Jump to content

KillingGoblinBabiesIsDishonorable

Members
  • Content Count

    23
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About KillingGoblinBabiesIsDishonorable

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. This is boiling down to the semantics of what an action consists of. An Attack roll to swing your sword at a man and hit him. To me, the action is swinging your sword to hit the man. Nothing should stop your character from trying to hit that man. Doing damage, however, is a lateral result of that action, not that action itself. You cannot take an action to "kill this guy", just like you can't take an action to "Find this thing." You can take an action that you hope results in that. I would say that the action you are taking is remembering, theorizing, or surveying. That is what your character hopes to achieve, they hope to remember something, come up with a theory, or scan an area. As a result of that action, they hope to find insight in the investigation, but just like it's possible to land an attack and not do damage, it's possible to come up with a theory or completely survey an area and not achieve anything from it beyond the success of trying. I guess it's all personal preference on how you care to read it. I interpret it that way because I want a world where characters try impossible tasks, It's strange to me that individuals would only ever pursue avenues they had a chance of success in, just based on celestial intuition of divine meta intervention. If your character attempts something stupid, they are attempting something stupid, people attempt stupid things all the time, and if you just say "no you can't even try because it's stupid" then you're creating a world where the PC's, in universe don't have that flaw as people. Rokugan your way and all that.
  2. I will let him roll, and hopefully while he's preparing his dice for inevitable failure one of the other players asks to survey/survival to actually have a chance. The way I see it is it's not the DM's job to tell the player what to try and do. A player tells the DM what he's trying to do, and the DM tells him what happens as a result of trying to do it. If someone said, "I want to recollect deeply on my medical studies and research in hopes of remembering where these bloody footprints go", then I as DM am obligated to say, "Okay, that would be a recall / medicine roll, you can try if you want." Best case scenario he successfully recollects his medical studies about blood and is no closer to following bloody footprints. Worst case scenario he can't even properly remember his medical studies and is still no closer to following bloody footprints. It's a strange world one lives in where no one ever has bad ideas or tries something impossible because the magic voice in the sky/their heads tells them the TN is too high, or that combination of skills can't possibly achieve that result.
  3. It's a matter of letting them try not letting them succeed. You can try to jump 100 feet in the air from a standing position. You can roll for it and everything, but it doesn't mean it's going to happen That's the realm of opportunities. Failing to find what you were looking for but finding something else of value is textbook opportunity usage. If you're using fire ring to theorize where something could be, that's your intent. During a fight you want to kill your opponent, but your roll isn't a roll to kill the opponent, it's a roll to attack in hopes of killing the opponent, just like a roll to theorize a solution is a roll to craft a theory in hopes that it will provide you with something, it isn't a roll to get the thing. With success you successfully come up with a theory, as you were intending to do. It doesn't have to be a fruitful or correct theory in any way, and if you would always give the player something worth while for any roll they do that's just you being very generous as a DM.
  4. I'll let 'em. My approach is to let anyone try anything, go ahead and give it a roll! 2 successes? You theorize that you might find the murder weapon tucked behind the armoire. Oh you check? It's not there. Afterall, it was only a theory. Meanwhile the guy who gets 2 successes using his eyeballs to just survey the scene notices the lamp over there is covered in blood!
  5. "Mirumoto Honor and Soul as One; Blade Chasing Blade Just as Lady Sun and Lord Moon Danced Together in the Heavens... School"
  6. I can +1 this. I think that there could be more tweaking to the balance of duels, In my experience the optimal approach is actually to just spam strike and never use center. Provoke is just terrible, too. I like the concept, but there's some refinement to be done there, I believe. I've also turned to using intrigues as a guideline more than anything and it seems to work well. I have the players make a case, actually debate their point, and then adjust the TN based on how good of an argument it was. A bit of skill, a bit of luck, and if they're using an npc's preferred approach there's a high chance that a good argument just auto-succeeds and hands them the point. If they give such a good argument I can't think of a way to retort on the NPC's round, they immediately gain 1 or 2 bonus points and the intrigue usually ends either right then, or after just a bit more coaxing if it's a task with real stakes and high threshold.
