Thug2
-
Content Count
35 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by Thug2
-
-
Yepesnopes said:
Within my house rules, me and my party definied the following rules regarding social encounters and basic action cards:
Due to the lack of a basic social action card, like Melee Strike or Ranged Attack act for combat situations, player characters may use the Perform a Stunt action card to Influence their target. This is done by using the card normally as described in page 68 of the Player’s Guide. The following limitation applies though: In a given encounter, a single PC can only achieve 1 successful "Influence" with the Perform a Stunt action card per skill (i.e. Charm, Guile, Intimidate, Leadership).
Understanding that with the simple succees line of the Peform a Stunt you achieve an "Influence" result, and also agreeing that not all the skills are equally appropriate for all social encounters, e.g. an Intimidate skill check may not be the best option (or it can even go against the PCs interests in the case of a chaos star result) to convince Lady Ludmilla to go with you to the Mascarade Ball.
The idea behind is that by limiting the amount of uses per encounter of a given skill, players who want to have a bigger impact in social encounters will need to buy extra action cards.
I believe that this is not the best option, since by analogy, there is no limitation on the amount of uses of the Melee Strike or Ranged Attack action cards. But given the difference in mechanics between the two type of encounters i.e. wounds and critical wounds versus stress, shame and a progress tracker, and typically the difference in the amount of "opponents" involved, we have found it so far a good aproximation.
I would not put such restrictions to the use of the Perform a Stunt action. Its purpose is to give players freedom to fully use their imagination. This rule also poorly simulates for example an encounter where character uses different kind of charming tricks to persuade Lady Ludmilla (he sings a serenade, kisses her hand, etc.). Stunt is a difficult and risky action compared to well practiced specialiced actions learned through experience. I would just add more challenge or misfortune dice to the Perform a Stunt check.
-
With this kind of scenarios the game world becomes very unbalanced and not very immersive. Where the hell does those cannonfodder dragons emerge if few novice adventurers can kill them? This reminds me of some stupid hack and slash computer game. I don't know where the problem is. Is it the GM's unwillingness to play dragon's strengths using its incredible raw strength, intelligence, and abilities (it really should have proper action cards)? Or is the combat system really so heavily favouring PCs?
-
In our last session yesterday we were using the rule
"If a NPC suffers a number of criticals equal to its threat rating, it will die/fall unconscious”.
It worked out fine. The battles were vs. low level enemies (skavens and ruffians) that had threat ratings of 1 and 2. Our characters were rank one and only one of them is combat oriented character who is wielding great weapon. He killed several enemies and I think that one of the kills was a result of the above rule (his single Thunderous Blow caused two criticals on a ruffian which was enough to kill that weakling). Some of his blows vs rats also caused enough criticals but they also caused enough wounds to kill them, so the rule didn't come into play. The rule adds excitement to the combat because it is more fun to see if the attack causes enough criticals than just calculate the same old wound score.
-
…or more grittier version of the above rule:
"If a NPC suffers a number of criticals equal to its threat rating, it will die/fall unconscious”.
-
Nishra said:
“If an enemy gets hit by a critical attack he must succeed a resilience check against the total number of critical wounds he suffers or he will die/fall unconscious”. That would take the TO of stronger opponents into regard as well as making the first critical count.
Example:
If Yorn hits a BM with 9dmg+1 crit the BM soaks 5 and would get 4 wounds and 1 critical. The GM would now roll a resilience check against 1 challenge die to see if he can take this hit or if he’s gone for good. If he withstands and would suffer another critical wound in this encounter, he would have to make another check against a challenge of 2.This is quite good solution. If you want to avoid additional dice rolls I propose a rule: "If a NPC suffers a number of criticals above its threat rating, it will die/fall unconscious”.
I will playtest this rule in my next play session and tell how it goes.
-
I use the tracker. Either skill checks for the static difficulty tests or actions when testing against opposing character can advance the tracker. The opponent's arguments (skill checks or actions) or wasted time (failed checks) can make the tracker go backwards. Our rule is that the tracker can only move maximum of one step in either direction per round. This way also the "social buff" actions become valuable and the tracker won't rapidly jump to some direction. Perform a stunt is used as a basic action that can be used in any circumstance but usually with higher difficulty modifier compared to more specialized actions.
-
Your rule regarding criticals is excellent! I thought that something about criticals was missing. They didn't have desired impact in RAW. I've tried other houserule variants like severity converted to extra wounds but that didn't work that well. Your ruling was just what I was looking for. I'm using it in my games now.
-
Seriously people, forget the stats and use your imagination (which could lead to roleplaying). In the case of weapons and gaming scenarios, different sorts of tools for different purposes.
