NZRaG
New Zealand Roleplaying and Gaming forums
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Conan rule interpretations
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    NZRaG Forum Index -> Descarte
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Luke
Site Admin


Joined: 24 Jan 2006
Posts: 2697

PostPosted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 9:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Benedict wrote:
It seems to me that a surprise round is only a half round, i.e. you can with move or take a regular action, not both.


That is right. You can get 1 move or regular action in a surprise round.
_________________
Playing: Doomstones (WFRP2e); Shades of Terra (Exalted: Dragonblooded)
Running: Thousand Thrones (WFRP2e)
Planning: Incarnadine Crucible (Exalted: Alchemicals); Tale of Twin Kings, Angels of Death and the Lover Who Stole All Things (Exalted 1e)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Benedict



Joined: 22 Jan 2006
Posts: 256

PostPosted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 10:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Luke wrote:
Benedict wrote:
What does everything think of this rule?

It seems odd to me that you might stand around like stunned mullet until you get to attack. I mean, why should the first thing you do in a combat be an attack? Why not a dodge or a parry?


It is not so much you stand around until you get attacked. It is that until you act in the combat, you are grabbing weapons, dealing with the change of events and generally less able to defend yourself. It helps distinguish between hardened warriors and newbies who reel at combat.

In my experience it works really well in making combat quicker and deadlier. It also tends to favour the PCs as Initiative bonus is Conan increases with level. Those who want to have a PC who is always ready for combat can take Uncanny Dodge or Reflexive Parry.


I can see that.

I think I was trying to picture combat too literally, with each attack roll indicating a single sword swing. I should instead be seeing the rolls as being average results. In that way the flat-footedness of slow defenders represents the advantage quick fighters get. It does also give rise to some interesting literal interpretations of the rolls, for example, a failed attack roll against a flat-footed defender could represent the defender desperately parrying with his scabbard as he draws his sword.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Luke
Site Admin


Joined: 24 Jan 2006
Posts: 2697

PostPosted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 5:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Benedict wrote:
I think I was trying to picture combat too literally, with each attack roll indicating a single sword swing.


The way I look at it is that combat actually begins in the second round. The first round is that series of split second reactions at the start of the fight. In this phase, some people are swinging at others before they are even aware that the fight has started at least to the extent that they can actively defend themselves.
_________________
Playing: Doomstones (WFRP2e); Shades of Terra (Exalted: Dragonblooded)
Running: Thousand Thrones (WFRP2e)
Planning: Incarnadine Crucible (Exalted: Alchemicals); Tale of Twin Kings, Angels of Death and the Lover Who Stole All Things (Exalted 1e)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Benedict



Joined: 22 Jan 2006
Posts: 256

PostPosted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 9:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Slow and steady gets the bigger bonuses

Here's something odd. If more than one attacker takes on a single defender, each attacker after the first gets a progressively larger bonus to hit, i.e., the second attacker gets +1, the third +2, fourth +3 etc. But then what happens the next round? Is the first attacker still at +0? Yes, presumably, but it is not intuitive what is happening here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Luke
Site Admin


Joined: 24 Jan 2006
Posts: 2697

PostPosted: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Benedict wrote:
Slow and steady gets the bigger bonuses

Here's something odd. If more than one attacker takes on a single defender, each attacker after the first gets a progressively larger bonus to hit, i.e., the second attacker gets +1, the third +2, fourth +3 etc. But then what happens the next round? Is the first attacker still at +0? Yes, presumably, but it is not intuitive what is happening here.


The first attacker gets +0. The bonuses don't carry from round to round. The rule is designed for ease of use. You don't know how many people are attacking you in any round in advance, so it allows you to simply apply the bonus as you go.
_________________
Playing: Doomstones (WFRP2e); Shades of Terra (Exalted: Dragonblooded)
Running: Thousand Thrones (WFRP2e)
Planning: Incarnadine Crucible (Exalted: Alchemicals); Tale of Twin Kings, Angels of Death and the Lover Who Stole All Things (Exalted 1e)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Benedict



Joined: 22 Jan 2006
Posts: 256

PostPosted: Fri Aug 25, 2006 10:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Experience

I think we should institute a protocol for awarding XP when there is some sort of break for a character, for example, when a player misses a session or has to roll up a new character or when we change GMs.

I'm not sure how XP is supposed to be awarded in Conan, but I am assuming the GM gives it out arbitrarily based on how fast they want the characters to progress.

My suggestion is that regardless of what a character does or whether the player was actually there, all characters get the same amount of XP. When someone starts a new character, including the case where we change GMs, the new character starts with that amount of XP (ignoring any XP costs paid by scholars casting spells with XP components), by default. The player might choose to take less XP, perhaps even starting at 1st level, but I don't think they should be forced to start less powerful than the rest of the party.

That's my suggestion, which is inspired by my experiences moving from GMing to playing in Hackmaster, but also by a belief that a player should never feel their character is a third wheel. I'd be happy with another system, but I do feel that we should decide on a protocol before it comes up.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Luke
Site Admin


Joined: 24 Jan 2006
Posts: 2697

PostPosted: Fri Aug 25, 2006 11:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Benedict wrote:
ExperienceI think we should institute a protocol for awarding XP when there is some sort of break for a character, for example, when a player misses a session or has to roll up a new character or when we change GMs.


