Guild of San Marcos Forum

Posted: **Thu Jul 19, 2012 3:14 pm**

Since aimoo has been up and down, I thought I'd repost my questions from there.

Black Jack Rackham wrote:Been a while since we had any rules related questions, but I found myself with some free time a couple of days ago and decided to re-read the PG. For your ease, I've added page numbers to help the conversation.

Question 1 - (reference p. 18 Contested Rolls)

I always thought when it came to contested rolls, both 'contestants' rolled their respective dice and whoever rolled higher won. Straightforward right? Turns out that's not the way its supposed to go. Contestant 1 rolls against Contestant 2's "Opposed Trait*"x5. Simultaneously, Contestant 2 does the same thing for Contestant 1's opposed trait.

If neither makes it, they both fail. If one is successful, that one wins. If both succeed, the one who made the better roll compared to the TN is the winner.

So now my questions. 1 - Does anyone play it this way? If so, how did that work out? and 2 - How do we decide what the Opposed Trait/Knack is (or is it fluid kind of like how we can pick different Traits depending on what we want the roll to do)?

*there is mention that sometimes an opposed 'knack' is more appropriate.

Question 2 - (reference p. 129 Beat and Feint, among others)

Ok both are quite popular among various schools but the truth is, I have never used them. Why? Well I always thought their use was thus. You use Beat/Feint to attack and if successful your opponent cannot use active defences. But then you still had to make a regular attack roll to do damage (because NEITHER mentions whether or not they actually do damage). So really it was only necessary against a powerful opponent whose active defenses could defeat you (essentially, you sacrifice an action to ensure you hit at least once).

But re-reading it, I'm not so sure. I could interpret it to be that both Beat and Feint are simply variants of the regular attack roll which allows you to allot some of your raises to ensure your opponent cannot actively defend. Comments?

Question 3 - (reference p. 139 Etiquette)

Civil skills are notoriously rules-lite (and really that's as it should be, my comment was really a statement of fact rather than condemnation). HOWEVER, Etiquette is the noted exception in which it specifically mentions that trying to use it in a culture for which you have no experience will mean a -2k0 penalty. Now I have nothing against this particular idea (heck if it were story-relevant, I might just have it happen myself*). But the problem comes in when you realize that this same idea (having penalties for unfamiliarity with the culture for which you are performing the action. Just off the top of my head, I think it'd work equally well with Street Navigation, History, Diplomacy, Fashon, Socializing, and a host of others) occurs NOWHERE else in the rules. So, does that mean it only applies to Etiquette? If so, what makes Etiquette so special? Thoughts?

*All you Vesten players in my Heroes of Altamira campaign, you should start worrying about now.

Love to hear your thoughts.
Mark

Posted: **Thu Jul 19, 2012 3:23 pm**

Actually, if I recall correctly, Street Nav., Socializing, Shopping, Scrounging & Underworld Lore (there may be others) DO have the -2 unkept die penalty.

As for Question 2, I always ruled it as "variant of the attack roll" myself rather than 2 separate rolls.

Posted: **Thu Jul 19, 2012 3:27 pm**

I haven't finished re-reading (and haven't even started back with the GMG) but in the initial discussion of the various skills Etiquette specifically mentions the penalty and nothing else does...

Posted: **Thu Jul 19, 2012 3:29 pm**

Which edition are you reading, BJR? Because my PHB mentions them (pg. 149-150).

Posted: **Thu Jul 19, 2012 3:52 pm**

Not sure which edition (its the one I bought off RPGNow) but my page 149 has the Spy advanced knacks, description of Streetwise and most of its basic knacks, while 150 finishes the advanced knacks then moves on to Martial Skills...

EDIT: on the bottom of p.4 it says Second Printing, Feb, 2000

Posted: **Thu Jul 19, 2012 3:56 pm**

Yep, that's the edition I'm getting my info from.

