Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

[2E] Homebrew Gauru´s "Beaten Down" rule

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

  • [2E] Homebrew Gauru´s "Beaten Down" rule

    Something It has never made sense to me in 1st and 2nd is the fact that as written Gauru can never get the fight knock out of them which wouldn't be an issue if there wasn't fluff pieces about the Pure dragging Forsaken to conversion.

    Now with players this never work, as when fighting Pure they always choose Kuruth when the limit is up. If the option is facing torture and brain washing why wouldn't they take as many as they can before having their PCs die gloriously? On the Pure side the same issue, as why wouldn't they choose Kuruth on a losing battle? Unless they had a insurance that the Forsaken wouldn't kill them.

    So I have been looking at the beaten down rules, as I barely use humans in my game it is kind of a useless rule but I like the idea of it.

    That is, when 2 character enter Gauru without the intention to kill the other when they get an 1 lethal or Stamina in bashing they have to spend 1 Willpower to continue fighting.

    Obviously as we are talking about Gauru form, Bashing and lethal get toss out of the window for Aggravated. But how much? Stamina in aggravated is too few. Then, I tought about size but as a player pointed out that give no edge whatsoever to any character build except those that got Giant merit.

    Finally I though about Willpower score. It made sense to me, as any uratha in Gauru will have 10 health point minimun (size 5 + stamina at least 1 + 4 for Gauru form).


    So that thats my homebrew for a beaten down Gauru rule.

    Originally posted by Gauru´s Beaten Down;
    An Uratha that enters a combat without the intention to kill and get his total willpower score in aggravated damage. Then is Beaten Down: He’s had the fight knocked out of him. He must spend a point of Willpower at the start of every turn of shift back to hishu and surrender.

    Or he can choose surrender, giving his attacker what she wants according to her intent. If he gives in, he gains a point of Willpower and takes a Beat, but he takes no more part in the fight. If the other side wants to attack him, they’ve got to spend a point of Willpower to do so and probably suffer a breaking point towards the flesh for violating the Oath of the moon (-2).

    If anyone find it useful or has anything to contribute is welcome.
    Last edited by LokiRavenSpeak; 01-11-2018, 06:19 PM.

  • #2
    Gauru cannot be maintained indefinitively, and it can usually be subdued. I had a Hunter In Darkness pack which would incite the Kuruth with the cunning facet of Rage on interlopers and then use the Honor facet of Nature to make the raging animals try to kill their packmates and get lost, only to be discovered unconscious later and simply coup d'graced.

    Replace the tactic with renown flaying, and you have your typical Pure modus operandi.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Malus View Post
      Gauru cannot be maintained indefinitively, and it can usually be subdued.
      It can but the player get a roll each turn to try to get free which is around 3 second (or 6, i cant recall at the moment) which in hard rage of at least Primal Urge 1 (10 minutes) is around 200 rolls (3 sec per turn) or 100 rolls (6 sec per turn) unless the pure carry some kind of magical binding to zip tie the Gauru.

      And all of that assuming the opponent can maintain a subduing a Gauru in hard rage for 10 minutes straight.

      Originally posted by Malus View Post
      I had a Hunter In Darkness pack which would incite the Kuruth with the cunning facet of Rage on interlopers and then use the Honor facet of Nature to make the raging animals try to kill their packmates and get lost, only to be discovered unconscious later and simply coup d'graced.

      Replace the tactic with renown flaying, and you have your typical Pure modus operandi.
      Yeah its seems too complex than the whole "Pure punch you into submission" i am no saying is bad. Just that it seems to indirect. I read APs and fiction in which the Uratha get forcefully dragged or just hit so hard they "give in" even in Gauru and this while a valid strategy it doesnt reflect that.

