Re: Rules Discussion: Did you know?

[Solomon Gargoyle]

I'm not quite sure what your saying. I just know if you have cel 1 its basically that your first action, which is everyman, goes first.

[Theseus Ahroun]

Ya, what I wrote doesn't make the most sense. Guess that's what happens when I try to write something detailed while juggling 4 different jobs and writing a response to a customer in an email. I'll sit down and see if I can make more sense later on when I get home.

[Solomon Gargoyle]

FOUR different jobs? Ugh. :-/

[Theseus Ahroun]

Only 1 employer. Around the shop we refer to orders placed by our customers as jobs. There was 4 hot builds earlier today I was having to oversee. Anyhow...

I could be entirely wrong but took a look at Cel 1 and glanced at the combat shtuff in the book and here's my take on it.

Example 1: Player one is standing off vs player two. Tensions are high and both expect combat to break out at any moment. If and when it finally does both resolve there actions per normal as we have been doing and unless you want to get some final adjustment in position or such very little changes from what we've been doing.

Example 2: Player one is minding his own business in his corner of court when player two comes strolling up and with no provocation attacks player one. In this example player one has no cel so he is left only able to soak or dodge for the first strike. All additional strikes would be handled normally.

Example 3: Same setup as example 2 only player one has celerity. As burning blood is reflexive and instant player one can burn the blood to activate cel and then due to the preempt player one would be able to react as normal even attacking player two.

Example 4: Just for due diligence and to not seemingly ignore this one if player 2 has somehow hidden themselves, be it through distance or something like Obfuscate, then the only option player one has is to soak.

Higher levels of Cel of course result in that player responding quicker or first but that just means he positions himself first and the player with lesser cel is stuck in more the reactionary position. From what I can tell it doesn't "resolve" his action prior to the other person. So for example if player one with cel 5 and player two with no cel are still striking eachother they throw together to resolve both players actions and whichever one win's the challenge there victory condition happens preventing the other players action from being successful. Player one would be able to adjust position for instance to flank player two, or any other action that doesn't resolve the "combat action" prior to player two being able to respond.

[Guest]

I have thought myself in circles about this issue in the past. My take on the books is that the use of Celerity does not grant you the ability to resolve challenges before the opponent. Of course the preempt does allow you to react effectively to a situation (draw weapon, move, etc) before the everyman round. The only thing that would allow you to resolve before your opponent would be weapon speed, which is an optional rule. Then the challenges would be split into two separate ones, the faster weapon first then the counterattack of the slower. Double your trait bids in a round, woot.

For sure Celerity will allow you to react better to your opponents non Celerity actions. I would make the slower player to declare his actions first allowing the Celerity user to base his actions off of that. And of course the extra actions at the end of the turn.

[Solomon Gargoyle]

It specificially says that you pre-empt them though. If you cannot preempt it makes Cel 1 somewhat useless.

[Guest]

Preempt doesn't mean you get an unopposed challenge. Per the book, preempt means you get an action to react to your particular situation. For example someone pops up in front of you and points a gun at you, you drop a blood and your preempt is to draw a weapon of your own and/or move to a better position. So, yes you do get an action you wouldn't normally get. Celerity 1 ftw. Would you rather spend an everyman action drawing a weapon. Wanting a free challenge is just going just a bit too far.

If you want that, then arrange for surprise...

[Solomon Gargoyle]

I didn't say a free challenge. I simply said you go first. It's still opposed but instead of them shooting first, you quick draw and shoot at them first.

[Solomon Gargoyle]

I found this out on Self Control/Instinct, page 110 and I didn't know this before and I don't think most others do. "You can never use more Self/Control/Instinct on Virtue Test resolution than your current number of Blood Traits. If you are hungry it is hard to resist the call of frenzy. Note that you do not frenzy automatically if you run out of blood; however, you are very likely to frenzy if exposed to a stimulus, since you won't be able to use any Self-Control/Instinct Traits in the event of a tie."