Posted: **Thu Jul 19, 2012 4:06 pm**

to answer 1 I play it that way, but also allow my players to roll against the total, like an active defense.

for 2) I always use the beat/feint as the attack roll, since it is an attack roll with additional raises taken

for 3) I apply the modifier to most social rolls, or, I add ten to the target number, which generally makes my players complain less.

Posted: **Thu Jul 19, 2012 10:35 pm**

Rules are in the trunk, Boondock Saints is on, so I'm only commenting on what I recall. I need to look at the contested info. The feint and beat are variations on attacks and roll damage if they hit. modifiers are always up to the GM and street nav does have a penalty somewhere in the rules system for unfamiliar cities. Other knacks may have penalties depending on specific use. (there are general diplomacy issues that would be universal and knowing to bow to a sultan's wife first -or not at all).

Posted: **Thu Jul 19, 2012 10:40 pm**

"Do NOT point or bare your feet towards a Crescent"

Posted: **Fri Jul 20, 2012 4:47 pm**

salamanca wrote:Boondock Saints is on

[threadjack]Dear God how I love this movie![/threadjack]

Posted: **Fri Jul 20, 2012 5:03 pm**

I am STILL the undefeated champion of the Boondock Saints Drinking Game in our household. :twisted:

Posted: **Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:41 pm**

Black Jack Rackham wrote:*All you Vesten players in my Heroes of Altamira campaign, you should start worrying about now.

What ever gave you the idea that a Vesten would even know what etiquette *was* much less want to use it?

"You point your little finger out when you take a drink? That's a good way to lose a finger." :lol:

Posted: **Thu Aug 23, 2012 9:01 am**

I was going though the players and gms books the other day, and for the life of me I can't find where it mentions how a gm gets drama dice / how many he actually starts with. I know how we play it, but it seems to change based on which group I run with.

Can someone point me to where this stuff is actually written down?

Posted: **Thu Aug 23, 2012 9:53 am**

PG Second Printing, Drama Dice p.183, paragraph 1.

Posted: **Fri Aug 24, 2012 11:51 am**

Thanks!

Posted: **Mon Aug 27, 2012 4:31 pm**

Still working my way through the PG, todays questions come courtesy of Throat Strike (p.153). Now I presume we're all familiar with the "Add 15 to the TN to hit and do an automatic DW" skill. If you're not, go ahead and re-read it, I'll never know.

Ok first question. Bob and I are attacking Villaino. Bob attacks with a sword doing a wopping 32 flesh wounds, and Villaino (who has an ungodly strength and resistance to pain) manages to roll higher than that on his resistance roll (leaving him at 32 FW). Now I come along and Throat Strike him doing an automatic DW. Do Villaino's FW go away? I can see arguments both ways. Pro - after you take at DW you erase all your flesh wounds. Con - after you roll your resistance roll and FAIL you take a DW and erase your flesh wounds (no resistance roll to make with Throat Strike, you just get an automatic DW)

Second question. Since the roll is essentially "Take 3 raises to do an automatic DW" could you take another 3 and do a second DW? 9 and a third? etc.? Again I could see arguments both ways. Pro - with the amount of raises you're taking it'd probably be better to just take the raises for extra damage and take your chances (and really anyone that can take 9 raises has either saved up LOTS of DD or is powerful enough that regular raises will probably roll over into kept dice anyway). Con - while adding 15 to the TN to hit may be functually equivalent to 3 raises, in point of fact the text doesn't say "take raises" and doesn't discuss anything about a second DW.

Aaannndddd...DISCUSS!

Posted: **Mon Aug 27, 2012 7:55 pm**

Ok all my answers will be based on a rules as written point of view.

1. In this situation where Bob stacks 32 flesh wounds on Villano and then you throat strike him. The flesh wounds would be erased and he would just take the 1 dramatic wound. P 189 under dramatic wounds, "When you suffer a Dramatic Wound, the first thing you do is erase all the Wounds you've suffered so far." That right there tells you what happens in that situation.

