Pages

Monday, February 7, 2022

Rules & Rulings from 2/6/2022

Yesterday was session 120 of Felltower and, naturally, we had rulings to make.

DFRPG Slams & Shield Rushes

A few on this:

- A shield rush adds +DB of the attacker's shield, and gives -DB to the damage the defender inflicts. It doesn't say it provides DR, it says it reduces damage. So I ruled that this matters for questions like "Who did less damage?" and "Was this twice the loser's damage?"

- This didn't come up, but you can't shield rush with a buckler, or block a slam with a buckler (at least in my games the latter is true.)

- A block that is made by more than the DB stops a slam entirely. I still think this should not be true, but here we are. An easy, better solution would be that a block just takes the hit on the shield DR so you get hurt less, but might get knocked back. I'd prefer that, with maybe a critical block fully stopping the slam without harm.

- You can "just put my shoulder into the slam" against a foe's slam, but that's exactly the same as failing to defend. You don't do more damage, get a bonus on DX rolls not to fall, etc. You just take it.

Wait Tricks - So I pulled a Wait trick yesterday. I know this is legal, but it didn't sit well with one of my players. I think I got it from one of my players in any event:

Draug's turn: Wait, action is Attack, trigger is the guy right in front of him (Crogar) trying to attack someone.
Crogar's turn: Attack, but Draug interrupts and attacks him.

Why this way? Because of Retreat Tricks. I've long since learned from my players that sometimes you want someone to hit, so you can Retreat and move yourself into a better position to avoid other attacks or block off a gap or something. Behind Crogar was an open hex the other draugr needed to pile through. Had Crogar realized this, the attack could have let him block it. So pausing a beat on the attack so your friends can pile through an open hex? Pretty gamey, yeah. But my players do this kind of thing all of the time - the side-step to allow an Invisible friend to pass by, the three-man shuffle to allow everyone to attack on a two-hex front in one second, etc. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. I could make this kind of Wait illegal, but how? I can't make the Retreat Tricks illegal without making perfectly sensible things illegal. It's just the usage that was too cute . . . but legal and mimics the kind of fighting tricks people are really after when they push for tactical combat over theatre of the mind.

Attacks of Opportunity

No, we don't do anything like this. No, we don't use the various Interdiction power-ups. No, no, no, no, no. I will not ever be swayed on this. It's a one-second time scale and you want free attacks on people that pass through your Zone of Control? No, that makes no sense at all in my experience of the world.

But so some 7' draug can accelerate from 0 movement to 6-7 yards per second and run through an opening created a fraction of a second earlier by someone? Yes. PCs do this all of the time - see Retreat Tricks, above - so the enemy can, too. The game is played - whether we like it or not - as if everyone has just about full understanding of all of the moving parts of a giant battle, with zero lost time to process any of that or act on it. You have an action economy - you can only do so many things - but not an awareness economy. Foes who save part or all of their actions to take advantage can do so. PCs already do this, so I'm not opening a can of worms, here. I'm just also taking advantage.

Bladeturning

Only works on attacks that hit past defenses; resisted by the attacker's DX or ST.

A good alternative would be to leave it alone, but say it converts the attack to crushing without making the foe's weapon unready. Not really much better from a "too many rolls" perspective but at least I don't need to track weapon re-readying.

Mostly stuff I think we already "knew" but people do still ask.

5 comments:

  1. Pretty much any tactic the players use should be available to the opposition. That's been one of my rules for a long time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agreed. It just doesn't always seem as logical and much more nonsensical when you see it done to you instead of by you.

      Delete
  2. Would the players' tactical actions sit better if they all had the Teamwork perk? Don't know if you allow it even, since it might not be DFRPG.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, because even that perk doesn't explain the level of impeccable coordination - perfectly suited levels of healing, Awaken spells less than a second after a combatant is stunned, the movement coordination, etc. - and if I require it to stop complaining about it so much, they'll complain about enemies without it being coordinated in their actions. It's lose/lose to add anything to that perk beyond what's listed.

      Delete
    2. If only there were combatants who led rather than fought to coordinate things, eh? :P

      Delete