      Comment


      • #4
        I'm not sure painting the Pure as a bunch of unsophisticated brutes makes much sense. As well, the need for the house rule seems premised on something strange: that every last Uratha will pick dying in a blaze of glory over capture. None of them are going to be cocky and think they'll endure the Pure's efforts long enough to escape. None of them are going to cling to the hope that their pack will save them before it's too late. None of them are just going to opt to live over dying because of ideology. Players might be prone towards the "blaze of Glory" option, but that's only because the threat of becoming a Pure is basically the same as death for the player: both are removing their character from them in a permanent fashion. If the blaze of Glory can be stopped fairly easily by any Pure that are using the minimum of tactics, it changes that pressure on players to not just go Kuruth (since it drastically limits what your character can do) and try for other options. Making the house rule less necessary.
        Last edited by Heavy Arms; 01-11-2018, 11:51 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Heavy Arms View Post
          s well, the need for the house rule seems premised on something strange: that every last Uratha will pick dying in a blaze of glory over capture. None of them are going to be cocky and think they'll endure the Pure's efforts long enough to escape.
          Thats relate my experience with players. Most preffer to die in a blaze of glory and get songs about them than have to RP torture/humiliation of their PCs.


          Originally posted by Heavy Arms View Post
          If the blaze of Glory can be stopped fairly easily by any Pure that are using the minimum of tactics, it changes that pressure on players to not just go Kuruth (since it drastically limits what your character can do) and try for other options. Making the house rule less necessary.
          My issue with the tactics is that it seems a lot of work on both situation and setup for something that the fluff tells my is fairly simple. Fluff tells me, pure attack they beat you into submission and drag you.

          But practically speaking as Mallus said, a combination of gifts + timing and waiting to the Kuruth to burn off or spirits of calm (plus keeping track of them and their rolls) or fetishes to inmobilize (then remembering whether i want those to be accessible to players) and their exact functioning and whether it makes sense for the pure to have them is the way to go. However i find thats a lot more complex (and heavy on my mental workload) than just having a rule for the above scenario (being punched into submission) be possible.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by LokiRavenSpeak View Post
            Thats relate my experience with players. Most preffer to die in a blaze of glory and get songs about them than have to RP torture/humiliation of their PCs.
            Probably best not to have this be their only choice then? I mean, lots of players don't like "you got captured, the rest of the pack comes to rescue you," much, but it's generally preferred to outright losing a character. You also don't have to force them to play out torture/etc.

            Some of this just comes down to how you introduce the Pure as a threat in your games.


            Fluff tells me, pure attack they beat you into submission and drag you.
            OK, I'm kinda curious... which setting lore is telling you this? Because I just read every passage in WtF 2e about the Pure again.. and this is nowhere. The brutish Pure tend to kill Forsaken that put up a serious fight instead of trying to capture them. Those that focus on conversion the most are the Fire-Touched, who are the least likely to use physical force. Their favored weapons are words, and strange spirit magics their masters grant them, so they can manipulate minds or demoralize their foes. They're the ones that would use Mallus's tactics as a matter of course per the books. The Ivory Claw blood hunter sample NPC tries to talk victims in, and if he doesn't think it'll work, he kills them outright. The Predator Kings don't really care about capturing anything.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Heavy Arms View Post

              Probably best not to have this be their only choice then? I mean, lots of players don't like "you got captured, the rest of the pack comes to rescue you," much, but it's generally preferred to outright losing a character. You also don't have to force them to play out torture/etc.

              Some of this just comes down to how you introduce the Pure as a threat in your games.
              My issue is this when a pure of forsaken takes Gauru then the situation revolves to a combat to the death. Is the only option that makes sense as you only have 1 Gauru form per scene if you change back to another, then one is assuming the other part is gonna let you walk alive. I dont like that the only way for a Uratha to win over another is a conscious choice, that getting the fight knock out of you isnt possible.

              Same the other way around with with Forsaken, the idea of there is a moral difference between executing a Pure and killing it combat is moot as when a Pure shift into Gauru you either kill it as quick as possible or risk the pure having more turns than you in Gauru or entering frenzy.

              So the idea of a Pure surrendering and the players facing the moral choice of either killing him or letting him live seems forced, to me, when nothing really stops you from continue fighting system wise.

              Or even the idea of a forsaken pack beating a Pure pack and send them packing.

