Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
BlaxicanX

Dodging Flamers, Unclear Rules?

29 posts in this topic

Hello again, fellas~

 

So, me and my roleplaying group are having a bit of a disagreement about how dodging flamers work. One of our party believes that you can dodge the flamer attack, and then if you fail to dodge it, make an agility test to dodge it, and then if you fail both of those you make the aglity test to avoid being caught on fire. So all in all he thinks its 2 chances to avoid the flamer damage (dodge reaction+ag test), and 1 chance to avoid being caught on fire (ag test). 

 

I don't think that's correct. It seems to me that what the rules are saying is that you don't get to make a dodge test at all, seemingly because it isn't a standard shooting attack that you roll BS for, etc. You roll just the ag test to avoid getting hit, and if you fail that, you roll a second ag test to avoid getting set on fire.

 

So, which one of us is correct?

 

Thanks in advance guys!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He is.

You can Dodge the flame attack IF your AB allows you to move out of the Area of Effect, just as when dodging grenades. See rules for dodging AoE weapons on p193.

Then, if you cannot attempt, or fail your Dodge, you are in the Area of Effect and follow the rules as normal. The Agility test to avoid being hit replaces the attackers BS-test, and the second test to avoid catching fire is treated the same for all fire-weapons (ie shotguns with Inferno shells, or psychic fireballs).

This became slightly clearer with Black Crusade, where they split the existing Flame Quality into 2 seperate effects: Spray (which deals with the to-hit / aility to avoid being hit), and Flame (which deals with putting people on fire, Agility to put out the flames).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do you determine the AOE size of the flamer cone, though? Blast weapons have a number in meters that clearly defines whether or not you can get a dodge test against it. Flamers do not.

 

A friend of mine math'd out how big the cone would be based off of the 20 meter length, 30 degree width, and came up with ~11 meters at the cone's widest point. Surely the writer of the flame rule didn't intend for you to have to try to math it out, though?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's probably lifted from the tabletop battle-game where you use plastic templates. 

But yeah, you have to calculate the width of the cone as a function of the distance from the shooter. Its a linear function, and ends at the weapons given Range. The width at any point is ~0,54 * the distance from the shooter, which is 5,4m at 10m range, 10,8 at 20.

You could make a little table, like the one below, or you could just wing it :)

 

Distance Width
1 0,54
5 2,68
10 5,36
15 8,04
20 10,72
25 13,40

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah those rules are wacky. If you are engulfed by 11 meters of prometheon fire, how do you escape that by simply rolling an agi test? This becomes even more strange after actually failing a dodge test.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if you were at the very end of the flamers range, where the widht of the cone is about 11m, you simply have to take a step back…

There are very few (if any) places inside this template where you can't dodge to an edge with an AB of 4.

However, if used indoors, on bridges or with other clever usees of scenery, you may not be able to dodge outside the effects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Darth Smeg said:

 

Well, if you were at the very end of the flamers range, where the widht of the cone is about 11m, you simply have to take a step back…

There are very few (if any) places inside this template where you can't dodge to an edge with an AB of 4.

However, if used indoors, on bridges or with other clever usees of scenery, you may not be able to dodge outside the effects.

 

 

Having played the Table-top game for years this is a pretty accurate portrayal for the weapon.  It's ideally used to soften or break the morale of a lightly armored unit that's entrenched in bunkers, and isn't used so much in a firefight.

The real advantage of the flamer is using it in tandem with another acolyte with a blast weapon.  An NPC, or player, only receives one reaction per round.  The frag grenade from an ally (a very cheap and effective tool) combined with a flamer is a very potent way to clear a room.  (of course, not dice proof)

That chart emphasizes the advantage a standard sized flamer has over a hand-flamer.  Range on a flamer matters.

EDIT:  It appears that 20m is the ideal range to engulf all but the speediest of foes, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IdOfEntity said:

EDIT:  It appears that 20m is the ideal range to engulf all but the speediest of foes, no?

Just because my table goes to 25m doesn't mean that your flamer does.

Engaging enemies at almost maximum range makes it possible for them do doge backwards. A regular flamer has a range of 20, which means that at 16+m people with AB of 4 can leap back instead of to the sides (or more likely, diagonally forwards and to the side, straight towards the closest edge of the template.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the replies, guys! 

 

I sent FFG a an email asking the same question before making this thread. They finally replied after a week.

