Outstanding Issues

[Lurid Sorcerer]

Here is a thread for all of us to discuss rules that we would like to see implemented or changed. I'll dynamically update this first post as things are discussed and resolved.

The reason I'm doing this is because there are many things we've discussed that I can't remember what we decided on. It's frustrating, but hopefully having a dedicated place for these things will help prevent this in the future.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed by: Lurid?
Current Rule: When an Accuracy and Evasion roll are tied, they roll-off, and for each roll-off that has to be done, one die is taken off of the attack if it succeeds.
Proposed Change: Instead of a roll-off (a rule that isn't in the book, mind you), the attack damage is simply cut in half (rounded up, of course).
Why Change It?: This will eliminated the need to explain roll-offs in the book and will be quicker in-game.

Votes:
Yea: Zain Winters
Nay: Child of Flame, Perilaxis, DC_Desperado, Lt. Pwnage, Nocturnal Angel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed by: Lurid?
Current Rule: 6s rolled on the ACC roll of a Melee attack give additional dice in the Damage roll, but this doesn't apply to Ranged or Magic attacks.
Proposed Change: 6s rolled in ACC rolls will give additional dice for Damage for all attack types.
Why Change It?: More consistent.

Votes:
Yea: CoF, Perilaxis
Nay: DC_Desperado, Lt. Pwnage, Nocturnal Angel

Alternate: 6s should carry from ACC to Damage for Melee and Ranged, but not Magic.
Why?: Magic can be boosted by spending extra MP, Melee and ranged attacks have no such means.

Votes:
Yea: DC_Desperado, Lt. Pwnage, Nocturnal Angel, Zain Winters
Nay: None.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed by: Lurid
Current Rule: Trine Rolls
Proposed Change: Remove them from the book.
Why Change It?: Nothing (in the core book) uses them.

Votes:
Yea: None.
Nay: DC_Desperado, Nocturnal Angel, Child of Flame, Zain Winters, Perilaxis

[Child of Flame]

Rule: Evasion/Accuracy ties
Proposed by: Lurid (yes, you did!)
Proposed Change: Cut ATK in half.
Vote: NAY!!!
Why: Roll-offs aren't that hard to explain, and it takes seconds to do as well, as most if not all roll-offs are between two people. I understand the logic behind cutting the attack in half, and it's more realistic than just taking one die away, but the way it works now is fine. Maybe it's the cutting the attack in half part that gets to me, because it would really discourage new players/campaigns if their precious 6+ die pool was cut down to a measly 3 die against some guy's 4 or 5 Vitality.

It's rare, but sometimes we get more than one roll-off during an attack...maybe cut more die as you go, if we decided to leave this rule be?

---------------------------------------------------
Rule: Dice damage for all!
Proposed by: Lurid
Rule Change: 6s on ACC rolls gets re-rolled for DMG for all attack types.
Vote: YAY!
Why: I like consistency...although I'm wondering why we didn't already have this set in the first place...wasn't the magic strong enough already? Ah well. 6's on ACC are uncommon, and it's possible for a huge DMG die pool to backfire with 1s. Fun for all!

[Perilaxis]

Rule: Evasion/Accuracy ties
Proposed by: Lurid (yes, you did!)
Proposed Change: Cut ATK in half.
Vote: NAY!!!
Why: I just do not see the point in changing something that works. While I'm sure it would be quicker without the roll we use roll offs for just about everything it would be less work (from my perspective) to just type up the explaination once and then reference back to it or use the old copy and paste function.

Rule: Dice damage for all!
Proposed by: Lurid
Rule Change: 6s on ACC rolls gets re-rolled for DMG for all attack types.
Vote: YAY!
Why: Like CoF I enjoy a bit of consistency however I also look at if we don't give the magic and ranged people this they will be significantly handicapped in terms of damage particularly late game. once the dice pools get big enough (which doesn't take all that long) you start seeing at least one six every turn such is the way of odds. this means that melee fighters will have a significant edge in dealing damage compared to a mage (maybe not so great in actually having it go through a targets defenses but still a bit more powerful).

[DC_Desperado]

Rule: Evasion/Accuracy ties
Proposed by: Lurid (yes, you did!)
Proposed Change: Cut ATK in half.
Vote: Nay.
Why: Don't fix what "ain't" broken. The roll off system simulates a real life measurement of an attack. You can swing a sword and be so close to hitting that you cut only clothes... an action that close can only be measured by roll offs.

