Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ask a Simple Question, Get a Simple Answer: General Chronicles/World of Darkness

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

  • Use those dice pools when they are applicable. Otherwise just roll Attribute with an untrained penalty. It's explained in the text immediately prior to the example antagonists.


    Bloodline: The Stygians
    Ordo Dracul Mysteries: Mystery of Smoke, Revised Mystery of Živa
    Mage The Awakening: Spell Quick Reference (single page and landscape for computer screens)

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Tessie View Post
      Use those dice pools when they are applicable. Otherwise just roll Attribute with an untrained penalty. It's explained in the text immediately prior to the example antagonists.
      I see. Thank you! 😀
      Last edited by Elythia; 02-12-2020, 01:04 PM.


      Waiting for new Chronicles of Darkness Dice! 🤗 🎲

      Comment


      • I've noticed some discrepancies between the rules for violence in the Chronicles of Darkness book and in some of the newer game books, specifically Changeling 2e and Geist 2e. In these cases should I consider the version in the newest book to be a sort of errata and the correct rules to use? For example the Chronicles of Darkness book uses the Initiative cycle itself to define a turn, while Geist refers to the character's action as a turn. A difference that makes a huge impact on the timing of things such as when the penalty to Defense is reset.

        Also, what about when the new and old versions of the rules conflict? In Chronicles of Darkness a character may drop prone reflexively at the cost of their next action, the same as Dodging, while the one dot power of the Close Quarters Combat Merit allows a character to run for cover as a reflexive action in response to a ranged attack instead of dropping prone. However, in Geist 2e dropping prone is an instant action. Is that Merit's ability now useless? Or would it still grant the same effect even though the ability it offers an alternative to no longer functions in the same way?

        Comment


        • Originally posted by RainRaven View Post
          I've noticed some discrepancies between the rules for violence in the Chronicles of Darkness book and in some of the newer game books, specifically Changeling 2e and Geist 2e. In these cases should I consider the version in the newest book to be a sort of errata and the correct rules to use? For example the Chronicles of Darkness book uses the Initiative cycle itself to define a turn, while Geist refers to the character's action as a turn. A difference that makes a huge impact on the timing of things such as when the penalty to Defense is reset.

          Also, what about when the new and old versions of the rules conflict? In Chronicles of Darkness a character may drop prone reflexively at the cost of their next action, the same as Dodging, while the one dot power of the Close Quarters Combat Merit allows a character to run for cover as a reflexive action in response to a ranged attack instead of dropping prone. However, in Geist 2e dropping prone is an instant action. Is that Merit's ability now useless? Or would it still grant the same effect even though the ability it offers an alternative to no longer functions in the same way?
          I'm pretty sure the Violence section is rewritten to make things easier to understand and that it wasn't supposed to change, so just go with the original rule instead. Consider that the new rule is pretty much worthless in a firefight because during your turn you'll almost always be able to just leg it and find cover if you don't want to be shot at instead of preemptively throw yourself on the floor. Being able to drop prone as a response to being shot at is why you'd want to do it at all.

          The CofD writers are fucking awesome, especially when it comes to the fluff, but there's something seriously lacking in OPP's production process for these books that leads to under-explained, contradictory, or outright broken rules.


          Bloodline: The Stygians
          Ordo Dracul Mysteries: Mystery of Smoke, Revised Mystery of Živa
          Mage The Awakening: Spell Quick Reference (single page and landscape for computer screens)

          Comment


          • So clearly conflicting rules should be considered errors rather than errata, that makes things a lot easier. I was getting ready to house rule half of the stuff back in anyway, especially the dropping prone rules since I agree making it a normal instant action renders it nearly pointless. It also explains why the newer books appears to have a few small conflicts within their own rules.

            That said, do you think it'd break things too much to use Geist's definition of a turn instead? Thus resetting Defense at the beginning of a character's action instead of at the beginning of the Initiative cycle, and so on? I'm fairly certain that defining turns by actions would be a lot more intuitive and fun for my players, but since we're all new to this game I'm a little worried that change would cause something to go horribly wrong in unforeseen ways.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by RainRaven View Post
              So clearly conflicting rules should be considered errors rather than errata, that makes things a lot easier. I was getting ready to house rule half of the stuff back in anyway, especially the dropping prone rules since I agree making it a normal instant action renders it nearly pointless. It also explains why the newer books appears to have a few small conflicts within their own rules.

              That said, do you think it'd break things too much to use Geist's definition of a turn instead? Thus resetting Defense at the beginning of a character's action instead of at the beginning of the Initiative cycle, and so on? I'm fairly certain that defining turns by actions would be a lot more intuitive and fun for my players, but since we're all new to this game I'm a little worried that change would cause something to go horribly wrong in unforeseen ways.
              I think you need to consider the turn vs the round. As I understand you take "your turn" on your initiative. And everyone turn happens within the round. And agreeing with Tessie sometimes the writers muddy these concepts with poor descriptions and lack of clear examples. So my quick reaction is the definitions for turn and round should not change but the language of the mechanic can gain clarity.

