

[GrumpyOldFart]

In other words: What is the tone of the campaign? If you are going for a Lovecraftian tone, then fear checks every time - with possible insanity checks thrown in.

Which is why I suggested this:

http://www.ironcrown.com/ICEforums/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=item80

[ReaperWolf]

Were I running Ravenloft or a similar fantasy-horror game/setting I can see where there'd be an ambient level of fear that would require RRs to avoid but for most fantasy games, I wouldn't grant freebie fear effects on player characters who were lycanthropes or berserkers. Any kind of gratis ability, whether it effects fellow PCs or not is prone to abuse as the other PCs adapt their play style to capitalize on your freebie presence attack.

In short, I wouldn't but it's your game so if your rule tweak makes for a more enjoyable experience I say go for it.

>>ReaperWolf

[GrumpyOldFart]

Personally in the case of undead, lycanthropes, etc. I could see the sense in a check for effect the first time a given person encounters one, but really only then. You can't necessarily tell who has faced a particular shocking situation before by who runs, but if you can spot the difference you should be able to tell by who panics.

[Mitchiban]

Another option I learned from a West End Game called Torg is let them know something is different about a monster or place.  No roll on their part just tell them something like "...as you pass the gates and enter the cemetery something just feels wrong. Almost as soon as you enter the Tomb part of you knows you shouldnt be here."   Then look at the players, smile knowingly, and tell them.  "For this scene no fate points can be spent."  Now they know they are not in Kansas anymore.  Best part is the unknown.  They know something is different but they dont know what is causing it or why.

Sometimes changing the world laws is a better simulation of fear.  To often fear is mechanical.  RR take a minus.  Cower.  Fighting a Vampire in the magical reality of Torg was pretty normal fantasy play.  Just roll dice cast a fear spell etc.  But a Vampire from the Horror Reality of Torg was a completely different thing.  What made it different was the Laws that govern the game changed to make it darker more dangerous.  When a player was targeted by the Horror Vampire and Marked for Death it meant something.  Not being able to use possibilities (Fate points) to offset damage or dodge attacks was huge.  Of course over time the party would gather enough intel and a few items and perhaps a stong case of vengence as a love interest was taken etc that they would be able to lessen the fear and overcome it.  It was a serious feat to defeat a beast there. 

I would agree with the Players not gaining to much of an advantage for changing to scare NPC's but definately would shift their view of the character to something negative.  If they want to have the fear effect buy a blood magic fear spell.   Players unless GM approved would be like the Fantasy Torg from above while True horrors would be well Horrific.  Grrr. Now I want to combine some of those rules for harp.... lol

[RandalThor]

It depends upon if it is mundane fear or supernatural fear. In the case of mundane fear, most people "get used" to things, only specific people will actually never adapt and possibly get worse. I would graduate the modifier down at each exposure (how much depends upon the RR results) until there is none, and on the next successful fear RR, I would make that the last one.

For supernatural fear, well it is full RR every time.

[GrumpyOldFart]

For supernatural fear, well it is full RR every time.

I can see it for a fear spell... I can see it for a major God. For a minor God or a dragon, probably not.

[Marc R]

afraid or not is generally a role play thing, much like angry or not is a role play thing. . .I think the RR situation is where it's a check to see if you panic.

The GM can decide to make "Panic checks" whenever they choose works in their game, but if the GM designates any singular thing as "supernaturally fear inducing" then it's another matter.

In one game-world I have run, undead are unlife, and the energy field/aura around undead pokes the fear/panic button in your brain directly. . ..no matter how often you're exposed, they always do it. . .even if you can't see them, or are behind a barrier like a wall, when you enter a given radius you start to feel them. . .expressed as an RR vs Panic. . .you can't really learn to get over it, it just always works that way. . .you are always afraid, the check is to see if you're afraid and still rational, or afraid and panic. You can go up levels (or spend more on RR will) making it easier to not panic, but you can't reach a point where you can skip the roll, because it's an involuntary, irrational effect, much like you can't choose not to breathe.

IMO that's what the check is, it's a panic check. . .and when to use them will vary from game to game. . . .

I must admit, that over the years, I've had more success with the "Make the players paranoid" method described by Mitchiban than I have had in just saying "You're scared." "Now roll for panic" . . .though at times you need to go that route, especially if you fail, and the players choose not to get into the scaridy-cat groove.