Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"Are Gambits really Decisive attacks?"

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

  • #76
    Originally posted by Chejop Kejak View Post
    Okay, but... we have blanket rules for Gambits?

    And they don't always make sense. Does only being able to distract a person who you can hit with your sword make sense? I can't think of much more distracting than evading an attack, leaping five meters away, having this jump carry you off a waterfall, and gliding to a landing in the treetops below... but with Leaping Dodge Method and some Athletics Charms, that gets you out of the Gambit.

    The rules do not treat that as "so varied that it's mostly going to be case-by-case," because they are a set of rules. If you have an idea for a house rule in a given situation, you can always use it, but the appeal of a rule system (especially a rule system with hundreds of pages worth of exceptions) is that it tells you what to do when you don't have such an idea off-hand.

    And that's before you get to the idea that, say, the ability to parry a lava flow with your sword might also extend to parrying loud noises. Common sense will only take you far in dealing with Solars.
    I think you missed the part of my post where I was saying that it makes sense for some Decisive-boosting Charms to work on Gambits, despite the fact that by the rules they can't, because they would specifically call out Gabits if they did.

    Otherwise, I'm not sure what argument we're having? Like, okay, my impromptu examples aren't perfect, but I never claimed they were and I was simply agreeing with the idea that it's okay to house-rule some stuff.
    Last edited by Fata-Ku; 06-02-2016, 11:54 AM.


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

    Comment


    • #77
      The general rule of "don't apply decisive-enhancing Charms to gambits" is probably a significantly more balanced and sensible approach than the hypothetical "apply decisive-enhancing Charms to gambits freely," even if in both scenarios the players and ST collectively decide to apply the Orichalcum Rule on a case-by-case basis.

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by Fata-Ku View Post
        Otherwise, I'm not sure what argument we're having? Like, okay, my impromptu examples aren't perfect, but I never claimed they were and I was simply agreeing with the idea that it's okay to house-rule some stuff.
        I wasn't intending to be arguing with you?

        I was simply expounding upon why "most things are case-by-case" bug me, because your post put me in mind of that. I know I can seem a little abrasive (one of the reasons why I've mostly been lurking in my own thread, here), but I am not actually attacking every post I quote.


        "For me, there's no fundamental conflict between really loving something and also seeing it as very profoundly flawed." -- Jay Eddidin

        Comment


        • #79
          You will only get weir results for decisive Charms that explicitly reset initiative and I believe non of those explicitly support gambits. The rest of the charms should be ok to use with gambits as long as the gambit themselves do make sense.
          We have this explicitly for grapple gambits, but it it clear we should generalize it to other gambits as well:
          Originally posted by Ex3rd p. 201
          A final note: Characters cannot grapple any opponent where a grapple simply doesn’t make sense given the relative scales involved (so grapples would be inapplicable against an army of a hundred Realm legionnaires, or against the Mask of Winters’s corpse-fortress Juggernaut; likewise, a toddler can’t effectively grapple a grown man, nor could a grown man grapple an eight-ton tyrant lizard).
          Emphasis not mine.

          Comment

          Working...
          X