Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What is "Embattled", really?

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by LadyLens View Post
    The thing everyone is missing is that range bands measure your positioning relative to the opponent.
    And that fails completely outside of a White Room.

    Unless you don't need to Disengage from one opponent in order to Move towards another opponent, or something tactically advantageous. Then everything remains conceptually and mechanically consistent.

    Everything is consistent if you can Move wherever you want, within your regular mobility, with your inability to shake your opponent being a matter of the opponent following you rather than the opponent keeping you from moving out of the range band.


    Formerly Inugami, formerly Tornado Wolf.

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

    Comment


    • #32
      I think you should read and re-read this statement until you grok it.

      Originally posted by Robert Vance
      If you want to stage a cinematic fight in which, say, two swordsmen are running through a marketplace trading blows, you can simply declare that they're running through the marketplace as the fight goes on, without them needing to use their movement actions or change range bands to do so. In that context, a disengage would be attempting to put distance between yourself and your foe.


      Movement across range bands is a mechanical conceit which remains constant. Movement in the narrative sense of where characters are is flexible as subject to the whims of players and storytellers. If that narrative movement which does not involve mechanical movement across range bands occurs and confers a concrete advantage upon one character or another, it's a matter of storyteller fiat.

      EX: The character faces off against a god-turned-monster in its temple. The character wants to reveal to the public that the god is a monster, and the storyteller also thinks this is cool. The player stunts and hits the god hard with a punch, and the stunt he hopes would punch him through the wall and out into the street. The storyteller thinks this is cool as shit, and lets it happen. Neither character moves any range bands apart from one another, but narratively, they go flying through the wall to the streets below, infront of a crowd of onlookers. Thus, no disengage action is necessary.

      If the storyteller had decided they would prefer that the character do something more substantive to knock the god-monster into the street, he may have required the character to use Heaven's Thunder Hammer to knock him a range band back (through the wall) to get outside. Alternatively, he may have required the character to disengage to lead the god-monster on a chase out of a temple. Lotta different ways to handle that situation.

      Mechanical movement and narrative movement are the same until they aren't. When they aren't is determined by how cool the ST thinks your idea of narrative movement might be. This isn't that hard to grasp.



      Leetsepeak's Ex3 Homebrew Hub - Hub of homebrew for Exalted 3rd Edition that I've made.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Leetsepeak View Post
        I think you should read and re-read this statement until you grok it.
        And I think you should tell me if a kitten fighting a behemoth can prevent the behemoth from moving two range bands towards the city it wants to step on, or if the kitten merely follows behind the behemoth while attacking its ankle.


        Formerly Inugami, formerly Tornado Wolf.

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

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Sunder the Gold View Post
          And I think you should tell me if a kitten fighting a behemoth can prevent the behemoth from moving two range bands towards the city it wants to step on, or if the kitten merely follows behind the behemoth while attacking its ankle.
          GM rules the Kitten is an insignificant opponent and the Tryant lizard treats it as such - moving away without contest.


          My Homebrew: Architect of the Regal Puppet Style (WIP) || Monkey Style || Radiant Halo of Incandescent Might || Pale Driver, Ruination of the Edifice of Tyranny || Sublime Percussion, Just a Whole lot of Fun || Idris, The Graceful Heart of Purpose

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by LadyLens View Post
            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.

            Yes. This is one of the reasons the game uses range band (which only care about your distance relative to other characters or some landmark in the scene you have a reason to give a shit about) rather than zones or a grid or whatever. The engine doesn't really give a shit if you're running in lockstep through a bamboo forest, standing in place, or having a lightsaber duel while standing on two force-fielded pieces of debris as they're carried over miles of lava-river-- they're all two characters just remaining at close range bashing away at one another as far as the system is concerned, so long as there's no important third point in the scene that you need to mark distance against.

            (At that point, fudge something, because the engine and the fiction are starting to come unglued from one another.)


            Former Exalted developer.
            --
            Holden Reads the entire classic World of Darkness
            Follow my RPG ramblings on Twitter.

            Comment


            • #36
              Would it BREAK anything if embattling opponents reflexively moved into your new range band if you only used a Move and not a Disengage action?


              Originally posted by Elkovash View Post
              GM rules the Kitten is an insignificant opponent and the Tryant lizard treats it as such - moving away without contest.
              Okay, remove the kitten and use a Solar who could use the giant-grappling effect of Dragon Coil Technique so long as he can get in range to make the clinch.

              The Solar has the power to threaten the behemoth, but outside of his grappling might he has no other reasonable way to prevent it from moving into another range band.
              Last edited by Sunder the Gold; 08-16-2017, 10:25 PM.