              Originally posted by Heavy Arms View Post
              OK, I'm kinda curious... which setting lore is telling you this? Because I just read every passage in WtF 2e about the Pure again.. and this is nowhere. The brutish Pure tend to kill Forsaken that put up a serious fight instead of trying to capture them. Those that focus on conversion the most are the Fire-Touched, who are the least likely to use physical force. Their favored weapons are words, and strange spirit magics their masters grant them, so they can manipulate minds or demoralize their foes. They're the ones that would use Mallus's tactics as a matter of course per the books. The Ivory Claw blood hunter sample NPC tries to talk victims in, and if he doesn't think it'll work, he kills them outright. The Predator Kings don't really care about capturing anything.

              From the Antology the funeral of Eli Marks

              "And they grabbed him. He was hurt, so hurt he’d dropped to Hishu, bleeding from all over. They were picking him up to take him away. And so I… I had to."

              And from 1st edition pure book since there is barely any material in 2nd about the Pure. Also as I said, i take inspiration from APs, Detroit Rock City in which Urathas in Gauru get the fight beaten out them frequently beyond their control. I ask the DM what houserule he used but he/she hasnt replied yet.
              Last edited by LokiRavenSpeak; 01-12-2018, 10:21 AM.

              Comment


              • #8
                All those sources are 1e, in which Gauru was fairly less of an issue.

                Why would you roll dice 200+ times if you can simply adjudicate the subduing with a single down and dirty roll?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Malus View Post
                  All those sources are 1e, in which Gauru was fairly less of an issue.
                  I though the same but reading 1st edition the Gauru form there had similar rules with no wound penalties and no unconsciousness meaning that the only way to defeat a Uratha in Gauru/Kuruth was to kill it, use a gift/Fetish to remove the form or the Gauru in question choosing to change back.

                  Originally posted by Malus View Post
                  Why would you roll dice 200+ times if you can simply adjudicate the subduing with a single down and dirty roll?
                  I have very rule lawyering players and Down and Dirty combat is used against lesser foes which a Uratha in Gauru isnt. Also it kinda breaks the flow of the game, i feel, rolling normal combat rolls and then suddenly we switch to deciding the whole combat on a single roll.

                  And lastly as a group we dropped the Down & Dirty combat as whole after we tested it in play and found it a bad rule for us. Deciding a whole combat in one roll (and possibly the death of a PC) in a system heavily lean on one failing a roll.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by LokiRavenSpeak View Post
                    My issue is this when a pure of forsaken takes Gauru then the situation revolves to a combat to the death.
                    Yeah... you don't take Gauru unless your life is on the line, or you want to escalate things because you want to kill something. It's the killing form. Once either side opts to take, it's like drawing a gun in a knife fight... you change the stakes completely. Though there are ways to avoid it having to go to the death, as has already been brought up.

                    Same the other way around with with Forsaken, the idea of there is a moral difference between executing a Pure and killing it combat is moot as when a Pure shift into Gauru you either kill it as quick as possible or risk the pure having more turns than you in Gauru or entering frenzy.
                    There's other ways of executing people beside some sort of chopping block where they have a chance to do something about it.

                    So the idea of a Pure surrendering and the players facing the moral choice of either killing him or letting him live seems forced, to me, when nothing really stops you from continue fighting system wise.
                    The Pure know that most Forsaken think killing the Pure outside of combat is a violation of the Oath of the Moon, and a sign of their weakness for continuing their association with Luna. Why not surrender when the Uratha are going to be forced to not kill you, and that gives you plenty of time to try to escape/etc.

                    Or even the idea of a forsaken pack beating a Pure pack and send them packing.
                    Why do the Pure want to die? Why fight to the death when you're losing and you can run away? Shifting to Gauru when you're already losing isn't some magical "reverse" power here.

                    And from 1st edition pure book since there is barely any material in 2nd about the Pure. Also as I said, i take inspiration from APs, Detroit Rock City in which Urathas in Gauru get the fight beaten out them frequently beyond their control. I ask the DM what houserule he used but he/she hasnt replied yet.
                    Eh... you're basically saying that the system doesn't conform to stuff the system isn't supposed to conform to. The 2e core book has more then enough about the Pure to explain how they operate in the changed systems for 2e.

