Jump to content
sndwurks

Blink and You'll Miss It - Easily Overlooked Rules

Recommended Posts

30 minutes ago, Avatar111 said:

that is how star wars works, but where did you find that rule in l5r? 

Yup!

Quote

A character can only resolve a given opportunity effect once per check, but many opportunities can scale with additional <Opp> symbols spent.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Earth is bad at the midpoint of Intrigues because you can't really offensive with it (or, if you can, you're probably looking at a higher TN - I'm certainly not letting you Spread Rumours with Earth nearly as easily as I would with any other stance). Earth is REALLY good in Intrigues when you're starting them, because its Shuji are loaded with Opps for info gathering, and at the late part with Shuji for, well, making sure your buddy doesn't fly off the handle.

Mid-intrigue Earth is bleh (unless your buddy is flying off the handle THEN).

 

ETA: I mean, sure, you can Stonewall Tactics or something to further protect your buddy, but that's the sort of thing that should probably let you murder Strife anyway.

Edited by JBento

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JBento said:

Earth is bad at the midpoint of Intrigues because you can't really offensive with it (or, if you can, you're probably looking at a higher TN - I'm certainly not letting you Spread Rumours with Earth nearly as easily as I would with any other stance). Earth is REALLY good in Intrigues when you're starting them, because its Shuji are loaded with Opps for info gathering, and at the late part with Shuji for, well, making sure your buddy doesn't fly off the handle.

Mid-intrigue Earth is bleh (unless your buddy is flying off the handle THEN).

maybe. but not enough to convince me that just getting strife below or equal to composure level uncompromise a character. unmasking should be the foremost option, or staying a emotional wreck for the rest of the scene.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JBento said:

Getting 2 Strife off of you isn't going to really keep you uncompromised, though, presuming the other side actually WANTS you to be compromised. 2 Strife isn't, as you pointed out, all that much.

yeah, but then its goign to be ping pong vs compromised and uncompromised. not sure how i like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's probably only for 1 round, though. Presuming the dude teetering on the edge is actually doing something with their action they're probably getting Compromised mid-way through it, and then the other side can pounce on them. It's not like you're passing any check worth a **** while compromised, what with half the successes having Strife on them. If two folks on the other side act in succession without someone calming the target, not even that: one of them can compromise the target and the other can just do whatever it is they want out of the Intrigue.

Strife-giving is probably going to be a whole lot more than 2 Strife, so the other side is actually winning on this on action economy alone.

...

It's actually not a bad Intrigue tactic, now that I think of it. Keep pushing on the weakest link and forcing everyone else on their team to keep him from getting them all thrown out of the room, while the rest of YOUR side goes on to accomplish your goal. Hmm...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, JBento said:

It's probably only for 1 round, though. Presuming the dude teetering on the edge is actually doing something with their action they're probably getting Compromised mid-way through it, and then the other side can pounce on them. It's not like you're passing any check worth a **** while compromised, what with half the successes having Strife on them. If two folks on the other side act in succession without someone calming the target, not even that: one of them can compromise the target and the other can just do whatever it is they want out of the Intrigue.

Strife-giving is probably going to be a whole lot more than 2 Strife, so the other side is actually winning on this on action economy alone.

...

It's actually not a bad Intrigue tactic, now that I think of it. Keep pushing on the weakest link and forcing everyone else on their team to keep him from getting them all thrown out of the room, while the rest of YOUR side goes on to accomplish your goal. Hmm...

yeah, its definitely a big part of the game! great part of it actually. but if most scene it comes down to rolling earth opportunity vs opponent fire opportunity and a character ping pong in between being compromised and uncompromised all the time... i find that gamey. hence why I feel that putting it at half your composure, makes it a challenge that the party needs to commit to and less swingy, otherwise, just unmask.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Vutall said:

Having to maintain that balance between compromised or not is pretty core to the gameplay. I don't recommend modifying it.

you are ok with the compromised condition being like ping pong ? i think it is abusable. especially when you factor in the "wait" action (that is also totally busted) and you get party of people managing their compromised status way too easily, in a cheesy way.

Edited by Avatar111

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, first, Wait can only be performed in a Skirmish conflict, not an Intrigue. (And Wait isn't broken at all, it's like any other form of held actions from other RPGs)

Second, yes, I am absolutely ok with that. Think of it like a real life debate between heated people. You have ebbs and flows where one person is clearly struggling to keep themselves in check and then regain their composure only to lose it again at a carefully crafted remark from their opponent. They still haven't outright done anything crazy or shameful (which would equate to an outburst) but they are clearly having trouble.

Furthurmore, if say a party was all just going earth ring, I'd probably introduce NPCS that have a demeanor that increases TNs vs earth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Vutall said:

Well, first, Wait can only be performed in a Skirmish conflict, not an Intrigue. (And Wait isn't broken at all, it's like any other form of held actions from other RPGs)
 

no. the fact that you can call something that will never happen and get an end turn action, but regaining your top of the initiative order on the next round, potentially getting 2 turns in a row, is not ok.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean, there's literally no point to the Wait action in intrigues, because you act whenever you feel like it in the round.

And if a party is just going Earth ring, they're probably not really getting anything done. You can inflict more strife than they can remove, and they're not getting any successes in to accomplish any goal other than "I gather information on person X", which is more useful at the start of the intrigue, when your Strife is probably not all that high anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Vutall said:

Second, yes, I am absolutely ok with that. Think of it like a real life debate between heated people. You have ebbs and flows where one person is clearly struggling to keep themselves in check and then regain their composure only to lose it again at a carefully crafted remark from their opponent. They still haven't outright done anything crazy or shameful (which would equate to an outburst) but they are clearly having trouble.