- - - - - - 

Hi Isaiah! 

You try to Dodge; if successful you move up to your Ag Bonus out of the way of the flames. If you fail, then you make an Ag Test to see if you catch on fire or not. So just two Agility-based Tests here. 
If I read you right, you have it correct though it is a Dodge Test, then the Agility Test for the flames if the Dodge failed. 
 
This help? 

Tim Huckelbery
RPG Producer
Fantasy Flight Games



E-mail:




Rule Question:

Hello~


So, me and my roleplaying group are having a bit of a disagreement about how dodging flamers work. One of our party believes that you can dodge the flamer attack, and then if you fail to dodge it, make an agility test to dodge it, and then if you fail both of those you make the aglity test to avoid being caught on fire. So all in all he thinks its 2 chances to avoid the flamer damage (dodge reaction+ag test), and 1 chance to avoid being caught on fire (ag test). 




I don't think that's correct. It seems to me that what the rules are saying is that you don't get to make a dodge test at all, seemingly because it isn't a standard shooting attack that you roll BS for, etc. You roll just the ag test to avoid getting hit, and if you fail that, you roll a second ag test to avoid getting set on fire.




So, which one of us is correct?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That makes sense. So basically the target(s) get one chance to dodge, and if  they lack the dodge talent, they get  a freebie chance to dodge anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You make an Ag test to advoid the flame attack. You would only use a Dodge skill if your GM allows it and if you have Dodge +10 or Dodge +20, because there is no point in using your dodge skill if you don't have the skill beyond basic because otherwise you would be halfing your chances to advoid the flame attack.

Now if you have failed your Ag test and take damage you will proceed in having to take another Ag test to advoid being set on fire.

So in final you take the first Ag test to advoid the flame attack, you take the second Ag to advoid being set on fire.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

vogue69 said:

wow **** just got real with cleanse & purify

Very much so.  An acolyte with a flamer and associated talents can make a low Ag NPC's life very short.  Even high Ag NPC's have to be wary in confined quarters since they'll be deprived of that dodge attempt.  And any NPC using a weapon that needs to be braced (sans Bulging Biceps) makes a great target as well.

And we all know what energy weapons can do to a sufficiently cooked NPC's ammunition, right?  Gibbets ensue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not convinced. Many of the questions I have seen answered officially by FFG have clearly shown they haven't read the rules in detail, that they have gone with their gut on it rather than thinking through the rules thoroughly, or that they have been thinking about one of the rulings in one of the other games in the line rather than the one mentioned.

Flamers have always simply replaced the "to hit" roll with the agility test to avoid being hit. Cleanse and Purify is essentially a way to compensate for the fact that you cannot actually increase your ability with it otherwise. The ability to dodge is an entirely seperate ability. The rules for dodging the flamer are covered by dodging area affect weapons already mentioned, ie that you can only dodge them if you can reach the edge of the area with your agility bonus. Change this and suddenly they often become noticable better than other weapons (as they only get 1 opportunity to avoid being hurt by it, rather than the two that every other weapon allows).

I personally feel this ruling was simply a result of the person making it going "It doesn't sound right that they should get to avoid it twice" and making the ruling on that basis.

Flamers are best used in confined spaces, where the target does not have the opportunity to reach the edge of the area of effect, such as enclosed rooms, tight alleys, etc. This reflects their best realistic use, where they are used for clearing out bunkers, buildings and the like, rather than as a general field weapon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if you recieve an official answer and are still not convinced, I got no idea what else anybody can do, mate. Houserule it your way if you'd like, I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said, I have just had much experience of seeing the official answers to questions, and them not gelling with the rules as written (even with the FAQs) if examined in detail, feeling like they have just briefly skimmed over the question and rules and then. The answers are also often worded in such a way that they sound like they are answered in a brief fashion.

 

And it fits with FFGs general reputation. Amongst everyone I know (personally) FFG has a reputation for being terrible at writing clear, consistent rules. Good games, yes, but that often need heavily FAQed ( the errata even needs errata in some cases) and interpreted to work out the details, often written in such a way that suggests they haven't thought everything through. Like GW they seem to write rules presuming that everyone is coming from a common framework, and so interpreting edge cases should be clear. If this is the approach that they seem to take with writing rules, it doesn't bode well for answering questions from members of the publc regarding those, especially for a game system they didn't originally design.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It sounds like you're trying to convince yourself that you're right here. I have no gripes with your ruling. I'm just telling you to go ahead and rule it as whatever you want because it's your game.