Rule: Dice damage for all!
Proposed by: Lurid
Rule Change: 6s on ACC rolls gets re-rolled for DMG for all attack types.
Vote: Nay!!
Why: Theres just one thing that everyone seems to have forgotten when it comes to this ruling... (CoF almost hinted at it). Balance over consistancy. Now, I like consistancy. However, if we were to make magic 6's carry the balance between magic and melee is broken. The rule that seems to be forgotten is that mages/ eidolons can spend X mp/ep to add more dice to the dmg pool, were melee has to rely soley (sp?) on the talents of there weapon/skills.

If this rule were to pass you can very well see many actions like...a eidolon with 4 INT and lvl 3 lucid with a natural dmg copacity of 5 dmg. now if 6's were to carry the copacity could change to 6-7 dmg. Now lets say the eidolon spent 2 mp/ep for dmg... now the copacity changes to 8-9 dmg.

Now lets look at the Melee fighter in these context. Give him/her a STR of 4 and a weapon prof of 3. the weapon is a short sword which adds nothing to ACC but plus 1 to DMG. The natural damage copacity is 6 Dmg. 1 Dice higher than magic. Now we add in the ACC 6's. to the equation and the copacity changes to 7-8 dmg. Melee fighters cannot spend extra mp/ep to buff dmg... so the copacity stays at 7-8 dmg.

Now with the possibly new rule implimented magic has a plus 1 dmg possible over melee. I can see were many would say that its not that big of a difference... however there is one more factor to this combat senerio(sp?) that had yet to be mentioned. Distance. A mage can attack from afar with no threat of receiving damage from the emeny. Were as a Melee fighter has to be in the thick of battle and will most likely be a traget on the enemies turns.

I believe that melee fighters should retain their natural dmg over magic for the shear fact of the risk of being the character. If I can make a character that can possibly do 2x the dmg of a melee fighter without the risk of getting myself killed then I would be stupid to make a melee fighter.

As for ranged attacks (bows, ect.) we can keep the 6's roll for them. A good shot would show on the dmg pool.

thank you for your time.

[Lt. Pwnage]

Evasion/Accuracy Ties
Proposed by Lurid
Change to Rule:Cut Attack in Half
Vote: EPIC NO
As stated before don't fix what isn't broken. And to be honest we use roll off for almost everything. Combat Intuitive, Wake up rolls, Find companion rolls etc. Why cut it from Acc if we use all the time anyway.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule: Dice damage for all!
Proposed by: Lurid
Rule Change: 6s on ACC rolls gets re-rolled for DMG for all attack types.
Vote: Nay (Condition: Range gets sixs/ Magic does not

Vit is usually higher then will in most cases that and and magic is always ranged. Also has D_C said mages can buff magic using EP/MP/WP, however I think we should give bows sixes because if we don't ranged will fall short when it comes to damage.

[Lurid Sorcerer]

Thanks for the feedback, guys! Looks like I'll be adding the "roll-off" rule to the core book. I'll probably call it something like "tie-breaker roll" or something.

Also, I've added the alternate change for ACC 6s carrying over. Let me know if you'd be willing to compromise there.

[Edit]Just tossed in another thing to vote on. Pretty sure about how it's going to go, but I would like some confirmation.[/Edit]

Again, thanks!

[DC_Desperado]

Proposed by: Lurid
Current Rule: Trine Rolls
Proposed Change: Remove them from the book.
Why Change It?: Nothing (in the core book) uses them.
Vote: Nay.

Why?: even if the system is not given a direct roll it would be good for veteran players and new players to know that the option is there. As it stands, in the core book, the trine roll is a good desicion(sp?) making tool, for TS's, between three options.

[Nocturnal Angel]

Current Rule: When an Accuracy and Evasion roll are tied, they roll-off, and for each roll-off that has to be done, one die is taken off of the attack if it succeeds.
.
no

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Current Rule: 6s rolled on the ACC roll of a Melee attack give additional dice in the Damage roll, but this doesn't apply to Ranged or Magic attacks.

no for same reason dc gave

Alternate: 6s should carry from ACC to Damage for Melee and Ranged, but not Magic.
yes

------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Current Rule: Trine Rolls

no just in case

[Child of Flame]

Rule: Trine Rolls
Proposed Change: Removing it from the book
Why?: Nothing in the Core Book uses them.
Vote: Nay...

Why?: As DC has stated, even if the trine roll is not directly used for any rules set in stone, we can come up with ways to use the trine roll during the game session. I feel an example is needed.

Say a character is trying to open a heavy door. Maybe he/she rolls their STR to open it, but perhaps they barely succeed at it, or maybe even botch the roll (maybe use this roll more often when characters repeatedly are on the cusp of failing/botching a particular event?). You could make them do a trine roll to see what incurs afterward (the TS would have to think of three events on the fly but yanno).

That's just one example, and yes it is a house rule...but it's a neat little roll that should be used more often. We just have to think of rules for it!