              Formerly Inugami, formerly Tornado Wolf.

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

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Sunder the Gold View Post
                Would it BREAK anything if embattling opponents reflexively moved into your new range band if you only used a Move and not a Disengage action?



                Okay, remove the kitten and use a Solar who could use the giant-grappling effect of Dragon Coil Technique so long as he can get in range to make the clinch.

                The Solar has the power to threaten the behemoth, but outside of his grappling might he has no other reasonable way to prevent it from moving into another range band.
                The answer that the book gives you is that if, for whatever reason, a circumstance created by following the letter of the rules is mind-bogglingly ridiculous, then leave the rules aside and do what makes sense.

                If this behemoth can be attacked by a Solar who possesses charms to Grapple it, then I personally would rule that the Solar poses enough of a physical threat to prevent its passage without a disengage action (assuming they are rolled into combat in the first place).

                If the Solar had no reason to oppose the behemoth's movement they can simply elect not to resist the disengage.

                If the behemoth has a goal it is moving towards (the third 'actor' Holden mentions) then it should have to disengage to move towards it if the Solar doesn't want it to go there.

                How is this achieved narratively? The Solar has the power to grab it, so if it fails a disengage it's not because the Solar is just standing nearby and the ground becomes sticky, they are grabbing at them and holding them for moments, pinning a limb to the ground, tossing trees and other obstacles in their way.

                If it makes absolutely NO narrative sense whatsoever for a creature to be opposed disengaging, just let them move.


                My Homebrew: Architect of the Regal Puppet Style (WIP) || Monkey Style || Radiant Halo of Incandescent Might || Pale Driver, Ruination of the Edifice of Tyranny || Sublime Percussion, Just a Whole lot of Fun || Idris, The Graceful Heart of Purpose

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Sunder the Gold View Post
                  And I think you should tell me if a kitten fighting a behemoth can prevent the behemoth from moving two range bands towards the city it wants to step on, or if the kitten merely follows behind the behemoth while attacking its ankle.
                  Given that there are no hard rules for how behemoths work, that's exactly what I'm talking about, ST fiat.

                  You might decide the Kitten can't realistically stop that behemoth from moving out of its range band. You might decide the Behemoth is too big to operate in the combat engine at all so the question of disengaging never comes up. You might decide that Behemoths have a trait called Unstoppable Size which makes it so that they don't have to disengage to move out of range of whoever you want.

                  Or, for some reason, you might decide the Behemoth has to disengage, and thus have it roll against the kitten. These are all equally valid choices.

                  Apply your common sense, that's what the system tells you to do. Use your pink matter. Do you think the kitten being able to stop the behemoth makes sense? Then do it. Do you not? Then don't.


                  Leetsepeak's Ex3 Homebrew Hub - Hub of homebrew for Exalted 3rd Edition that I've made.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Elkovash View Post

                    The answer that the book gives you is that if, for whatever reason, a circumstance created by following the letter of the rules is mind-bogglingly ridiculous, then leave the rules aside and do what makes sense.

                    If this behemoth can be attacked by a Solar who possesses charms to Grapple it, then I personally would rule that the Solar poses enough of a physical threat to prevent its passage without a disengage action (assuming they are rolled into combat in the first place).

                    If the Solar had no reason to oppose the behemoth's movement they can simply elect not to resist the disengage.

                    If the behemoth has a goal it is moving towards (the third 'actor' Holden mentions) then it should have to disengage to move towards it if the Solar doesn't want it to go there.

                    How is this achieved narratively? The Solar has the power to grab it, so if it fails a disengage it's not because the Solar is just standing nearby and the ground becomes sticky, they are grabbing at them and holding them for moments, pinning a limb to the ground, tossing trees and other obstacles in their way.

                    If it makes absolutely NO narrative sense whatsoever for a creature to be opposed disengaging, just let them move.
                    While I agree it is correct to have a contested action over something narratively important. However it seems wrong to apply disengage unilaterally to this kind of action. Why is it the behemoth's dex+dodge to reach his objective. And why is it the Solars dex+athletics to stop it. Surely there are far more appropriate choices to represent this contest.

                    Disengage is fine represented as the ability to escape someone else in combat. However trying to apply it's rules to determine if someone can move or not just does not make sense.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Klaek View Post

                      While I agree it is correct to have a contested action over something narratively important. However it seems wrong to apply disengage unilaterally to this kind of action. Why is it the behemoth's dex+dodge to reach his objective. And why is it the Solars dex+athletics to stop it. Surely there are far more appropriate choices to represent this contest.