Also, when your very hungry (about 2 or fewer Blood Traits) your difficulty to resist frenzy due to hunger goes up by one Trait. (page 106). So it's incredibly likely you will frenzy if your really hungry unless you've got super self control (and probably Calm Heart.) Brujah are gonna have a bitch of a time. :-p

[Solomon Gargoyle]

This is actually in the Laws of the Night, under Ranged Combat page 207, but I never see anyone use it. It's not some whacky optional rule, its just another rule most people don't read about.

"Fighting with ranged weapons allows combatants to stand some distance apart; participants can therefore "dive for cover". When resolving each ranged combat challenge, each combatant can present one Trait of cover to add to his total number of Traits. These cover Traits may not be used for bidding, but they do add to a player's total if Traits are compared. This cover can take the form of whatever obstacles are around and within reach. A Narrator may be required to describe what cover is around, unless the combatants can agree on what cover is available.

If cover is extensive, it may be worth more than one Trait. The number of Traits available for cover is left for challengers to agree on, or for a Narrator to decree. Hiding behind a boulder, for example, might be worth two Traits, while hiding behind a thin wood fence might only count as one. If one combatant goes completely under cover (he cannot be seen at all and is thus thoroughly protected), he is considered impossible to hit. The attacker must change his position to get a clear shot."

[Raven]

I don't think I have seen the cover angle used in our combat situations but my memory isn't always that great. It is a good thing to know though.

[Theseus Ahroun]

I have yet to see anyone try to use this in our game, I have seen it used in other unique situations before though. Most of the combat I've seen so far has been up close and personal, likely due to the ability to use disciplines in melee where many don't work with ranged weapons. To be honest I had forgotten about this so I likely wouldn't have tried to use it even in a ranged combat scenario.

I would be interested to hear how this would work in a contested challenge situation as it would lead to some strange resolutions when trait totals are compared. Maybe just put the person attacking the individual in cover down traits as there action would be more difficult then normal?

[Solomon Gargoyle]

It's only added when you compare Traits on a tie so it's not complicated and like they said, it's usually only one trait unless there is really large types of cover. The boulders around Negro Bar would be an example of possible 2 Trait cover.

[Raven]

I'm still not sure if we have a need for cover per say. When you think about most of the settings where combat happens it is indoors for the most part that is habitated so there wouldn't seem to be alot of cover. Now on the other hand if the area was outdoors I can see where that would potentially be useful.

[Anna Russo]

I'm curious as to whether you'd get the extra trait if you used another person as cover. Because yeah, most combat so far seems to have occurred either indoors, where there usually really isn't good cover except for other people, or in large outdoor spaces (like the railyards) without a lot of cover at all.

It is an interesting rule though...

[Solomon Gargoyle]

I'd disagree on the amount of cover. Some fights have happened outdoors yes but in an urban setting. There is indeed cover in most city streets. Some fights also took places in forest type areas so there are trees and in Jackon I bet there may have even been enough cover in those hallways for at least one Trait.

[Solomon Gargoyle]

The stuff about Self Control I put up is interesting too. So it's incredibly important as a Vampire to have a decent amount of blood in your system.

[Theseus Ahroun]

1 extra trait however can be a huge deal especially when stacked with gear and specializations. The way it's written up any time comparing traits the additional trait would be added even if all the target is doing is trying to evade. Since the cover should realistically only come in when someone is trying to attack someone behind cover and the mechanics of it shouldn't be making it easier for the person in cover to hit but make it harder for the guy trying to hit them. Then of course if you going for a realism angle there's only so far into cover you can duck before you start experiencing a demishing returns kind of effect where it gets harder for you to shoot out from due to loosing some angles to take with your firearm due to that very same cover.

So really if you choose to delve into it to the point of being able to bring it into the game it may get very complex.

[Solomon Gargoyle]

It's only going to come into play when someone is trying to hit the person under cover, I agree with you there. Having cover would not and should not really make it easier for you to shoot someone else. I'm confused about the gear statement. How is gear going to help you not get hit? NO gear whatsoever does that. None. Armor helps you take damage, not avoid being hit. This isn't D&D. Specializations would only help if you had a Dodge specialization that applied.

