Take the 2-minute tour ×
Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for gamemasters and players of tabletop, paper-and-pencil role-playing games. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Presence, Conviction, and Endurance all have a Fortitude trapping that indicates how many stress boxes the character has on the appropriate track, i.e. Conviction has Mental Fortitude that affects the Mental Stress track.

On YW147 the rules discuss mortal stunts, and one of the ways to create one is Adding New Trappings to an existing skill, which can refer to a new trapping, or a transplanted trapping from another skill.

If a character's concept would indicate that they have the ability to fend off stress, but not through the applicable skill, would it be appropriate to transfer that trapping to the other skill, and what would that do to the stress track?

share|improve this question
add comment

2 Answers 2

up vote 4 down vote accepted

It is possible to alter the skill affecting a stress track using a stunt according to general FATE rules. The original skill would lose its effect on the stress track length and the new skill would be used to determine it.

You end up "transplanting" the trapping to another skill with the stunt. Not creating a duplicate trapping in the said skill.

I don't know if DF mentions this in the book explicitly but it should be applicable without problems.

share|improve this answer
    
Thanks! I didn't know if the original would lose the effects or not- I figured it would, but wasn't sure. YW147 doesn't explicitly say whether transplanting moves or copies said trapping, and that was what was confusing. I now see where it says that limitations can also be applied, and that makes it even better, i.e. the same as with inhuman toughness, the altered stress track would only apply under certain circumstances. –  wraith808 Apr 2 '12 at 16:07
add comment

My inclination is to make it a minor Refresh power of some variety, allowing them to have an extra "reserve" stress level in a given track. I think that allowing this workaround discourages the use of a given skill, and might easily be abused to build a concept. The GM, of course, has the final say in what happens (or doesn't) so if you/they want that mechanic to apply then so be it, but it wouldn't be recommended if you ask me.

share|improve this answer
    
Thanks for the answer- I was asking about a specific rules interpretation rather than an answer to a situation, so this wouldn't really apply. –  wraith808 Apr 2 '12 at 16:11
    
Then I would agree with the answer before mine in that it comes from the other skill instead, not in addition to the original. However, I think the book is implying that while they give you all sorts of trappings for skills, they want to remind the GM/Players that the book is never the be-all-end-all, and if you want to add a trapping you couldn't find you should do so. –  CatLord Apr 2 '12 at 21:33
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.