              * Lasts until the start of your next turn
              * Lasts until the start of the next round

              Best regards



              Roleplaying not Rollplaying or Ruleplaying
              Current Focus
              Storypath & Storypath to Run CoD, VtR, WtF, MtA
              Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Graylion View Post

                I think you need to consider the turn vs the round. As I understand you take "your turn" on your initiative. And everyone turn happens within the round. And agreeing with Tessie sometimes the writers muddy these concepts with poor descriptions and lack of clear examples. So my quick reaction is the definitions for turn and round should not change but the language of the mechanic can gain clarity.
                Muddied and unclear descriptions are definitely the source of my confusion, so perhaps I should begin with making sure my understanding is correct in the first place. "Turn" is poorly defined in the CofD book, but the rules for Initiative state that one turn includes one action for each character. Based on that, my understanding is that any time the book mentions a turn it's actually referring to the round, and whenever your character's action is mentioned it's referring to "your turn". An interpretation supported by special maneuvers like Charge stating that you can't use them if you've already applied your Defense against an attack earlier in the turn, since there's no point to that rule if "the turn" starts with your own action. Meanwhile, Geist seems to always define "the turn" as the time between the character's current action and their next action. This changes the timing of rules that simply state "the turn" in both versions, and it even explicitly states that Defense is reset at the beginning of "your turn." Assuming my interpretation of the core book's rules is correct, then as discussed above it's Geist's rules that are in error.

                My question is - again assuming my interpretation here is correct - would it become too game-breaking to use Geist's version of the rules anyway?

                Comment


                • I would (and have, pretty much since nWoD came out) consider "a turn" to be "until your next action" whereas "your turn" (distinct from "a turn") is when you take your action(s). That is, "your turn" and "a turn" are two distinct, different things. Then there is "this turn" or "the turn" which is also called "a round" which is a period of time during which every player takes their turn, from highest initiative to lowest (unless someone delays their turn).

                  As others have said, CofD is not very precise with its language, preferring feel and intuition over precision and clarity. It can be frustrating, but it goes along with the general theme and feel they want for their game(s). It's pretty easy to tell by context which version of "turn" they mean. Duration is almost always "a turn," as defined above. One full rotation of initiative starting and ending with the player it affects or who put it into effect. Prerequisites for maneuvers are almost always "a round" or "the turn" as above, including your "mustn't have used your Defense yet."

                  Trying to nail down one solid, consistent, universal meaning for "turn" is an exercise in futility. It's about context. It just wasn't written with that level of precision in wording. It really isn't necessarily a matter of "error" as these words simply don't have a singly-defined meaning in the context of this system.

                  Comment


                  • I just read both definitions for Defense, and to me it doesn’t look like an update. It just looks like they wanted to make it shorter and cleaner.
                    Furthermore you can use an instant action and a reflexive action in the same turn. So those things are not interchangeable. (You can find a definition in the Glossary.)

                    Generally I use more than one book. (Sometimes I go even back to the first edition, if I just don’t get it. Trying to understand what the authors want to say...)
                    Anyway, most of the new books have a smaller but cleaner rules section, because they need more space for the rest of the setting. And if there is not something that screams „I am new“, it’s usually not.


                    Waiting for new Chronicles of Darkness Dice! 🤗 🎲

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by RainRaven View Post
                      Several questions.

                      I do not own Giest 2e, is this the final version? Or is it a pre-errata pdf?

                      Can you copy the text exactly as it appears for review?

                      Without any other factors, I would not change the definition of a turn as it is fairly industry standard. It is also counter intuitive if a turn is something else. Turn come from taking your turn.


                      Copied from Vampire the Requiem 2nd Edition

                      Action
                      Actions The majority of actions in the game are instant actions. They represent acts that only take a couple of seconds. In combat, an instant action takes up your turn. A reflexive action is the sort of thing you don’t even need to think about doing. Most rolls to resist supernatural powers are reflexive. You can take a reflexive action at any time, and it doesn’t take your turn in combat.

                      Turn — The smallest increment of time, a turn lasts for about three seconds. A character can perform a single instant action in a turn. Turns normally only matter in combat or other dramatic and stressful situations.
                      Copied from Exalted 3rd Edition


                      Initiative: A trait abstracting combat advantage, and determining the order in which characters take turns during combat. This very important trait changes rapidly during battle. See pages 192-194.