Here is for example a scene where (witch) hunter named Uli is chasing a monster in dark narrow tunnels. Obviously, Uli left his stinky longbow at home. After all, it is a gay elves weapon and does not even properly fit in those caves anyway. So his chosen weapon is his new pistol which cost a ransom but is worth every crown because it makes him feel like a man. He has heard that the lurking monster carries some nasty disease so he does not want any close contact. He plans to give it just one shot in the head. After this cannon shot it should be dead. Now he is deep in the tunnels with pistol in his right and torch in his left hand. Even with lightsource he can see maybe ten meters at best. Suddenly a breeze of freezing air distingushes the fire and leaves him in utter darkness. Now he is at mercy of his hearing ability which unfortunately has gotten worse after few practices with that pistol. Uli consentrates and sharpens his senses and continues, the beast must be near. There it is! He hears steps in front of him and sees even darker monstrous shadow approaching. Like a flashlight the burning gunpowder lights the caverns. Then only darkness and ringing in his ears. Uli can feel his heart racing like never before. The picture is burned in his mind like a painting. A lightning struck wet mossy cavern wall and mouse with glowing eyes in the corner.
-
Actually downgrade of armour soak reducing actions was my initial concern as well. However, the propabilities of rolling four or more successes are so low that for example ***** in the Armour is still as good as before for certain (high Observation or weak) characters or any character when opponent's armour soak is very high. The real problem is that for some actions like Extreme Shot or Covering Fire this rule may trigger anomalously good damage because they only have one hammer success line. But for these actions this rule does not make much sense anyway, so its easy for GM to discard those results.
-
New higher lethality rule inspired by GM's toolkit one.
If more successes are generated than necessary to trigger the maximum success line of an action, the action reduces the target's armour soak value by one per extra success against this attack.
Note that there is no maximum amount of extra damage related to skill level. I think that the GM's toolkit rule overvalues already very powerful skill training. This rule also attemps to address the issue of armour being maybe too protective when compared to unarmoured style. Armour still is very effective against opponents with lesser strength, but more powerful opponets have better chance to pierce through armour.
-
to jahonen:
Welcome to forums fellowfinn! I too used to play warhammer long time ago, in Heinola if I recall correctly. If you have been in "The Quest" then I know you.
-
I must add that I think that recharge mechanic works really well because
- it balances different actions
- you can justify it to satisfactory degree (not perfectly as Alrded pointed out) by narration which usually fleshes out gameplay
- it adds variation to gameplay
-
Aldred Fellblade said:
Falling leaves block your shot for six rounds? Why don't they affect your basic Ranged Shot? Also, it's more than a little convenient to repeatedly use something that's so dependent upon a combination of specific enviromental conditions and bad luck.
If it's based on time to aim how come you now have to spend another five rounds aiming?
Surely numb fingers would affect your basic Ranged Shot too?
Basic Ranged Shot is not affected by minor nuisances because it is simple action and can be executed in various conditions (simulated by 0 recharge). Whereas Accurate Shot is so easily interfered (by falling leaves, slippery bowstring, flashing lights, sudden image of chaos moon, or any random temporary effect you can think of) or more difficult to control that you average time interval for doing such action is many times longer than basic Ranged Shot.
-
"You cannot use Accurate Shot because your line of sight is slightly obscured by falling leaves. This however will not penalize your basic Ranged Shot. Joe next to you is not interfered by those leaves and may use ..."
or
"Because you used Accurate Shot previously you only have time for one quick shot before your target reaches you (or hill blocking your sight). Joe next to you however has already aimed carefully enough to launch his Accurate Shot because his first shot was so quick one."
or
"You cannot use Accurate Shot now because your fingers are slightly numb for too much aiming and your touch is little bit off. This however will not penalize your basic Ranged Shot. Joe's fingers however are in perfect condfition and he may use ..."
or
...
-
Aldred Fellblade said:
Okay then, explain the earlier example to me. In the first round of an encounter I use Accurate Shot to hit an opponent. For the next few rounds the rules dictate that I am unable to use it again (unless I expend some Fortune Points etc.). However, someone standing right next to me with the same ability can attack the same target using that action. In what way does common sense dictate that I am unable to use my 'Accurate Shot' ability in these circumstances? Why do I need to be 'lucky' in order to be able to shoot more accurately sooner than I otherwise would? You're beginning to sound like a Flat Earther.
Accurate Shot requires great deal of concentration or preparation and thus is very sensitive to delicate circumstancial variations like wind, line of sight, shooting angles, target's movemets, etc. In the above example, your opportunity to use this action happened in the first round because maybe your target happened to move directly towards you or you saw perfect opening between the bushes or... [here your or GMs narrative justification]. However, in the next round it is propable that you dont have this opportunity again (maybe because buzzing fly just ruined you aim a little bit) unless you are lucky. The recharge and fortune mechanic just tries to simulate these propabilities and opportunities.