[Theseus Ahroun]

My point is the trait of cover doesn't affect the individual trying to shot at the person using cover. It adds into the trait total for the person who is hiding in cover shooting out. Therefore it adds to there trait total for resolving ties just like any weapon's traits would and just like any weapon specialization would. I personally think it's cheap for someone to be able to say there jumping behind some random object when they think they may need an extra trait to push them over on ties is my biggest point on this.

If it were adjusted to require the person shooting at someone who's using cover to lets say... have to bid an extra trait to make up for the added difficulty of the shot it would be more fair across the board. I would even agree with making the shooter traits down if they choose to try to shoot the individual under cover. To give additional traits just for hiding behind an object doesn't seem right to me.

[Solomon Gargoyle]

The extra trait bidding would be more fair too I think but when I see rules in books that I don't always like I try and think of WHY it is that way. Why did the people who wrote the rules make it only matter in the case of ties. If someone instead has to bid an extra trait does that somehow screw up what they intended cover to do?

[Solomon Gargoyle]

Been using Counter Magic wrong in some cases. You can only counter Thaum that is the same level or LESS than your Counter Magic lvl. Thus, if Solomon only has Counter Magic lvl 2 and a Tremere uses path of Flame lvls 3-5 on him, Solomon cannot counter it. This goes for Rituals as well.


Storyteller Edit: Also you may only counter one magical effect per round of combat. It's "A" free action, not every time you're attacked it's a free action.

[Solomon Gargoyle]

If a power requires you to spend more blood than your gen allows, you must spend the blood on successive turns. It's under Blood, page 197 the last paragraph with a bullet in front of it. This is pretty important cause otherwise a weaker gen guy can snap off a super costly power he shouldn't be able to do, thus another benefit of lower generation.

(So for example a weaker gen Tzmice 13th-10th gen wants to go to Horrid Form. Well Horrid Form cost 2 blood. He'd have to spend 1 blood for 2 turns each before he could change.)

[Solomon Gargoyle]

You can't use weapons in Frenzy. No swords no guns, no nothing but your bare hands (claws?), though you can actually initiate social challenge IF it's Intimidation.

[Solomon Gargoyle]

It keeps coming up that a lot of people seem to think pre-empt is merely a quick draw ability and that's just not true. You do indeed go before anyone who does not have pre-empt or at least more celerity (or the same ammount of celerity). For example it does say you can do something like get in front of an ally to attack an aggressor. If you didn't go first, how could you do that? If you went at the same time you could not do this. It also does say the person with more celerity goes FIRST in the case of two people with Celerity, not at the same time. The first sentence also does say you complete your moments before they can respond. It's not just a quick draw "Feat" like in D&D 3.0 and 3.5. This is an "I go first" power. Or ok maybe it IS a quick draw IF your weapon isn't already out. But if it is already out, then shouldn't you be able to go first? Your prempt wouldn't be to draw your weapon anymore. It would be to attack the other guy before he gets you, thus I can at least see that working. Pre-empt action to draw your weapon if its not out already but then once it IS out shouldn't you be going before the other guy if he doesn't have more cel than you? Something to think about....

Also, people with more traits really should be going first. Going at the same time regardless of traits takes away one of the huge advantages of having more traits. It matters. A lot. If someone can go first they could take out an attacker before they get to attack, use a power to neutralize them OR at the very least, wound them and make them less capable due to wound penalties.

Traits from weapons are NOT used for initiative btw. Ever. It's just used to compare in ties. The confusion in this is the Speed ability. What the speed ability does is just allow to you to go before someone who has a weapon with certain neg traits, so if I'm using a big ole slow sword and someone is using a rapier with the speed trait, they would go first. (Assuming my sword has the neg traits that allow the fencer user to go first.) That's it. Traits from a weapon are not added to initiative. Otherwise wouldn't people with greatswords go before someone with a gun?

I don't know if this is in the book but used to be a "rule" that mental and social go before physical challenges. Not sure if that was just a house rule though.

[Sponsored content]