                      Round—A unit of time used to measure combat scenes, considered long enough to take one action. A round normally lasts about three seconds in combat situations, but could potentially represent more time during fights involving large battle groups. The point during a round when you declare your character’s action is called your turn.
                      Copied from D&D 5th Edition

                      Your Turn
                      On your turn, you can move a distance up to your speed and take one action. You decide whether to move first or take your action first. Your speed—sometimes called your walking speed—is noted on your character sheet.
                      Copied from Storypath

                      Turn (Your Turn)
                      The smallest increment of time, which can last anywhere from a few seconds to a minute. A character can perform a single instant action in a turn. A turn is not itself a length of time. Instead, it is the moment in each round that a character takes their action(s) while acting in initiative order.

                      Round
                      A round is a snapshot of an exciting scenario such as a fight or competition. It is the length of time it takes all participants to have a turn in a situation governed by initiative. Every round each character involved takes a single turn, which they can use to move around and perform a suitable action, like launching an attack.
                      So st the end of the day change what makes your game better for you and your players. I recommend you change the duration of a mechanic or power to follow proper terms. Last until the start of your next turn or lasts until the start of the next round.

                      Best regards
                      Last edited by Graylion; 02-14-2020, 09:08 PM.



                      Roleplaying not Rollplaying or Ruleplaying
                      Current Focus
                      Storypath & Storypath to Run CoD, VtR, WtF, MtA
                      Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition

                      Comment


                      • Word count eats clarity!
                        Last edited by Graylion; 02-14-2020, 11:51 PM.



                        Roleplaying not Rollplaying or Ruleplaying
                        Current Focus
                        Storypath & Storypath to Run CoD, VtR, WtF, MtA
                        Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition

                        Comment


                        • It's the final version of Geist. That said, I just looked at Changeling: The Lost 2e and realized that it also uses the exact same wording that was confusing me in Geist. So I'll be providing these quotes using Changeling's page numbers instead as more people are likely to have access to it. My apologies for not using it as the example from the beginning.

                          Turns in Changeling are still defined the same way as what you quoted from Vampire. My confusion comes from how the wording of other rules use the term in the different books, particularly in regards to Defense and special maneuvers. For Defense, when discussing the rules for multiple hazards Changeling explicitly states "This penalty goes away at the beginning of your next turn" (page 182).

                          In contrast, when referring to the Defense penalty for multiple hazards, Chronicles of Darkness states the following on page 88:

                          Every time a character applies his Defense against an attack, reduce his Defense by 1 against subsequent attacks until the start of the next turn, when the character at the top of the Initiative order acts again.
                          This is why I understood that "the turn" in CofD was the same as "one round," and why the newer books suddenly changing the wording to "your turn" on everything confused me so much. To make matters worse, Changeling references this change to when the Defense reset occurs and then immediately provides an example that contradicts it. The following can be found in Changeling on page 184, under Special Maneuvers:

                          To enact any of the following instant actions, the character sacrifices her Defense until her next turn. If the character has already lost her Defense, for example by being surprised or attacked by enough opponents in one turn to reduce her Defense to 0, she cannot take any of these actions.
                          If Defense resets at the start of the character's turn, the example of multiple attacks reducing Defense to 0 makes no sense. In the CofD book, the restriction on these types of maneuvers is instead "If [the character] has already applied her Defense before her action occurs, she can't Charge" (page 92). All-Out Attack uses the same wording on the same page.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by RainRaven View Post
                            If Defense resets at the start of the character's turn, the example of multiple attacks reducing Defense to 0 makes no sense. In the CofD book, the restriction on these types of maneuvers is instead "If [the character] has already applied her Defense before her action occurs, she can't Charge" (page 92). All-Out Attack uses the same wording on the same page.
                            I want to highlight a thing you mentioned: All Special Maneuvers have also changed after the rewrite to be unavailable only if your Defense is reduced to zero. It used to be that you couldn't use any of them if you had used your Defense at all.

                            Considering how much the rewrite of the Violence section has changed, I have to ask if DixieCyanide or Meghan Fitzgerald can confirm if the changes to Initiative and Defense are intentional and, if so, explain how new, weird rules interactions are supposed to be handled.


                            Bloodline: The Stygians
                            Ordo Dracul Mysteries: Mystery of Smoke, Revised Mystery of Živa
                            Mage The Awakening: Spell Quick Reference (single page and landscape for computer screens)

                            Comment


                            • I have a question about the exorcism.

                              In the Cronicle of Darkness it is considered a standard extended action and everyone with the appropriate dice pool can try to perform it, or it's a ritual limited only to some supernatural splats?

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Ipergigio View Post
                                I have a question about the exorcism.

                                In the Cronicle of Darkness it is considered a standard extended action and everyone with the appropriate dice pool can try to perform it, or it's a ritual limited only to some supernatural splats?
                                Its usable by mortals (possibly other supernatural splats) with the requisite knowledge/research. It doesn't require merit or to be supernatural. It's not really a supernatural ritual more just mundane stuff that messes with ephemeral entities materialization conditions. It still, however, needs the various research rolls etc as written. You should have huge penalties if you just attempted an exorcism without research etc.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X