[Zain Winters]

Proposed by: Lurid?
Current Rule: When an Accuracy and Evasion roll are tied, they roll-off, and for each roll-off that has to be done, one die is taken off of the attack if it succeeds.
Proposed Change: Instead of a roll-off (a rule that isn't in the book, mind you), the attack damage is simply cut in half (rounded up, of course).
Why Change It?: This will eliminated the need to explain roll-offs in the book and will be quicker in-game.

i say yea on this change, just for the fact that it speeds it up quite a bit. and well if i barely hit you i barely hit you. so fuck all you nay sayers.

Proposed by: Lurid?
Current Rule: 6s rolled on the ACC roll of a Melee attack give additional dice in the Damage roll, but this doesn't apply to Ranged or Magic attacks.
Proposed Change: 6s rolled in ACC rolls will give additional dice for Damage for all attack types.
Why Change It?: More consistent.

debateable, if were going with the mp dumping. then no for magic getting that bonus. and which magic book? most likely just mean magic in general so id say just cut magic out of that and chock me up as a yea in the alternative. but if we got rid of the mp dump which im 50\50 on it. then well yeah you get me on this. yeah for the alt.

Proposed by: Lurid
Current Rule: Trine Rolls
Proposed Change: Remove them from the book.
Why Change It?: Nothing (in the core book) uses them.

keep it in. it'll be helpful for the TSs and maybe just other places that just need 3 choices needed so i'd definitly keep it.

there, i helped or atleast talked. Fuck You Guys.

[Perilaxis]

Proposed by: Lurid
Current Rule: Trine Rolls
Proposed Change: Remove them from the book.
Why Change It?: Nothing (in the core book) uses them.
Vote: Nay.

Its not that nothing uses them just that we don't. Talespinners have a tool here to create a more varied story line. Instead of just good and bad now there can also be neutral. Example: you are leading a party through a dungeon and they are comeing up on a puzzle room to get to their objective... a trine roll could decide between a bad, say a fight or a deadly trap, a good, like the opportunity to find something really cool and/or helpful, or a neutral, nothing changes nothing happens. I would include it maybe as an advanced ts tool.

[Lurid Sorcerer]

May 31, 2011 17:23:58 GMT -5 Zain Winters said:

debateable, if were going with the mp dumping. then no for magic getting that bonus. and which magic book?

Yes, you'll be able to boost spells by adding extra MP. I haven't worked out all of the details yet, however. The magic being addressed is the magic I'm going to include in the core book.

[Lt. Pwnage]

Trine Roll rule:

May I suggest just throwing it in optional rules, right nothing really uses it; however, make a note of it somewhere so new players now its there if they need it.

[DC_Desperado]

Proposed by: Zack Trable
Current rule: If a character were to recieve three 6's on an EVA roll (if the EVA total is greater than opponent ACC total) the evading character can counter attack. The rule that was questioned is if the countered target can evade the incoming blow.
Proposed change: I'm really at a loss on this one... I can see it staying and changing. Any thoughts?

[Perilaxis]

Current rule: If a character were to recieve three 6's on an EVA roll (if the EVA total is greater than opponent ACC total) the evading character can counter attack. The rule that was questioned is if the countered target can evade the incoming blow.
Proposed change: I'm really at a loss on this one... I can see it staying and changing. Any thoughts?
Proposed By: DC_Desperado aka Zack Trable aka Mr. JOEPOE!!
Perilaxis' thoughts: I think the main problem here is whether or not the evading character can roll his/her Acc for a counter-attack; both to make sure there is no fowl up and to perhaps increase their damage pool. Then if this is true does the newly defending character get the chance to evade and if successful would he/she get a chance to counter the counter.

I have several ideas to how this can be solved. The first is that the Countering Combatant must roll Acc to be sure they do not foul up and miss or hurt themselves but the 6's do NOT carry into damage (Note: Due to the rushed nature of combat and basic instinct "Call-shots" can NOT be used also, when using a non-thrown ranged weapon such as a bow and countering a melee attack the bow can NOT be used as there is no room or time for such complex movement). The defending character having overextended and left themselves vulnerable do NOT get a chance to evade.

Next thought is that Acc and Eva is rolled essentially creating a secondary battle step, however, no counter attack can be used. This is a Counter OR Attack rule. Meaning that within a given battle step you may either make an attack or respond to one. I personally feel that the second is the better of the two as the Note from above would still effect the calculations.

Also a thought for skills such as multishot or double strike. Since all the attacks for each are launched at once Countering one attack should not automatically preclude the others from finding purchase upon their target. That is all from me for now.... TTFN! Ta Ta For Now! ( I'm bouncy, flouncy, trouncy, pouncy, fat, Fat, FAt, FATMAN!)