Pages

Thursday, October 1, 2020

Cumulative Turn Undead in DF

One problem I've seen a few times in my game is repeated attempts to turn undead when it has failed.

To paraphrase one of my players, "You don't really know it won't work until you've rolled a 3 and it still failed." That attitude can be inspiring, but it's also a stubbornness that can grind down a referee's soul. It's painful to watch someone roll and fail, roll and fail, roll and fail, hoping that eventually they're roll low enough and you high enough to let those damned undead just run away (or suffer a penalty).

That's especially the case when the PCs are attempting to turn undead when it flatly won't work - the enemies aren't really undead, the enemies are in a special zone where they cannot be turned (a very D&D thing, but also something I've used), the enemy has enourmous effective Will and winning the contest is either unlikely or impossible. Yet turn after turn the PCs start to pin their hopes on a good roll instead of having the cleric or holy warrior do something else that can actually help.

It also means the drama of that first Turn Undead roll isn't. It's a question of, "Can I beat them this second? No? How about this second?" A lucky roll by undead foes just spares them for a second.

Perhaps ironically, I think a way to help players out of this trap, and get the GM out of the "fun" of a good roll for an undead foe becoming just a one-second delay of the inevitable with a penalty.

I think a limitation helps both - the player knows to stop trying and do other things, not just pray for a good roll or think he or she is helping when they just are not. It also means a good roll - or a well-used Wish or a Luck roll isnt just sparing the undead for a second.

Here are two options. I am leaning toward the first one for use in my own games, but I might use the second if it sits well enough with me after further thought.

Cumulative Turning Penalties

For each attempt to turn the same undead, you roll at a cumulative -2 penalty. This penalty lasts for 24 hours from the last turning attempt.

One Try Per Day

If you fail to turn a specific undead, you will automatically fail in any attempt until at least 24 hours after your last turning attempt. If you succeed, and stop concentrating on turning, you may try again - but if you fail on a subsquent turning, you cannot attempt it again for at least 24 hours.

FAQs:

"Surely a 3 must do something special?"

That logic is too combat-and-skill-roll oriented. It's not for Quick Contests. You really need to drop the thought that a "3" is anything better than the biggest margin you can succeed by. If you rolled a pretty good roll and failed, hoping for "critical" isn't a good approach when the rules that apply don't have critical successes.

Why -2, not -1?

-1 would make sense, much like forcing doors has, but it comes with a 1 FP cost for repeated efforts. This comes with none, so if you have a reasonably high roll (especially one of 17+ so you're already capped by the Rule of 16) there is little reason to worry about a -1. A -2 adds up twice as quickly, and makes attempts past 2-3 times crippling for all but the best of clerics against the worst of undead. There is still a chance, but each try is less and less likely. I think -2 works pretty well. So would -3, but I think -4 seems a bit too much.
Which one is for Felltower?

I'm a bit torn . . . I'm leaning toward the -1 cumulative but "One try per day" is harsh and easy. The first ignores failure or success - that penalty comes up even if you succeeded but then let the turning lapse. The second just says no.

13 comments:

  1. I don't know GURPS that well but it seems the system doesn't have a lot of arbitrary "n times per day" (often n = 1 in AD&D) rulings. It sounds like it is balanced more on use your powers often and you will deplete a resource (often fatigue) but you can get it back easily. So I would think the GURPSian thing to do is to either apply a cumulative penalty or drain a secondary resource, not go the AD&D route of "you get one attempt, period".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. GURPS has some "one try" and "one try per day" effects, but you're right, they are not as common as cumulative penalties and costs to resources.

      Delete
  2. I like one try per day. Harsh, but simple and quick.

    ReplyDelete
  3. What I do is I just tell my players it's not going to work. I'll dress it up: "The dark energy of this place seems to be strengthening the zombies' resolve." A lot of people think it's sacrilege for the GM to "help" players like this, but the way I see it, it's not fun for them, and it's not fun for me, so why bother?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In at least one case I said outright that it cearly had no effect at all. They tried over and over, even as I repeated it each time, in different words meaning the same thing. I wasn't be clear enough, but I didn't know how without just telling them to stop trying. I'd rather implement a clear rules basis for stopping. Besides, just telling them doesn't help the other case - try until it works better.

      Delete
    2. Where possible I give tactile feedback on resisted spells, so that turning minor undead feels like pushing your hands through jelly, tougher undead feels more like molasses, and strong-willed undead such as vampires feels like punching a wall. My players then have an informed choice of whether to press on with another attempt or try another tactic.

      Delete
    3. See, I don't like resisted spells to give feedback. It's not a resistance detector . . . just in terms of how I run game, I wouldn't feel comfortable doing so. It feels like a very different understanding of how such abilities work - that you project them out and feel them contact the other's Will, or HT, or whatever. That may work for some games but it requires a big shift in how we perceive supernatural powers working in my game.

      Delete
  4. I have often contemplated doing Turn/Hold/Damage Undead as a Modified Technical Grappling contest. It's not "automatic each round for free" that way (presuming the PC wins the initial contest), it means weaker undead can possibly be damaged, stronger undead have a greater chance of slipping the bond, and it gives the PC an idea of how strong the Will/Undead Compelling Force that they are "spiritually" grappling with is.

    And like I said, it allows for them to deal some damage without having to build a whole new ability to do just that...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. OK, there's some fun "wrasslin with evil" mojo in that, but it also makes turning undead into a big complicated combat thing.

      Might actually be good though. You need a skill - probably exorcism for PCs, max(10, IQ for Evil), a ST equivalent - here I'd go with Will+PI for PCs and Will+Evil* for the bad guys, and some fun weird spiritual hit locations.

      Delete
    2. That's more complex than I'm looking for, but I do think you could build a workable system off of that.

      Delete
  5. I think I'll work on it and then when I get it where I think it's easily usable, I'll throw it here for you guys to eyeball.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Have you considered giving the undead a cumulative +2 to their roll instead? So each failure by the PC bolsters the undead's ability to avoid being turned for a day?

    I don't know if knowing they're making an apparently strong enemy stronger would provide more motivation to stop than watching their own scores drop.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'd rather give them one more thing to track that give myself one more thing to track.

      Delete