                      Disengage is fine represented as the ability to escape someone else in combat. However trying to apply it's rules to determine if someone can move or not just does not make sense.

                      ....Isn't this entire discussion about how disengage repersents an attempt to get space, not just movement? The example above is about how if the solar wants to contest an opponent, and is able too, disengage works to reflect that (since Disengage is "I'm moving despite a person actively opposing my movement")


                      I did a lot of homebrew over here. PEACH.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Klaek View Post

                        While I agree it is correct to have a contested action over something narratively important. However it seems wrong to apply disengage unilaterally to this kind of action. Why is it the behemoth's dex+dodge to reach his objective. And why is it the Solars dex+athletics to stop it. Surely there are far more appropriate choices to represent this contest.

                        Disengage is fine represented as the ability to escape someone else in combat. However trying to apply it's rules to determine if someone can move or not just does not make sense.
                        Because those dicepools are he baseline that cover most examples of the actions taking place. If you feel in any particular instance that they don't suit, you can substitute them for others with ST discretion. Some people elect to require stunts to do so.


                        My Homebrew: Architect of the Regal Puppet Style (WIP) || Monkey Style || Radiant Halo of Incandescent Might || Pale Driver, Ruination of the Edifice of Tyranny || Sublime Percussion, Just a Whole lot of Fun || Idris, The Graceful Heart of Purpose

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Elkovash View Post

                          Because those dicepools are he baseline that cover most examples of the actions taking place. If you feel in any particular instance that they don't suit, you can substitute them for others with ST discretion. Some people elect to require stunts to do so.
                          Except the disengage action is not about moving when an opponent does not want you to move. It is about attempting to retreat to short range from an opponent. Achieved by dodging, weaving, sudden turns or however you want to describe it vs their reflexes and athletic ability to keep pace with you. These do not describe your ability to keep someone stationary, just keep them near you or away form you.

                          Consider the circumstance of someone trying to get to an objective at short range. They are currently embattled with someone. Their intention is to move to the objective, not to disengage/retreat form the opponent. There are at least 3 potential outcomes of this scenario.

                          1: You are unable to move - Your version of failing a disengage
                          2: You successfully move towards the objective and shake the person - successfully disengage
                          3: You move towards the objective, but fail to shake the person, as such they keep up with you - ???

                          In what you are suggesting, option 3 will never happen, which seems dramatically inappropriate to exclude that possibility.

                          Keep in mind that by RAW you still can use a move action when in close range of an opponent. You just cannot use it to leave close range. This could describe you gaining distance towards an objective, or anything else you may be trying to move towards, but not actually breaking close range with your opponent.

                          Now my interpretation of how you go about the about 3 options is as follows.

                          1: You are unable to move - Your opponent utilises Grapple or some other gambit that locks you in place, preventing movement
                          2: You successfully move towards the objective and shake the person - successfully disengage
                          3: You move towards the objective, but fail to shake the person, as such they keep up with you - fail disengage or just move and let them follow

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Sunder the Gold View Post
                            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.
                            Two people are in combat.
                            The combat can move fairly freely around the landscape.
                            If one person wants to move in a specific direction, then the other combatant can:
                            - stay engaged in combat and move with them.
                            - stand still and let them run away, ending the combat
                            - use a gambit to grapple/trip/whatever and try to prevent movement

                            If the person trying to move actually wants to leave combat and deny their oponent the choice of the actions above, then they have to use a disengage action.

                            Isnt that about all there is to it?


                            Visit me at Tales of Grey - my RPG Game-Master's blog.

                            "If only I had an enemy bigger than my apathy, I could have won" - I gave you all, Mumford & Sons

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Klaek View Post
                              *snip*
                              Okay, you do you.


                              My Homebrew: Architect of the Regal Puppet Style (WIP) || Monkey Style || Radiant Halo of Incandescent Might || Pale Driver, Ruination of the Edifice of Tyranny || Sublime Percussion, Just a Whole lot of Fun || Idris, The Graceful Heart of Purpose

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally I had thought of Disengage, especially when there are multiple combatants embattled, as being a way to keep you from moving.

                                With some of the mostly valid points made in this thread I've somewhat challenged my original assumption (although my feelings on the original matter, re: moving battles still stands).

                                What if there were two different versions of Disengage with different pools? The current flavor would generally represent keeping pace with one another (barring fiction, your contest to Disengage could be fluffed to be you move faster into position to bar their way, how I originally pictured it). An alternate version could be a strength contest for the one Disengaging to blow passed the interdiction.


                                Raksha are my fae-vorite.

                                Reincarnation of magnificentmomo.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X