2. Again based on what the book says it isn't basically take 3 raises for 1 dramatic wound. P153 Throat Strike, "You declare that you are making a Throat Strike, and roll to attack using this Knack. The TN to hit your opponent is raised by 15 when using this attack...." So you aren't making 3 raised for 1 free dramatic wound you are using the knack which itself raises the TN by 15.

Posted: **Mon Aug 27, 2012 8:57 pm**

1. I agree.
2. I agree.

Posted: **Mon Aug 27, 2012 10:22 pm**

Ok. To play devil's advocate (and for no other reason) let me posit another interpretation of the rules.

1. The section you're quoting from (Dramatic Wounds) is adding directly onto the section previous (Wound Checks). You could interpret the "When you suffer a Dramatic Wound, the first thing to do is erase all the Wounds you’ve suffered so far." as referencing "If you fail the roll [Wound Check], you suffer a Dramatic Wound, plus one additional Dramatic Wound for every 20 you failed your Wound Check by."

So taken together we have "If you fail the roll [Wound Check], you suffer a Dramatic Wound, plus one additional Dramatic Wound for every 20 you failed your Wound Check by. And when that happens the first thing to do is erase all the Wounds you’ve suffered so far."

But when hit with the Throat Strike, you don't make a Wound Check. Once it hits, you get a DW and you're done. So the "erase the wounds you've suffered" rule doesn't apply.

2. Well if I were simply attacking I could call 3 raises for extra damage and that would raise the TN to be hit by 15. Under Raises (p.182) it says I can call Raises for any[my emphasis, obviously] TN I'm assigned by increments of 5, which will increase just how impressive the success will be (then it gives examples of unkept dice to damage). So then theoretically I could raise the TN for a Throat Strike by an additional 5 and get an unkept die of damage?

This btw brings me back to my original argument about Tagging/Double Parry and asking how calling raises could/might add to the number of DD I get/force the other guy to get rid of.

I do want to reiterate, I don't really have a dog in this race (well I do about the calling extra raises for Throat Strike/Tagging/Double Parry, I don't really like it). I just find the vagueness to be irritating.

Posted: **Tue Aug 28, 2012 10:39 am**

1. So, Mark, yes! Wound Checks is followed by Dramatic Wounds on p.189. This is because one situation check often follows another under Combat, p.184-189.

But all one has to do is read what it says and act accordingly. "When you suffer a Dramatic Wound" not only follows Wound Checks, but also gets a lead in from those actions which provide a Dramatic Wound without a wound check- as in Throat Strike.

Write out a flow chart and it becomes simple to understand.

Also, "When you suffer a Dramtic Wound", obviously the first thing you do is mark 'a dramatic wound' down on your character sheet. Then, the 'second' thing that you do is "erase all the [flesh] Wounds you've suffered so far."

The writers often get too cutesy with their language. But, that is not license for misinterpretation.

2. Again, don't mix apples with oranges.

We have "Normal Damage" on p.188, before Wound Checks and Dramatic Wounds on p.189. Then we have Raises on p.182, and also any 'non-normal damage' as in Throat Strike and the like.

Raises may combine with normal damage to provide extra unkept dice. (And provide 'extra' success, which is not defined and left to the GM, and allow for 'called shots'.)

Again, non-normal damage, as in Throat Srikes, is specifically defined and not a part of the normal progression under Combat/initiative, from p.184, to Combat/knocked out, on p.189.

Posted: **Tue Aug 28, 2012 1:34 pm**

See now you're giving as much credence to my point as your own. There's no such thing in this game as "normal damage" (as a defined concept) there's simply "the way damage works" (which I get, you were defining as Normal Damage) and exceptions to the rule (as in Throat Strike).

So if you say that Throat Strike is an exception to the rule of damage, then fine so be it. That means that damage doesn't work as described so all the rules that tell you when to erase FW no longer apply (because TS is an exception to that rule).