-
Problem with swapping the white and yellow dice is that it messes the action card balance and thus makes the game different than was intended by the developers. I employ different method to hinder the character development. In order to train skills second or third time, a character must have earned a promotion to higher status. For example if character enters to intermediate career he has done something that allows him to train his skills further or if soldier has been promoted to sergeant etc. Also higher skills can be accessed by hiring a skilled teacher, which could be expensive. Or maybe killing a wargor in epic fashion inspires such advancement.
This approach ensures that characters who take no risks and/or stay in lowly basic careers really cannot rise to super skilled levels. They only may take minor specialisations to their skills.
-
Overall very good rules. I have many things in the same direction and may even steal some of these.
Only one rule I suggest you to consider again. Your Double Strike balance is too balancing. I mean that its just too similar with some other high damage actions like Reckless Cleave of Thunderous Blow. Hypotetical example: Sturdy warrior carries two hand weapons and a great axe (he wants to be versatile and can also perform special moves with both two-handed and dual weapon styles). He can choose to face band of ungors or chaos warrior. Problem is that it does not matter what weapon he chooses against ungors or chaos warrior because the potential damage is around the same (Recless Cleave with Great axe or DS with hand weapons). Consider this rule that favours DS vs. ungors and two-handed style vs chaos warrior. DS three success line reads as in following bold text: You hit with your primary weapon for normal damage. You also hit with your secondary weapon for normal damage (Also maintain zero recharge for DS).
Try it. It does great damage to low soak enemies but its weak vs high soak enemies
-
fnord3125 said:
I never said I thought it was illogical OR a step-back mechanically. But I think I said that, at least to me, it would FEEL anti-climactic. Sword Master looks and feels "awesome." It's like, "Check out my sweet sword and cool special moves!" And then when I complete the career, I'd probably hope and expect to move on to something even more "awesome." But there are no "more awesome" options, just "normal" stuff like Soldier and Mercenary.
Yes it is kinda anti-climatic, but I think that there is nothing wrong with that. Our house rules for these situations are that if PC takes another basic career, he is not evolving or "taking a next step" in his development. Mechanically this means that he cannot train his skills more than once. However if he "gets promoted" by taking an advanced (or intermediate) career then he can train his skills more and rise to awesome levels. Unlike moving to another basic career the career promotion is not free and cannot be bought by advancements only. Something like a great accomplishment or heroic deeds are required. Problem is that currently there are not many advanced careers available. However, you could rule that for example Swordmaster, if he gets promoted, he can take Swordmaster career second time, becoming a Swordmaster Champion. Soldier can be promoted to Sergeant, Mercenary to Veteran, and so on. Just use the same career multiple times if necessary. But like I said, this promotion should not be easy and should feel like great accomplishment to a player. Thus, the skill training restrictions.
-
-
This is important topic. Action cards should be balanced in the sense that they at least give a tactical advantage in some special circumstances. My take on some of the "questionable" action cards
Dramatic Fourish - As mentioned, this action is vs. Discipline which is often much easier than vs. Defence. Well balanced by RAW
Rapid Fire - Clearly unbalanced without GM giving situational penalties. My suggestion: One added difficulty per range increment beyond Close range and maneuvers required for extra shooting. This makes this action great when opponent(s) are in close range with adding a risk element.
Arrowstorm - Maybe limit this to Waywatchers only
Double Strike - I believe that three success line should be interpreted as in the following bold text: You hit with primary weapon for normal damage. You also hit with secondary weapon for normal damage. This makes this action very good against low soak enemies but weak against high soak enemies like Chaos Warrior because the damage is reduced by soak two times. It also makes sense that you cannot put much force behind your individual blows when striking rapidly two times. Moreover, this action should be good against horde of enemies so I would not add recharge times.
Disorienting Strike and Setup Strike - These actions are duh because Staggered and Exposed conditions are lame. Our rulings for them are that when Staggered, one cannot use any Active Defences and Reaction cards. While Exposed, character cannot use Block and his defence rating (from armour, cover, shadows, etc) is reduced to zero. Also when blinded, one cannot Parry or Dodge, obviously.
Beat Back - Sluggish condition is also quite lame. I would also reduce the Sluggish character's Initiative down to bottom.
What do you think about these "corrections"?
-
Dvang already explained this well but you can approach this problem from different (purely gamist) angle as well:
One Challenge dice can replace two Misfortune dice. Note that this increases a chance for Chaos Stars, giving option for more flavourful outcome to skill check.