Ghaundan likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Borithan is right, Tim Huckelbery is mistaken. It happens.

 

First you roll Ag to see if you're hit - a stand-in for the attack roll.

Second, if you failed the first roll, you can expend a Reaction and attempt to dodge.

Then, if you're still hit, you take damage and roll Ag again to see if you're on fire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to see some supporting evidence. Just because it's your opinion doesn't make it "right". But like I said, do whatever you want, no need to try and convince me otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to see some evidence as well, because frankly, that is a nonsensical interpretation. 

 

You say "this substitutes the to-hit roll", like it's for balance, but there's zero in-game action that that represents. Regardless of how you try to word it, that line of thinking is basically:

 

- You roll to avoid being hit.

- If you fail, you spend a reaction to try to avoid being hit. 

 

So you're rolling to dodge it twice. That makes no sense. Even with the knowledge that the first attempt isn't "technically" a dodge, as in the reaction dodge, you're still moving to avoid the blast, twice. Which makes zero sense.

Edited by BlaxicanX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you assume that when you shoot your heavy stubber at people, they aren't moving as well before they make a Dodge attempt? 'Cause they actually are, and that's why your chance to hit them is such as such but generally lower than the chance to hit a stationary target.

 

There's no difference between spraying the room with stubber rounds and engulfing it in burning promethium. Some people will duck for cover for a second, some people will just have the luck to not be in the bullets'/flames trajectory. That's what the BS roll represents for the stubber and what them making Agi tests represents for the flamer.

 

Then, once it's determined that some people are indeed hit with an attack, they have the right to evade with a Dodge test. Simple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, there is a difference. You have to roll to hit for those stubber rounds. The reacion dodge they get is those people who "duck for cover for a second", and those who just "have the luck to not be in the bullets" are the ones where the attacker fails their ballistic skill rolls against.

 

Flamers, on the other hand, hits, because instead of being one little projectile, it is a spray of promethium that blankets an area. The free "dodge" they get is to balance it out. Making the defender roll agility to be "lucky to not be in the flames" makes zero sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We wouldn't have this discussion if some people could parse the rules correctly:

 

Flame quality, p. 128:

All creatures in the flame’s path, a cone-shaped area extending in a 30 degree arc from the firer out to the weapon’s range, must make an Agility Test or be struck by the flames and take damage normally.
 
Dodge action, p. 193:
Once a hit is scored, but before Damage is rolled, you can try to Dodge if you were aware of the attack. 
 

I'm in the flamer's area of effect and fail my Agility roll, therefore I am hit. Since I'm hit, and assuming I have a Reaction left and was aware of the attack, I can make a Dodge test. Simple, huh?

 

Now show me the fragment of the rules that contradicts it. And I want it to be an actual quote, not someone's idle musings on the subject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, that isn't simple because the lines themselves are contradictory. 

 

"Must take an agility test or be struck by the flames and take damage normally.

 

If you've already failed to evade the test and have been counted as "struck by the flames and taking damage", then rolling an additionalagility test is redundant. It's too late. 

 

Demanding a quote instead of "idle musings" is ironic, considering your argument is your own interpretation of the text, which directly goes against an official ruling on the matter...

Edited by BlaxicanX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You keep repeating the redundancy argument like it has any bearing on how the rule works. No, it doesn't have any bearing. Dodge is redundant by nature. The ganger shoots me with his pistol - I'm hit! Dodge roll - actually, I'm not hit, he missed! Redundant and retroactively changing the outcome, but working as intended. Argument dismissed.

 

Further, 'struck' is a synonym of 'hit'. If I'm struck/hit by an attack, but have a Reaction ready, and no rule prevents me from making a dodge attempt, I can dodge it. Doesn't matter how it was determined whether I'm hit or not.

 

There's nothing in the wording of the Flame quality that would deny me my dodge attempt. Well, the size of the AoE template certainly can exceed my ability to dodge AoE effects, but it's not the part we're talking about here.

 

BTW, I just realized, Tim's answer isn't actually wrong, it just works on the assumption that you're already hit by the flamer - as in, you already failed the Ag test to see if you're hit at all. From this point, the sequence of events he talks about lines up with the actual rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0