Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What is "Embattled", really?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Holden View Post

    Vance's answers 100% line up with my intent when I wrote those rules, fwiw.

    "Embattled" is, I think, a remnant of the old "engagement range" thing from the end of 2e (Christ what a suppurating nightmare that was to calculate) still rattling around in my head, and some vague notion at the time that we might eventually have stuff like really big opponents or enemies with huge long tentacles or whatever that could threaten characters clear out to short range who tried to get away from them. It ended up just not being important or coming up during the rest of the rules writing, and the natural language the rules ended up being written in didn't need the specialized term.
    Thanks for the clarification! It seemed crystal clear to me, but, well, here we are with this thread.


    I am no longer participating in the community. Please do not contact me about my previous work.

    Comment


    • #17
      Well here's one way to boil it down. An opponent does a success disarm gambit on me which flings my weapon to short range. Do I have to do a Disengage action in order to move to get it? Or would I be able to use my move to get to it without changing range from my opponent?

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Therian View Post
        Well here's one way to boil it down. An opponent does a success disarm gambit on me which flings my weapon to short range. Do I have to do a Disengage action in order to move to get it? Or would I be able to use my move to get to it without changing range from my opponent?
        Exactly.

        Also, Holden, you're alive! Huzzah!


        Formerly Inugami, formerly Tornado Wolf.

        My RWBY Blog on Tumblr: Semblances, Kingdoms, Grimm, and more!

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Therian View Post
          Well here's one way to boil it down. An opponent does a success disarm gambit on me which flings my weapon to short range. Do I have to do a Disengage action in order to move to get it? Or would I be able to use my move to get to it without changing range from my opponent?
          Why wouldn't you have to Disengage? From a rules perspective, it'd depend on its exact position, but I presume that by "short range" you mean that it's not reachable without leaving close range from them.

          From a cinematic perspective, they just disarmed you and now have you at swordpoint. If you want to get your sword back, you have to do a heroic combat roll under their blade or between their legs or to duck aside or something (a disengage action) to reach your blade without being killed. That happens in stories and movies all the time.

          And from both perspectives, you want disarming to be actually meaningful (that's probably the whole reason they can fling your sword out of reach in the first place.) If you could just walk over and pick it up without a roll, that would be boring and make disarming much less interesting.

          Comment


          • #20
            By my read on the rules: Is your opponent being a show off disarming you then graciously allowing you to go fetch your weapon? Then no disengage necessary. Are they actively trying to kill you while you are unarmed and/or actively trying to prevent you from getting your weapon back? Gotta disengage.


            You need a picture altered to fit your Exalted character, or just looking for some visual inspiration? Check out the twice-reborn Exaltification thread. And here is my Deviantart page

            Søren Kierkegaard + Kim Kardashian = Brilliance

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Therian View Post
              Well here's one way to boil it down. An opponent does a success disarm gambit on me which flings my weapon to short range. Do I have to do a Disengage action in order to move to get it? Or would I be able to use my move to get to it without changing range from my opponent?

              Well, are they trying to keep you from getting to it? Roll disengage.

              In the hypothetical running combat through bamboo forest and along a tranquil lake. Crouching Tiger and Hidden dragon are trading blow and moving along. Any give and take in distance is immaterial to the action, fiction, or mechanics. Now Crouching Tiger disarms Hidden Dragon and the action comes to a halt. Even if Crouching Tiger isn't directly in Hidden Dragon's path to their sword, each movement is evenly match. Hidden Dragon must disengage to overcome Crouching Tiger and gain fiction significant distance to reach the sword. And if that's all they wanted to do, they don't need to use the secondary reflexive move from succeeding and just continue trading blows and being all majestic and wire-fu and shit.

              Alternatively, are they not trying to keep you from getting it? Do they move with you? Carry on. Draw/Ready the weapon and eat that penalty.

              In the hypothetical.. kidding. This overwrought and overthought response to this overwrought and overthought thread is already....


              Raksha are my fae-vorite.

              Reincarnation of magnificentmomo.

              Comment


              • #22
                So, when Embattled, you CAN move into another range band if your opponent allows you, but he gets to reflexively follow you.


                Formerly Inugami, formerly Tornado Wolf.

                My RWBY Blog on Tumblr: Semblances, Kingdoms, Grimm, and more!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Sunder the Gold View Post
                  So, when Embattled, you CAN move into another range band if your opponent allows you, but he gets to reflexively follow you.
                  I don't understand what you mean by this. Where's the "reflexively follow you" bit coming from?

                  If they allow you to do something, they're (briefly) not an opponent any more, and you can just move normally ignoring them. I don't think they get to reflexively follow you.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Sunder the Gold View Post
                    So, when Embattled, you CAN move into another range band if your opponent allows you, but he gets to reflexively follow you.
                    No, no, no, and no.

                    The only time you can move into another range band is if your opponent for some reason is choosing not to contest your movement. And if your opponent does that, it does not magically grant them a reflexive move action.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Aquillion View Post
                      I don't understand what you mean by this. Where's the "reflexively follow you" bit coming from?

                      If they allow you to do something, they're (briefly) not an opponent any more, and you can just move normally ignoring them. I don't think they get to reflexively follow you.
                      It makes no sense that you can move ten miles freely with your opponent keeping pace with you, until suddenly you want to reach something in another range band and now you can't move ten feet.


                      Is being Embattled about your opponent keeping pace with you wherever you go, or is it about him preventing you from leaving an immediate space?

                      If the abstraction can mean both things, you'd need to write every Charm interacting with the base rules with a mind to which action it represents.