-
Silverwave said:
Thug said:
For example my last game had an episode Kill the Troll. First act was entering the swamp which was played in story mode with some skill tests. Player characters gathered some stress from mosquitos and approached a muddy pond. Rally step.
I'm wondering what's the point of making characters take stress and fatigue if you are to make them recover it before the next encounter.
It's not like you would make a character fall unconscious from mosquito bites...
Why not?
The first act simulates harsh conditions in the swamp. For some characters it can be stressful. Rally step is there for a chance of recovery. like you said, they are just mosquitos. It also rewards characters with strong discipline who have better chance to recover. Moreover, that extra little stress may cause problems later on because it cumulates. Troll cause fear, uses vomit attack, and so on.
-
Its not 3 acts per session or adventure. You could have a three act episode (encounter or scene) or an episode consisting of any number of acts. Encounters and acts are usually fast in game world time but not necessarily. Session usually has several episodes or at least one.
For example my last game had an episode Kill the Troll. First act was entering the swamp which was played in story mode with some skill tests. Player characters gathered some stress from mosquitos and approached a muddy pond. Rally step. Players attemp to recover some stress for their characters. In Second act Troll suddenly appears from the pond. This is combat encounter. After taking fatigue, stress, and wounds PCs wound the troll critically. Troll retreats and dives in the pond. Rally step. In third act PCs leave the swamp and observe a beastman who is spying on them. End of an episode. Spotting the beastman triggers encounter with the beastman (players choise). One of the PCs shoot beastman with crossbow and wounds it. Beastman flees. Wounded PCs decide not to chase the beastman. PCs travel to the village and GM decides that they recover all their stress and fatigue.
As you see the rally steps are important. Without recovery the PCs in my last game may have not survived the Troll episode. I think that this mechanic is smooth and adds depth to the game.
-
Intuition is frequently used by me as a GM. Its more of an GM tool to reward intelligent characters, i.e. giving them hints and bonuses in any type of encounter (even combat). For example hunch of an ambush grants bonus to initiative or chance to ready a weapon. Think it as an passive skill whereas Observation is somewhat more active (player driven) skill.
Folklore skill should be very important for an adventurer. Life is easy for skilled Folklorist. They find best merchants, healers, food, blacksmiths, jobs, and other contacts. Remember that life in the old world is harsh. People don't trust in strangers. Clothes and gear wear down, pickpockets quickly spot unwitted characters, food is often spoiled. Gm is free to harrass characters who don't know their way around, especially elves and men with low Folklore skill.
Nature lore is VITAL in rural setting. If you don't have it, you most likely die in wilderness, simple as that. Examples: Proper camping is necessary for recovery, avoid beasts, eat good mushrooms, don't get lost, etc. Just once in a while take your adventurers in the woods and make them suffer. They will learn.
Education can be great if player is creative. Maybe the knowledge improves a character in some way. He learns how to make potions. Construct a gadget of some sort, maybe a firearm. He learns chemistry and can make drugs, acids,explosives you name it. Also literacy can be powerful but that depends a lot on GM. For example PCs deliver love letters which are disguised communication of slaaneshi cult. Your nosey and educated (and possibly pervert) PC learns this fact and receives wonderful opportunities. He can uncover this cult or even join them!
When have you resolved social challenges in encounter mode?
in Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay
Posted
Yepesnopes said:
Thug said:
I would not put such restrictions to the use of the Perform a Stunt action. Its purpose is to give players freedom to fully use their imagination. This rule also poorly simulates for example an encounter where character uses different kind of charming tricks to persuade Lady Ludmilla (he sings a serenade, kisses her hand, etc.). Stunt is a difficult and risky action compared to well practiced specialiced actions learned through experience. I would just add more challenge or misfortune dice to the Perform a Stunt check.
Agreed. But somehow I want to motivate my players to buy social action cards, the same way they are motivated to buy combat action cards to have a good action cards rotation during the duration of a combat. If in a social encounter you can accomplish everything with a successful opposed skill check (with or without the Perform a Stunt action card), which is the point on investing exp on social action cards?
Another option would be the one mentioned by Hedge Wizard. Where without the proper social action cards you need to roll three+ hammers to obtain an "Influence" result.
I am looking for ideas.
Ok, now I see the problem clearer. Here's an idea: The action cards represent "special powers" that cannot be performed using the Stunt card. For example, your character meets some rich nobleman and lies to be the noble's long lost cousin. This is so outrageous lie that the character fails automatically and is sent to prison, unless, he has the Honeyed Words card! Or in another example a character wants to challenge somebody in duel, but there are no willing opponents. This attemp becomes impossible unless the character has Come, Face Me! action card. Would this mechanic give your players motivation to invest these cards, so that their characters can do almost impossible acts?