                    Originally posted by LokiRavenSpeak View Post
                    I though the same but reading 1st edition the Gauru form there had similar rules with no wound penalties and no unconsciousness meaning that the only way to defeat a Uratha in Gauru/Kuruth was to kill it, use a gift/Fetish to remove the form or the Gauru in question choosing to change back.
                    In 1e, even in Gauru, werewolves automatically go unconscious if you fill their Health with lethal. They can recover from it very quickly, but with Essence.

                    I have very rule lawyering players and Down and Dirty combat is used against lesser foes which a Uratha in Gauru isnt. Also it kinda breaks the flow of the game, i feel, rolling normal combat rolls and then suddenly we switch to deciding the whole combat on a single roll.
                    Down & Dirty combat is used whenever you feel is necessary. Gauru get to use it against lesser foes as a bonus, it's not the default reason to use the rules. The flow of the game is what you make it. Important actions as resolved with single rolls, or deeper systems, as you decide helps the flow.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Heavy Arms View Post

                      Yeah... you don't take Gauru unless your life is on the line, or you want to escalate things because you want to kill something. It's the killing form. Once either side opts to take, it's like drawing a gun in a knife fight... you change the stakes completely. Though there are ways to avoid it having to go to the death, as has already been brought up.
                      Ways that i also pointed out are way more complex and require more work (planning session wise) than just having a rule that allows for what i want.

                      Originally posted by Heavy Arms View Post
                      Why do the Pure want to die? Why fight to the death when you're losing and you can run away? Shifting to Gauru when you're already losing isn't some magical "reverse" power here.
                      Why wouldnt the Pure fight a top capacity? Why handicap themselves against the enemies which their hate group was funded to hunt by not using their better form to fight?


                      Originally posted by Heavy Arms View Post
                      Eh... you're basically saying that the system doesn't conform to stuff the system isn't supposed to conform to.
                      Is more "hey i wanna replicate this specific effect that i read in 1st editions and in actual play that isnt possible in 2nd, i made this houserule for it.


                      Originally posted by Heavy Arms View Post
                      The 2e core book has more then enough about the Pure to explain how they operate in the changed systems for 2e.
                      Lol no, just no. The 2nd edition write up of the Pure is minimal. It got a preffered prey but no correlations between Prey and tribal philosophy, but that is a problem of 2nd in general they use the same write ups from 1st but didnt do a good job in connecting them to favored prey, one could switch preys between tribes and keep the same philosophies and in most cases little would change.

                      Then we got barely a paragraph for each Pure tribe with some barebone strategies they use (which mind you are the same as in 1st) like the Firetouched use superior numbers and convincing/conversion, the Ivory Claws use proxies and hunt wolf blooded and the Predator kings use savagery and the temptation of "freedom" to the hunter within. And even goes into the same 1st ed idea of capturing and torturing.

                      And then it gives you strategies that it fails to explore as of yet. Like Fire touched "weild spiritual magics of disease and madness" and "the high priests and templars of the tribe can warp the Shadow and break its laws with ease" or Ivory claws "are masters of pain and blood, using elaborate rituals to tap into the full potential of the Great Wolf’s inheritance.

                      Which they cant we dont have any of those gift yet and 2nd gift are all equally rare so no special gifts except lunars. Same with Rites no special rites for the Pure and many of the rites in 2nd are equally available to everyone even more the Forsaken are the only ones that get secret tribal rite so far except for Tribal variant of Sacred hunt, unless that changes in moon banished.

                      Then we got 2 NPC of example and nothing else compared to the 1st edition source book that explains a lot more of the Pure. No specific strategies the Pure use or anything beyond "they bring spirit allies with them" and some generalities like "using proxies" which most are 1st write up.

                      Originally posted by Heavy Arms View Post
                      Down & Dirty combat is used whenever you feel is necessary. Gauru get to use it against lesser foes as a bonus, it's not the default reason to use the rules.
                      Thats is an interesting interpretation but is not what the book says in any way or form

                      Originally posted by Core 2nd;
                      "The Storyteller might decide that your character can get what she wants without focusing on the details of the fight. Maybe she’s picking on people weaker than her, like a Gauru werewolf faced with a mob of normal people. Maybe she’s internalized the mechanics of violence. Or maybe the fight’s not the important thing going on with regards to the character’s intent. If that’s the case, the Storyteller can opt to use a Down and Dirty Combat.