                      And I did read what Holden said about the "Embattled" term, but it still has meaning as "you need disengage to create distance".
                      Last edited by Sunder the Gold; 08-16-2017, 07:39 PM.


                      Formerly Inugami, formerly Tornado Wolf.

                      My RWBY Blog on Tumblr: Semblances, Kingdoms, Grimm, and more!

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Sunder the Gold View Post
                        So, when Embattled, you CAN move into another range band if your opponent allows you, but he gets to reflexively follow you.
                        Range bands deal with relative and relevant movement.

                        Lets say you and your opponent are at Close Range. You can move all over the place narratively, while not moving mechanically. Movement and scenario is just stunt fodder in this case.

                        Lets say you and your opponent are at Close Range and a cliff 3 range bands away. You plan on getting to this cliff to use your awesome Athletic Charms to jump over the gorge and pepper your enemy with arrows from the other side.

                        Now to move towards the cliff you use your Reflexive Move Action. If your opponent doesn't want to keep you from the cliff and your ST cares to count 3 rounds for you to reach the cliff, no Disengage is necessary. You use your RMA to get closer to the cliff and your opponent uses his RMA to keep up with you (he doesn't get an extra RMA to follow you, he just uses his cause he doesn't care).

                        Now you reach the cliff and you want to jump across, and your oppponent wises up and doesn't want to let you go. Now you need to disengage to jump.

                        This is all well and good.

                        The problem I see is when something goes "fuck it" I'm just gonna leave. A STR5 DEX2 STA5 Dodge 0 Super Resistance Dawn can't walk away from a regular soldier that "contests" the disengage? How the fuck? I don't feel the dice pools translate to the narrative very well.

                        Maybe what is missing is some sort of "attack of opportunity" for someone to take who wants to move without disengaging or something. If you don't get hit or don't take damage you can move, or some sort of thing like that. I dunno.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by TGUEIROS View Post

                          Range bands deal with relative and relevant movement.

                          Lets say you and your opponent are at Close Range. You can move all over the place narratively, while not moving mechanically. Movement and scenario is just stunt fodder in this case.

                          Lets say you and your opponent are at Close Range and a cliff 3 range bands away. You plan on getting to this cliff to use your awesome Athletic Charms to jump over the gorge and pepper your enemy with arrows from the other side.

                          Now to move towards the cliff you use your Reflexive Move Action. If your opponent doesn't want to keep you from the cliff and your ST cares to count 3 rounds for you to reach the cliff, no Disengage is necessary. You use your RMA to get closer to the cliff and your opponent uses his RMA to keep up with you (he doesn't get an extra RMA to follow you, he just uses his cause he doesn't care).

                          Now you reach the cliff and you want to jump across, and your oppponent wises up and doesn't want to let you go. Now you need to disengage to jump.

                          This is all well and good.

                          The problem I see is when something goes "fuck it" I'm just gonna leave. A STR5 DEX2 STA5 Dodge 0 Super Resistance Dawn can't walk away from a regular soldier that "contests" the disengage? How the fuck? I don't feel the dice pools translate to the narrative very well.

                          Maybe what is missing is some sort of "attack of opportunity" for someone to take who wants to move without disengaging or something. If you don't get hit or don't take damage you can move, or some sort of thing like that. I dunno.
                          If the rules mean that the embattling mortal merely gets to keep pace with the Solar, it would make sense.

                          You are right that in that case, representing embattlement as "keep you from leaving an area" does not make much sense.

                          Likewise if the Solar were replaced with a tyrant lizard. Or even a simple ox.


                          Formerly Inugami, formerly Tornado Wolf.

                          My RWBY Blog on Tumblr: Semblances, Kingdoms, Grimm, and more!

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Or what about a Fire and Water aspect having a running battle across the desert sands. The Water Aspect needs no disengage to run miles and miles towards the nearest river, and the Fire Aspect cannot prevent the Water Aspect from running towards the river.

                            But as soon as the storyteller gives a set range band distance to the nearest river, suddenly the Fire Aspect is using the exact same rules to do something radically different - no longer simply keeping pace with the Water Aspect, but preventing him from moving closer to the river... or even back away from the river.


                            Formerly Inugami, formerly Tornado Wolf.

                            My RWBY Blog on Tumblr: Semblances, Kingdoms, Grimm, and more!

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Sunder the Gold View Post

                              If the rules mean that the embattling mortal merely gets to keep pace with the Solar, it would make sense.

                              You are right that in that case, representing embattlement as "keep you from leaving an area" does not make much sense.

                              Likewise if the Solar were replaced with a tyrant lizard. Or even a simple ox.
                              Last time we (the forum) had this discussion, I used the "behemoth just wants to leave but waify fairy somehow contests that movement" example. It makes much more sense that the behemoth can't get away because the fairy is willing to keep up, not because it somehow keeps it from just walking away, what kind of narrative explains a contest between a man's agility (dex+ath) and a tliz's grace (dex+dod)? I can see a bunch of other things like distract, lure, fool, or grapple to keep something from getting to stay put. I just don't think it should be the exclusive purview of the Disengage action.

                              For me, Disengage works to keep something from getting away from you, but not to keep something from moving at all. If you have no believable way to describe how through your agility and athleticism is keeping someone from getting moving, in my table, it just means you are willing to follow.

                              This is good discussion, I ended up liking the "attack of opportunity" idea. Gonna test it out and try to see if the ST thinks its cool too.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                The thing everyone is missing is that range bands measure your positioning relative to the opponent. It's perfectly possible to have a running battle all through the halls of the palace with nothing more than stunting.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X