Yavathol
-
Content Count
6 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Yavathol
-
-
Wow, ok..thank you both for your help:-)
Actions may exist to cover these situations but it seems unreasonable to expect the GM to know all the possible actions in order to tell whether there is overlap or not. Also, I don't have all the expansions so I didn't even know about those two cards in Lure of Power.
I have looked over the cards in the basic set, but all of those which recover stress or fatigue are either taken by the acting character (like Assess the Situation) or require an ally who is able to see and hear the acting character.
It makes sense that First Aid should be the action to use, and in future I think I would allow it to be used on an unconscious ally to bring their stress/fatigue to one under the "pass out" threshold, keeping in mind the rule about only allowing First Aid to be used once a day. Enabling Assess the Situation to be performed while unconscious seems a little complicated, and unintuitive!
With respect to holding fire until the enemy is in range, in hindsight I think I should have asked for some kind of Willpower check to see if the PC has the nerve to wait until, traditionally, "wait until you see the whites of their eyes"! I'm unsure about making it too complicated but certainly it makes sense to move a player down the initiative order if you are waiting for an enemy to go before you react.
I wouldn't allow any more complicated interrupts without an appropriate action, but it does surprise me that there isn't a standard rule since I think it should be a basic action, no training needed, when you can see an enemy coming from long or extreme range, to be able to wait until he gets in range. Certainly the enemy shouldn't be able to avoid getting shot because he is willing to spend enough fatigue to get from medium to engaged in a single turn!!
On which matter, actually, I originally missed the rule about fatigue causing monsters wounds instead, which would have injured the wargor a little more but probably not enough to kill him. I'm not too worried about the TPK, hopefully we can generate some new characters for "An Eye for an Eye" and that adventure seems more investigative and less combat-oriented. I do have a question about that, but I think that should go in a separate thread.
-
That's great Flyndad!
Thank you:)
-
Apologies for the "me too" post, but if anyone has a copy of these and could email me, that would be very much appreciated! sgdonohue at hotmail.com
Thanks!
-
Hi, I just ran my first game with "a day late" & tpk'd the party!
They rolled up an envoy, a dilletante & a coachman, plus I added Birgitta as an npc. Though I suggested using the pre-gens, they wanted to generate new characters, so I should probably have replaced the war
gor with a second gor.
The wargor hit hard enough to take most to zero wounds, & the ungors success line was responsible for them all having vast numbers of criticals. The players were also a little unlucky. I did try tricks like the merchant running off & 2 ungors chasing him. Then rutger regained consciousness & contributed to the fight, but he fired a pistol into melee, rolled a chaos star & killed a PC! I think it should have just caused 1 damage instead of normal wounds..?
Anyway, 2 questions came up which I didn't know the answer to:
1) one PC was caught by both bestial howls & passed out from stress. First aid was attempted, but I don't think it helps stress, only wounds. Is the PC out until the next rally step, or is there an action a PC can take to break out the smelling salts?
2) when the wargor was at long range, the PC with the blunderbuss won initiative & wanted to ready an action to fire when it was in range, instead of gaining fatigue himself to get to close. I let him do it, but couldn't see any rules on readying an action/interrupting a turn?
Any comments appreciated!
-
I'm keeping an open mind about the new edition, I can understand that it makes financial sense for FFG. What I would like to see in the new version is:-
1) mechanics which tie in to roleplaying, like Traits from Burning Wheel. So you might decide "my character is paranoid" and the GM decides ok, so whenever combat starts, you're going to get a +1 initiative, but on the other hand, you take a -1 penalty in some social situations where your constant looking around puts people off.
2) game options not limited to official "moves", e.g. So my character has daily power called "Fireball", but he can't light a torch because he doesn't have an at-will called "Cantrip"? Great.
One thing I've noticed about people's attitudes when they have lots of cards and prescribed powers is that sometimes this subtly encourages a mindset where those cards and prescribed powers are the only things your character can do. Hopefully this won't be the case if the Skills engine drives the game.
3) Player input to the plot, and not just in describing how their character reacts to the GM designed situation, e.g. GM: You made your spot check, and see Bernard talking to a shadowy figure in a grey cloak. Player: Oh, I want to spend a drama point! The cloaked guy is the priest of Morr that buried my sister!
4) Something a little more accurate than "Slaughter Margin" when it comes to figuring out how many cultists your party can handle!
I suspect that the majority of the rules are finalised by now, but I would certainly buy the game if any of the above points were included.
Y.
P.S. Wardancers!
Observation tests
in WFRP Rules Questions
Posted
Ok, looking through an Eye for an Eye, it seems like there are lots of calls for observation checks, and this provides some meta-knowledge. In theory, the players should ignore this meta-knowledge but when there is a mystery to solve, the temptation to use it is hard to resist!
I mean, let's say they are searching Aschafenberg's bedroom. One player wants to examine the door. I don't know what difficulty that should be since it isn't mentioned in the adventure and there is nothing unusual about it. So I say make an observation with no purple and the player knows even if he fails, there is nothing to find there. Or even worse, I just say 'it's a normal door' and don't even call for a check. Now he searches the bookcase, and I say make an observation with 3 purple, even if he fails, he knows there is something there!
One thing that immediately comes to mind, is that the GM could roll the purple dice in secret, and if even if it is a simple test, roll a few dice and ignore them. Now the players don't know how many dice you rolled, and don't know how many crosses you generated, though they do still know how many hammers they rolled.
Obviously, the GM should discourage metagaming and prevent other players searching the same area if they are doing so because they suspect the first pc missed something!
Has this been an issue for anyone else?