                      Storyteller characters might deal some damage, but they’re never able to initiate a Down and Dirty Combat."
                      Nothing on there applies to a character being dragged to forcefully conversion. On one hand and sure I can make a ruling and decide it applies now because i say so. But that doesnt really replicate the same as "characters get the fight kick out of them" applied to universally any situation as my rule. Is just a way to do clumsily do the whole "you character gets dragged back to conversion" but more importantly

                      Originally posted by Heavy Arms View Post
                      The flow of the game is what you make it. Important actions as resolved with single rolls, or deeper systems, as you decide helps the flow.
                      And i think Down and Dirty combat hurts the flow of the game, we gave it a chance and as group we found it a bad rule. Using it midcombat to me is a weird shift and way worse that having a rule to Gauru being able to get the fight kick out of them.
                      Last edited by LokiRavenSpeak; 01-13-2018, 12:11 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I think this has drifted a little from Down & Dirty combat to more focus on the Pure. Pure are never lesser enemies as Primal Fear applies. If Forsaken are facing Pure, the combat should be run using the normal combat rules. Yes, this may take a while, but as a general rule, if you’re stronger than the opponents, you take the fight to them until they lose control, then you take advantage of their loss of control. If they’re more powerful than you, you retreat and come up with a better plan. All too often STs (in any game system) run characters as being willing to die over any combat. This should be very rarely the case, not the norm. Most people value being alive, and should look to run before combat reaches the point where they think ‘Kuruth to avoid being taken prisoner’.

                        And if characters are using Kuruth as their standard ‘die fighting’ tactic, the Storyteller is letting them off too easily. Werewolves on both sides are well experienced with the uses and drawbacks of Gauru and Death Rage. If an enemy goes to Kuruth, wise opponents withdraw and bait them until the time limit runs out. Or they provoke their opponents in areas where the follow-up cost of Kuruth will far outweigh the benefits.

                        There are older, longer threads on this forum with tactics about using and countering Gauru and Kuruth.
                        Last edited by Bunyip; 01-13-2018, 01:06 AM.


                        Writer. Developer. WoD | CofD | The Trinity Continuum 19 books and counting...

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Bunyip View Post
                          And if characters are using Kuruth as their standard ‘die fighting’ tactic, the Storyteller is letting them off too easily. Werewolves on both sides are well experienced with the uses and drawbacks of Gauru and Death Rage. If an enemy goes to Kuruth, wise opponents withdraw and bait them until the time limit runs out. Or they provoke their opponents in areas where the follow-up cost of Kuruth will far outweigh the benefits..
                          And I recognize those strategies, Mallus mentioned a few. I just designed this houserule to make things more direct.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by LokiRavenSpeak View Post
                            Ways that i also pointed out are way more complex and require more work (planning session wise) than just having a rule that allows for what i want.
                            Well, just using Beaten Down doesn't actually do what you want. Beaten Down, for instance, doesn't apply as written to the situation of, "I'd rather die than get captured." If surrendering to your opponent in combat would be a fate equal or worse than death to your character, you can't be Beaten Down with damage. If an Uratha is willing to go Gauru for the fight... there's pretty much no justification for inflicting Beaten Down on them through damage (opposed to some magical infliction of it).

                            Originally posted by WtF 2e
                            If one side’s intent involves brutalizing or killing the other, surrender isn’t an option — not without the losers dying. If that’s the case, their intended victims don’t get Beaten Down, and gain no benefit from surrendering.
                            So even waving that Beaten Down doesn't apply to Uratha in the RAW, it would still basically never apply if they're willing to go Gauru in response to the situation.

                            Why wouldnt the Pure fight a top capacity? Why handicap themselves against the enemies which their hate group was funded to hunt by not using their better form to fight?
                            Fighting in Gauru is limited in application for tactical reasons, and going Kuruth to gain more access to it can cause further difficulties for your pack.

