Dragon Keepers of the Fallow (Fate Accelerated)

[Marullus]

For my vote, I would want fixed ones. But I also liked the ones you picked as dragon-y.

[roryb]

Hmm. I don’t mind having standard ones. I might look again at those choices, I’m not sure I like all of them.

[roryb]

Okay, I had a look at some notes. I’ve taken a stab at this type of setting before. The last time, it looks like I had a list of three options to choose from best befitting a dragon’s style. What do you think of...not one universal set... but rather a limited set?

Approaches.

Distribute +3, +2, +2, +1, +1, and +0 among the following six dragon-specific approach types, selecting the most suitable adjective within each level:

Majestic, Haughty, or Dreadful (Flashy)
Ferocious, Mighty, or Stubborn (Forceful)
Swift, Precipitous, or Impatient (Quick)
Guileful, Cunning, or Sagacious (Clever)
Sly, Devious, or Secretive (Sneaky)
Enduring, Guarded, or Provident (Carefully)​

Dragon approaches are much less universal than the standard ones for a good reason. Dragons are unstoppable siege engines of death and destruction. Their actions, therefore, are restricted by the limited possibilities dictated by their natures, oft marked by less positive approaches.

When assigning scores to each, pick which of the three among the near synonyms best describes your dragon. You may change these at minor milestones instead of re-writing an aspect or swapping a score or stunt, but you must always select from the closed collection of adjectives. Thus, all actions will be funneled through your choices. If a chosen action cannot fit within the scope of the six chosen approaches, the dragon must roll without a bonus.

[Marullus]

That's a good compromise.

Can we add your additional set to the list?

Careful +1 Paranoid
Clever +1 Perceptive
Flashy +3 Furious
Forceful +4 Indestructible
Quick +1 Soaring
Sneaky +2 Calculating

I find some of them more classically dragon-y. My ancient forgebreather is more soaring and indestructible.

We seem to be gelling on non-verbal dragons (which is an important decision for dragonknights - are they mounts or verbal partners?). Given that, do we keep "Sagacious"?

[roryb]

I like your choices...and yes, let’s remove Sagacious.

[Leitz]

Are they empathic or telepathic bonds? If not, what is the bond?

I'm taking Arvad and Esse on the assumption that the bond goes through empathic, up to telepathic. However, they didn't know how to do that, or even know about it. They do feel each others emotions, though. She accepts it, he hasn't quite figured it out yet.

[roryb]

That goes with how you imagine it and define it. Perhaps having that empathic connection is unheard of, but you can do it (because your aspect or the facts you list specify it is so). My own feeling is that other than mundane empathic bonds, such as what an animal trainer might normally feel through body language, etc, is the only that normally exists. You can certainly dictate that it works differently for your bond as you are suggesting, and that will add an interesting new dimension. I like it!

[Marullus]

I think that's a perfect Fact to establish under your "Dragon Veterinarian" Aspect.

[Leitz]

I think that's a perfect Fact to establish under your "Dragon Veterinarian" Aspect.

Well, I think your PM questions about that Aspect are valid. It's been a busy couple of days, trying to get time to read the rules more closely and think through the concept. Your mention of Wart was useful, too.

[roryb]

After so long, it looks like Leitz and I will jumpstart this game again. I’d like to restart recruitment. Marullus and Spykee are invited, of course. However, I have no allusions that either will be interested after such a long dormancy.

Assuming a fresh recruitment, I’m looking for up to 3 players. Over the next two days, I’ll collect the great things my last players have established and correct the original post in this thread so it’s all there and easy to reference.

[Marullus]

Wonderful! I am glad to resume. My post rate may be slow, but I will try to be consistent.

[Leitz]

I'm looking forward to this. Well, my expectation is that I'm going to stumble through things, since Fate is different than what I know. However, I think it offers a lot of what I've been looking for in a game.

Rex and Jemmus expressed interest, and Rex mentioned having Fate experience. Would you feel comfortable with four players, since Rex and Marullus are more experienced?

I'll go look at Fari, and see what I can figure out.

Also, can you add me back into the group? I tend to clean up my groups and subscriptions every few months.

[Rex]

I would be interested. I have never been a player in a Fate game, but own the core books and ran a short (3 session) game FTF once to try and learn the system when it first came out. It has been a while since I have looked at the rules.

[roryb]

Awesome! Happy to have you three along. No worries if you're new at Fate. Mallurus and I can coach you through everything needed.

I'll be off today on a day trip, but I'll make sure to add Leitz back in. Mallurus, I'm not worried about a little slower rate. I have quite a few games on other boards going on.

As for a fourth player, it's okay. Not everyone may stay on by the time character creation is done. I like 3, but I can do 4...it just puts a little more of the onus on players to be mindful of aspects and some self-compelling.

More tonight...

[roryb]

Got you both invited to the game and have put in a request to un-archive. I'll probably be off the boards for the rest of the day.

[Leitz]

Got you both invited to the game and have put in a request to un-archive. I'll probably be off the boards for the rest of the day.

It may need to stay archived while the board "troubles" are sorted out. However, that's not an issue, since archived threads can be posted to.

Addendum And THANKS! I appreciate you doing the work on this game.

[roryb]

Good to know that archived games are not locked. My pleasure to do this!

[Leitz]

The appeal of this trouble is that it opens the concept. The "gruff old man" is self-limiting - by introducing the external impetus for him to express compassion and emotionality, he's more interesting. If we switch to the dragon-trouble I just need to think how to overcome this another way. (Actually, I would love if a PC played the young-dwarf/daughter/princess/protoge to challenge it by establishing me be overprotective of them.)

I'm easily seeing Arvad in this role, if you want. Maybe Astrid likes Arvad in the "not the same species, but good friends" way (did she give him the dragon rider gear?), and Lukkor sees something odd yet promising in the boy.

So far the mental concept I have is that Lukkor trained Arvad, and thus has a "leader" role. What Lukkor may not know is that Arvad grew up as a cast off, and sees Lukkor as a father figure. Arvad doesn't know his own family, but he considers Esse his "daughter" and is very protective of her.

On the Human and Dragon approaches, I'm thinking that there's some fun in the opposition. Unlike Lukkor, Arvad's personality is very different from Esse's. She's a free spirited young girl, and he's trying to be the protective father.

[roryb]

By the way, I updated the first post with the small changes to character generation that we have discussed so far. If I forgot anything, please speak up.

@Rex, when you are looking into character creation, the first post to this thread will be helpful. Scroll to the bottom for a list of specific stat block items to include for your character.

[Rex]

I read through it, just need to think some on it. Most likely will have a concept Friday or the weekend.