BTW are you going to use either episodic (each adventure is an epsiode with an indeterminate amount of noncovered time between them) or broken timeline (jump back and forward in time like the Conan stories do)? These may impact on how you wish to award experience/levels and fate points.
_________________
Playing: Doomstones (WFRP2e); Shades of Terra (Exalted: Dragonblooded)
Running: Thousand Thrones (WFRP2e)
Planning: Incarnadine Crucible (Exalted: Alchemicals); Tale of Twin Kings, Angels of Death and the Lover Who Stole All Things (Exalted 1e)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mikeythorn



Joined: 20 Jan 2006
Posts: 364
Location: Wellington

PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 12:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Luke wrote:

BTW are you going to use either episodic (each adventure is an epsiode with an indeterminate amount of noncovered time between them) or broken timeline (jump back and forward in time like the Conan stories do)? These may impact on how you wish to award experience/levels and fate points.


A broken timeline might be a bit too much of a stretch at this stage. I am trying to run the game as episodic, but I think the players are finding that a little too close to railroading. "What do you mean we are in the desert? How did we get there? I wanted to stop in the city and get a horse."
_________________
My favourite roleplaying memory - "Daisy at Colonus", two drunk cowboys and a pantomime cow in a 'reinterpretation' of Sophocles greatest play.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Benedict



Joined: 22 Jan 2006
Posts: 256

PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 1:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mikeythorn wrote:
A broken timeline might be a bit too much of a stretch at this stage. I am trying to run the game as episodic, but I think the players are finding that a little too close to railroading. "What do you mean we are in the desert? How did we get there? I wanted to stop in the city and get a horse."


I think one of the problems is that it isn't clear where the divisions between the episodes are.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Benedict



Joined: 22 Jan 2006
Posts: 256

PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 1:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

All the rules you can eat

With the splat books and Pirate Isles, we're already accumulating quite a few rules beyond the basic rule book, particularly new feats.

I suggest that every rule in every book should be an official rule in our game, unless we specifically decide otherwise (including any in books we don't own, but hear about in some way, such as on a forum).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mikeythorn



Joined: 20 Jan 2006
Posts: 364
Location: Wellington

PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Benedict wrote:
All the rules you can eat
I suggest that every rule in every book should be an official rule in our game, unless we specifically decide otherwise (including any in books we don't own, but hear about in some way, such as on a forum).


Well, I agree with you up until the last bit inside the brackets. If you do see something on a forum, I would prefer to see a reference and a direct quote from a sourcebook before we implement it into the game.
_________________
My favourite roleplaying memory - "Daisy at Colonus", two drunk cowboys and a pantomime cow in a 'reinterpretation' of Sophocles greatest play.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Benedict



Joined: 22 Jan 2006
Posts: 256

PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mikeythorn wrote:
Well, I agree with you up until the last bit inside the brackets. If you do see something on a forum, I would prefer to see a reference and a direct quote from a sourcebook before we implement it into the game.


Fair enough. I suppose I was just thinking aloud when I wrote that. I came across a mention in Hyboria's Finest to a feat called Weapon Panache that apparently appears in the Shadizar book. It really bugged me that it wasn't reprinted in Hyboria's Finest and that I might have to buy Shadizar just to get it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Luke
Site Admin


Joined: 24 Jan 2006
Posts: 2697

PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Benedict wrote:
I think one of the problems is that it isn't clear where the divisions between the episodes are.


Each to their own. This is certainly not issue when reading the Conan stories though.
_________________
Playing: Doomstones (WFRP2e); Shades of Terra (Exalted: Dragonblooded)
Running: Thousand Thrones (WFRP2e)
Planning: Incarnadine Crucible (Exalted: Alchemicals); Tale of Twin Kings, Angels of Death and the Lover Who Stole All Things (Exalted 1e)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mikeythorn



Joined: 20 Jan 2006
Posts: 364
Location: Wellington

PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 3:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lesson from last night
Fighting without armour will get you killed fast. Fighting without weapons will get you killed even faster. This means that no matter how enraged and committed the cultists are, or how many of them there are, PCs with weapons and armour will chop them down like so much chaff.
_________________
My favourite roleplaying memory - "Daisy at Colonus", two drunk cowboys and a pantomime cow in a 'reinterpretation' of Sophocles greatest play.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Benedict



Joined: 22 Jan 2006
Posts: 256

PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 3:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mikeythorn wrote:
Lesson from last night
Fighting without armour will get you killed fast. Fighting without weapons will get you killed even faster. This means that no matter how enraged and committed the cultists are, or how many of them there are, PCs with weapons and armour will chop them down like so much chaff.


Maybe unarmed/unarmoured chaff should be using more sophisticated methods. Perhaps grappling the PCs so they can't use their weapons, or disarming them and using their weapons against them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    NZRaG Forum Index -> Descarte All times are GMT + 13 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 3 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group