                            A lot of this seems to come from your desire to treat the Pure as two dimensional brutes that only care about kidnapping and force-converting Forsaken, or killing them if they can't. The 1e books make it clear they are far more than this. They have more to do than turn everything into a battle to the death with the nearest Forsaken pack.

                            The 2nd edition write up of the Pure is minimal.
                            You're conflating "enough to detail how they react to not being able to just beat up Forsaken," with, "complete mechanical representation."

                            And then it gives you strategies that it fails to explore as of yet.
                            And yet... one such strategy has already been explored in this thread...

                            Thats is an interesting interpretation but is not what the book says in any way or form
                            Um.. what does, "The Storyteller might decide that your character can get what she wants without focusing on the details of the fight." mean besides exactly what I said?

                            Nothing on there applies to a character being dragged to forcefully conversion.
                            Um... duh? It's not there to describe every situation where Down & Dirty might apply. It's there to give out an idea of when to use it. The whole point is, "getting into the full combat mechanics isn't important, so for the flow of the game, just do it in a single roll off," and leaves it up to the ST to judge when to do that.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Heavy Arms View Post
                              Well, just using Beaten Down doesn't actually do what you want. Beaten Down, for instance, doesn't apply as written to the situation of, "I'd rather die than get captured." If surrendering to your opponent in combat would be a fate equal or worse than death to your character, you can't be Beaten Down with damage. If an Uratha is willing to go Gauru for the fight... there's pretty much no justification for inflicting Beaten Down on them through damage (opposed to some magical infliction of it).
                              Uh do you read the houserule i wrote? I include the intent part at the very start. When combat starts i ask the players "hey guys you will fight the pure to the death or not" and if they say not for now, and i know because of the specific Pure then both can enter Gauru beat each other and have a clear mechanical line for "its enough".

                              Originally posted by Heavy Arms View Post
                              You're conflating "enough to detail how they react to not being able to just beat up Forsaken," with, "complete mechanical representation."
                              To me is the exact thing, if you tell they use strange powers and then dont back those powers with mechanics, is just useless fluff to me.

                              Originally posted by Heavy Arms View Post
                              Um... duh? It's not there to describe every situation where Down & Dirty might apply. It's there to give out an idea of when to use it. The whole point is, "getting into the full combat mechanics isn't important, so for the flow of the game, just do it in a single roll off," and leaves it up to the ST to judge when to do that.
                              And if tell you i consider Down and Dirty combat to hurt the flow of the game why you keep insisting i should use a rule i consider harmful to the flow of the game?

                              I consider down and dirty combat a bad rule, my group consider it a bad rule by absolute majority.

                              Originally posted by Heavy Arms View Post
                              A lot of this seems to come from your desire to treat the Pure as two dimensional brutes that only care about kidnapping and force-converting Forsaken, or killing them if they can't. The 1e books make it clear they are far more than this. They have more to do than turn everything into a battle to the death with the nearest Forsaken pack.
                              Okay let move away from the Pure. EDIT: Okay I will simplify you are right, i consider The pure as unredeemable black hats, do i consider there could theoretically "good pure"? Sure....rarely, but i consider the organization base goals to be unredeemable and the brain washing too extreme to really escape that unless special circumstances. No looking to discuss whether the pure are more than slowly breeding Black Spiral Dancers, simply put yet another row of special cases in which a Pure could be good or that being a sell out is what people in the real world do and thus is more relatable is not gonna convince me. It didn't do it for the Seers of the throne it wont do it for the Pure.

                              So lets move the discussion away of the Pure. The core of my house rule is "I want a rule for Urathas to beat each other in Gauru and have a mechanically enforced stop point before death based on intent" Can it be Pure Vs Forsaken, Forsaken Vs Forsaken or Pure Vs Pure whatever, the point is having a mechanically enforced stop point in Gauru VS Gauru.

                              I will move it further from the Pure Vs Forsaken thing. I want fights for territory 1 on 1 between Ghost wolves packs in Gauru to be able to be non lethal with a clear defined mechanically enforced stopping point.
                              Last edited by LokiRavenSpeak; 01-13-2018, 02:15 AM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X