And again I want to reiterate that I don't disagree with you (though I'd consider letting the FW stay after a successful Throat Strike)

Posted: **Tue Aug 28, 2012 2:22 pm**

I would argue on #2 that you could call raises to get extra unkept dice for damage on throat strike...... but since you aren't rolling anything then you'd still get >unkept< dice. So while you could call raises it would be silly as you'd have to call at least 11 OVER the +15 tn just to get 1 kept die of damage. Effectively calling 14 raises for 1 DW + 10k1. Seems kinda silly to me. blah blah argument that you're still using the weapon so you'd add weapon + str for damage, but it clearly states what the damage roll is for the skill. Now while I don't have my books on me at work <.< I'm willing to assume that under attack fencing knack it tells you to roll weapon + str for damage, or something similar.

Assuming my rambling makes any sense, I'd still just say no you can't call raises for damage on an attack that doesn't roll for damage. Frack, now I need to check exact wording on damage rolls and calling raises and such....
-----------------------------------------
For keeping FW after a successful throat strike I can see how it fits in thematically. I hit you in the throat causing minor damage, but all the cutting that you've endured up to this point still has an effect on you. My argument was purely based on a RAW mentality.

Tho i'm still right on point #2 :p

Posted: **Tue Aug 28, 2012 3:29 pm**

Black Jack Rackham wrote: There's no such thing in this game as "normal damage"

Sure there is! It's defined under "normal damage" at the beginning of p.188.

Black Jack Rackham wrote: So if you say that Throat Strike is an exception to the rule of damage, then fine so be it. That means that damage doesn't work as described so all the rules that tell you when to erase FW no longer apply (because TS is an exception to that rule).

But it does work: for all normal damage that produces dramatic wounds. TS is an exception.

Posted: **Tue Aug 28, 2012 4:22 pm**

Mark, why are you trolling?

The effect of the throat strike is to skip the damage check and apply the wound. As such it works like any dramatic wound suffered and clears all those pesky flesh wounds. I had a player that regularly did the bad guys a favor by using that throat strike all the time (often after several players had racked up a pile of combined flesh wounds that should have resulted in 2-4 DW with another successful hit)

As a GM I have used it to bail out more than one intrepid hero who had overstepped his way into ridiculous flesh wound territory due to my lucky dice.

As for calling raises to do multiple DW... slippery slope and if it is done it must be applied to every not damage attack that has a result like the tagging. Moreso when applied to a target that has been pommel struck.

Posted: **Tue Aug 28, 2012 5:41 pm**

salamanca wrote:Mark, why are you trolling?

I really didn't mean to, honest. I just thought it was another one of those 'grey area' things that the PG is notorious for.

I like the way you're using it Sal (to save players who racked up too many FW).

And I completely agree that using raises to do extra DW or even unkept dice is chancy at best. (That goes double for Tagging/Double Parry and trying to get extra DD).

Ok I've probably talked this one into the ground. I'll come back with my next question tomorrow (and more trolling

).

Guild of San Marcos Forum

General 7th Sea Rules Questions

General 7th Sea Rules Questions

Re: General 7th Sea Rules Questions

Re: General 7th Sea Rules Questions

Re: General 7th Sea Rules Questions

Re: General 7th Sea Rules Questions

Re: General 7th Sea Rules Questions

Re: General 7th Sea Rules Questions

Re: General 7th Sea Rules Questions

Re: General 7th Sea Rules Questions

Re: General 7th Sea Rules Questions

Re: General 7th Sea Rules Questions

Re: General 7th Sea Rules Questions

Re: General 7th Sea Rules Questions

Re: General 7th Sea Rules Questions

Re: General 7th Sea Rules Questions

Re: General 7th Sea Rules Questions

Re: General 7th Sea Rules Questions

Re: General 7th Sea Rules Questions

Re: General 7th Sea Rules Questions

Re: General 7th Sea Rules Questions

Re: General 7th Sea Rules Questions

Re: General 7th Sea Rules Questions

Re: General 7th Sea Rules Questions

Re: General 7th Sea Rules Questions

Re: General 7th Sea Rules Questions