Furthurmore, if say a party was all just going earth ring, I'd probably introduce NPCS that have a demeanor that increases TNs vs earth.

without being able to "wait", i wouldn't mind it as much, though i will probably still adjust it to need to get equal or lower than HALF your composure to uncompromise. a struggling character, emotionally compromised, is not switching his attitude at almost every turn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Avatar111 said:

no. the fact that you can call something that will never happen and get an end turn action, but regaining your top of the initiative order on the next round, potentially getting 2 turns in a row, is not ok.

The risk with that is that EVERYONE ELSE is acting before you do this round, and if they happen to either knock you out or Compromise you you're not coming ahead of anything.

ETA: For me, the obvious problem with Wait is that, as written, you can abuse it with Water stance.

Edited by JBento

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you make that rule change, you are forcing characters to be compromised a lot longer than the game system intends. Being compromised is rough, you can't keep any dice with strife on them and your vigilance is set to 1.

You are designed to be able to teeter right on the edge, hence why we have so many little options to remove points here and there. (Calming Breath, certain techniques, opportunity expenditures, etc)

I'd advise against your current idea quite heavily.

About Wait:

It can only be used in a skirmish, so that already limits it. Even if I am at the top of my turn and decide to wait and then the action never happens and I get two actions in a row, I fail to see how that is game breaking. First, you have to stay in the same stance you were in at the start of your turn when you waited, so opponents can play around it by shifting their stance at the start of their turn, and they can also wait themselves to interrupt you so you can't get two actions (Or 4 in water stance) in a row in a row .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JBento said:

The risk with that is that EVERYONE ELSE is acting before you do this round, and if they happen to either knock you out or Compromise you you're not coming ahead of anything.

ETA: For me, the obvious problem with Wait is that, as written, you can abuse it with Water stance.

sure also abusable with water stance... forgot that. but i don't see why you don't adjust your initiative order to the spot where you took your action, at the very least.

imagine one player hiding, start an initiative, he wins ini (cause ninja). he waits, immune to everything, then double act at the end of turn. ok, this is just an example, maybe not a perfect one, but i smell all the issues from here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Vutall said:

If you make that rule change, you are forcing characters to be compromised a lot longer than the game system intends. Being compromised is rough, you can't keep any dice with strife on them and your vigilance is set to 1.

You are designed to be able to teeter right on the edge, hence why we have so many little options to remove points here and there. (Calming Breath, certain techniques, opportunity expenditures, etc)

I'd advise against your current idea quite heavily.

About Wait:

It can only be used in a skirmish, so that already limits it. Even if I am at the top of my turn and decide to wait and then the action never happens and I get two actions in a row, I fail to see how that is game breaking. First, you have to stay in the same stance you were in at the start of your turn when you waited, so opponents can play around it by shifting their stance at the start of their turn, and they can also wait themselves to interrupt you so you can't get two actions (Or 4 in water stance) in a row in a row .

yeah the i wait, you wait, we all act at the end of the round will happen A LOT.

on the other subject, you can always unmask. or basically, you skip like 1 or 2 turns. in theory, you should manage your strife before it gets too close. and on a 12 composure character, we are talking 6 strife to reduce below compromised.  I will definitely test it as intended though, but I think it will make unmasking too rare, and i'd rather have more unmaskings (even if it means they are less hurtful). will definitely consider if its too bad for the gameplay though.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Avatar111 said:

imagine one player hiding, start an initiative, he wins ini (cause ninja). he waits, immune to everything, then double act at the end of turn. ok, this is just an example, maybe not a perfect one, but i smell all the issues from here.

Oh no, are ambushes an extremely favorable way to seize the beginning of a conflict? Say it ain't so.

Are all of your players playing honorless ninja? Are they winning every single skirmish round 2?

Is this extremely narrow example dominating the action of your group? Then add more combatants against them. Stop providing as much concealing terrain. Have their enemies hire more competent ninja to out-ninja your massive all-ninja PC group.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Hida Jitenno said:

Oh no, are ambushes an extremely favorable way to seize the beginning of a conflict? Say it ain't so.

Are all of your players playing honorless ninja? Are they winning every single skirmish round 2?

Is this extremely narrow example dominating the action of your group? Then add more combatants against them. Stop providing as much concealing terrain. Have their enemies hire more competent ninja to out-ninja your massive all-ninja PC group.

or just  improve the rules. the excuse every pen&paper rpg player/designer come up with is "DM can do whatever he wants", is all fine and dandy, but its a weakness.

are you also cool with the water stance "wait" action ? i mean.. just put more ninjas.

Edited by Avatar111

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ninja aren't really that good at initiative, though. I mean, they can beat the casters, but about half the warriors leave them in the dust. This tactic alone is eating up a lot of XP on improvements: Tactics, 2 rings for Focus, Fitness, Skulduggery, Martial Arts [something], and they're still getting owned by anyone with high Vigilance, or, heavens forbid, someone with The Earth Needs No Eyes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rules as intended (and some could argue as written, but lets just say intended for now) you cannot use your wait action in water stance if: It is a movement action (that restriction is in the wait action rules), if it shares the same type as your first action (detailed in water stance), or if it requires a roll (also detailed in water stance)

So... I'm not sure exactly where you are getting ninja from?

Finally, I still believe that this edition is pretty darn solid, very few errors, and even fewer (if any) truly game breaking things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...