Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"Are Gambits really Decisive attacks?"

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

  • #46
    I would generally adjudicate case-by-case whether a gambit can apply to a charm that uses decisive attacks, because I believe a case-by-case contextual reading best reflects the actual way the charms were intended to work. Most of the extra-attack charms obviously weren't written with that in mind, for instance, but it's no problem with something like Peony Blossom Technique.

    My rules of thumb here are:
    • If nothing in the power interacts weirdly with Gambits, I tend to allow it to be used with gambits unless it's grossly out of step with the apparent intention of the charm. For instance, if a charm's effect depends on inflicting damage I'd only allow it for a gambit that inflicts damage.
    • Effects that assume your initiative resets are only a problem if they react appreciably worse with gambits than with attacks that outright do not reset your initiative, like the Zenith smite power, since you can presumably use those. This would definitely cover things like Iron Whirlwind, though.
    This is superseded, however, by the more general rule: you can do anything if it's cool enough to make me want it to happen, and I'll figure it out on the fly, but this isn't a contract that the same thing will be allowed in all cases. In that situation I'd allow you to do something like an Iron Whirlwind gambit-storm and just drop you to somewhere in the 1-3 Initiative range when you're done. If you really wanted to be a martinet, you could say each gambit attack needs one more initiative than its cost, so that you're not spending more than you have, but that seems like overkill to me.

    Comment


    • #47
      One of the troubles, for me at least, is that what "makes sense" varies depending on what kind of game one's running.
      If you're running sword-and-sandals epic fantasy, limiting it to one gambit per turn makes more sense to me.
      If you're running high-flying wire-fu, disarming 5 guys in one action makes sense.

      so... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


      Former bearer of the legacy of Trauma Bear
      Need a dice-roller? Check out Dicemat.

      Comment


      • #48
        Charms that aid or create gambits specifically say so.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Fata-Ku View Post
          One of the troubles, for me at least, is that what "makes sense" varies depending on what kind of game one's running.
          If you're running sword-and-sandals epic fantasy, limiting it to one gambit per turn makes more sense to me.
          If you're running high-flying wire-fu, disarming 5 guys in one action makes sense.
          Doesn't that mean that adjusting it according to one's needs is a boon?


          I have approximate knowledge of many things.
          Watch me play Dark Souls III (completed)
          https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLDtbr08HW8RW4jOHN881YA3yRZBV4lpYw Watch me play Breath of the Wild (updated 12/03)

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Isator Levi View Post

            Doesn't that mean that adjusting it according to one's needs is a boon?

            Not if the game contains charms balanced on the assumption of one ruling and not the other. Adjusting a rule to one's needs can have cascading rule impacts that aren't seen until it's already mid-session.

            With a combat system as crunch-heavy and delicately balanced as this one, and one that encourages custom content as much as this one, that's a serious concern for me.


            Originally posted by John Mørke View Post

            Charms that aid or create gambits specifically say so.
            Thanks for the clarification! Much appreciated.
            Last edited by Skeptic Tank; 05-31-2016, 05:42 PM.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by John Mørke View Post
              Charms that aid or create gambits specifically say so.
              That's very helpful. I will remember that.


              "Wizard of Oz, you really are a wizard!"

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by John Mørke View Post
                Charms that aid or create gambits specifically say so.
                Great to get the clarification, but this is where I get more confused in the natural language thing of the new charms. As I understand it.

                Gambits are decisive attacks (this makes sense)
                Charms that aid decisive attacks only aid gambits if they say so?
                Charms that make decisive attacks only make regular decisive attacks (this makes sense)

                So gambits count as decisive attacks, but not for any charm purposes unless they are called out specifically? So why are they decisive attacks?

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Molez View Post
                  So why are they decisive attacks?
                  So that there doesn't have to be a third type of attack defined and provided resolution process, yet that still rolls without accuracy like a decisive attack does, still involves rolling your Initiative rather than a pool determined directly by traits or equipment like a decisive attack does, and still has an effect upon your initiative other than improving it like a decisive attack does.



                  Not so noble anymore.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by John Mørke View Post
                    Charms that aid or create gambits specifically say so.
                    And if it needs clarifying, surely adding a keyword 'gambit' would do the job.


                    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


                    • #55
                      As a thought; the initial question raised was 'What does it mean if Gambits do or do not get treated as decisive attacks', where the complications from gambits being decisive attacks was a result of 'if gambits are decisive attacks, then using gambits are interchangeable with damaging decisive attacks in various charms and that has weird complications'.

                      Since we've gotten a definite answer on these questions (Gambits are decisive attacks; charms can only create/improve gambits if they are specifically called out), the ambiguity is resolved. If we want to argue about how things *should* be, or ways to improve the clarity of this topic, that's well and good, but probably deserves a new thread.


                      A tinkering effort at bringing fate ninjas into Ex3: Sidereals: Where Fate Has Led

                      Album of the Charm Trees thereof.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Hang on a minute, I thought I had a pretty good handle on things but now I'm uncertain again.

                        Is John saying that bread-and-butter stuff like Excellent Strike doesn't apply to gambits?

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Sanctaphrax View Post
                          Hang on a minute, I thought I had a pretty good handle on things but now I'm uncertain again.

                          Is John saying that bread-and-butter stuff like Excellent Strike doesn't apply to gambits?
                          I'm not sure? If you take John's words at face value then you wouldn't be able to apply Excellencies when trying to perform a gambit as the Excellency description doesn't mention gambits anywhere.

                          I can't imagine that's his intent with the rules.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by AnubisXy View Post

                            I'm not sure? If you take John's words at face value then you wouldn't be able to apply Excellencies when trying to perform a gambit as the Excellency description doesn't mention gambits anywhere.

                            I can't imagine that's his intent with the rules.
                            Yeah, I can't imagine that's intended, but it does raise ambiguity as to whether you can use all those dice trick charms on your gambits at all. This could have repercussions for future supplements if they use the "gambits to fight Juggernaut" theory of things.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              I think he meant that Charms that specifically affect Decisves only affect Gambits if specifically mentioned. Charms that affect any Ability rolls (like Excellencies) are still game.

                              So if a Charm grants a Decisive Attack that Decisive can only be used ofr a Decisive, not a Gambit.

                              If a Charm affects the attack roll (like Combat Abilities Excellencies) it still affects Gambits.

                              Maybe thats it?

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                I'm pretty sure his post was with regard to specifically Charms that specify they affect decisive attacks.

                                Hungry Tiger Technique specifies decisive, but doesn't mention gambits so it doesn't enhance gambits. The Melee Excellency just flatly applies to all kinds of Melee rolls, of which both decisive Melee attacks and Melee-based gambits count...

                                EDIT: Sidereal'd!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X