  7. •I've run both duels and intrigues multiple times each. All of my players have dueled and intrigued against both each other and npcs. •The longest duel was probably a bit over 3 minutes where as the average intrigue was the same, 3-5 minutes, though they were meant to be fast-paced and had low point requirements (3-5) and had back and forth RP between each roll to determine the TN. •True duels should be something to be avoided, unless you have a death wish. Intrigues arn't bad, but i'll probably stray away from using them too often, only when the situation feels appropriate. Alot of social interaction can just be single roll or rp'd out. •At first I was adding the +2 from two handing a katana after doubling the deadliness, instead of considering it deadliness 7 before the doubling when it came to finishing blows. Needless to say quite a few people got off lucky during the first session until I realized my mistake. Other than that, it all seems about right. I wish there was an action like the opposite of a calming breath, a provocation action that gave someone +1 strife or something. Finishing blows make duels really interesting and tense, but not when both duelists just take water stance and use calming breath+opportunities to grind away strife every turn. At that point it's just a 1 on 1 skirmish with no range rules.
  8. •Searching without knowing what you're searching for is tough sometimes. I tend to make it based on location. If you're searching the woods, survival, if you're searching a blacksmith shop, smithing. If you know what's supposed to be there, you can usually tell if something's amiss, right? •Nope they all seem pretty straight forward, even if I keep calling courtesy sincerity on reflex. •We've only ever brought up advantages/disadvantages in seemingly the worst time. "Hey..Wouldn't your illness prevent you from running away from that wolf like that?" Would like to bring them up more in the next sessions, though. •Hero of the People, Prodigy, Great Potential, Inner Gift, Gaijin Gear. For disadvantages, Black Sheep, Consumed (The Shourido), Hostage, Lost Love, True Love, •Not really. Daredevil makes me a bit apprehensive since I don't want someone to be able to use it every single round of combat (after all fighting is risking your life!), a daredevil duelist would be insane if that were the case, but none that I have actually had trouble with yet.
  9. I kind of hope your interpretation is wrong purely because I don't want to think that the dev's believed that a system in which you could move 3 units closer to something 5 units away and still have it be 5 units away when the units did not change was an intuitive system that need not further explanation.
  10. How do you propose? What in the book indicated that range bands "aren't linear" and that 4-3 doesn't always = 1? Range bands are a measure of distance between two points. If you move one range band closer, you're decreasing the range between you and the second point by 1. What leads you to believe that doesn't translate to 4 range band difference turning into 3 range band difference?
  11. How? If I move one from standard, one from manuever, one from water and one from an opportunity on my manuever roll, whether I add that up and say "I move 4 bands closer to band 5, 5-4=1, i'm in range 1." or "I move 1 band closer, now he's in range 4. I move another closer, now im range 3. I move another closer, now i'm range 2. I move another closer, now i'm range 1." it comes out to one either way. There is nothing in the rules that dictates you could ever move 3 range bands towards a target and end up in the same range band as you started unless you're purposefully going forward and back for some reason.
  12. Whew. Is it bad that I really thought "You're trying to move relative to two things at the same time. Of course it breaks the system." to be someone's sincere attempt at a defense? Probably because it's not the worst one i've seen so far...
  13. How does one go about moving closer to the enemy without moving farther away from your friend if your friend is right next to where you were before you moved and isn't moving? If an enemy bushi is standing range 1 from his two friends and then charges 4 range bands towards you, are all of his friends still range 1 from him? Are they all range 1 from YOU now too? Is there a celestial belt tying their waists together, or does he exist in two places at once? I'm looking at a hammer and wondering why it's not a screwdriver because it's labelled as "screwdriver" in the box. I'm not making up faults or going out of my way to find little loopholes to complain about, I'm taking the exact rules exactly as they are printed and using them, and these are the kinds of problems that arise. If you feel comfortable hand-waving them away and saying "don't think too hard about it" then that's fine, more power to you, but that doesn't change the fact that, as written, movement involves bending space and time around you every time you take a step. If they wanted it to be abstract they shouldn't have defined the exact ranges, and if they wanted accuracy they shouldn't have made it so abstract. It's like they wanted both and got neither.
  14. My favorite 3 Samurai problem: You and your friend are hugging (Range band 0), an arrow whizzes by your head from range 5! You cannot let this stand! Entering water you simple manuever one range closer, range 1 from your friend, range 4 from your enemy. Then you take your once per round move, Range 2 from your friend, range 3 from your enemy. You are now 4 meters from your friend, and 10 meters from the enemy, *even though your friend and the enemy are 400 meters away from each other still*...Not to mention you're now 390 meters closer to the enemy, by moving 4 meters away from your stationary friend...Truly a samurai's greatest ability is to bend space around them, I don't know why that's not brought up more often in the narrative...
  15. In our very first session one of the PC's got a maimed arm and the other permanent brain damage. It was a few days later I realized all those critical hits that were temporary wounds should have been much worse, as I wasn't adding the two-handed weapon bonus properly. All in all, yea, limbs go flying off, so you'd almost rather get hit with Dying (3 turns) than "Where'd my leg go." "I would like to keep this single blank die for my fitness test." "But you can keep four.." "I choose to just keep the one. By the way, can one of you guys come heal me?"
×
×
  • Create New...