ParanetOnline
The Dresden Files => DFRPG => Topic started by: Silverblaze on May 15, 2011, 10:19:26 PM
-
Many systems come up with multiple action systems for combat.
Do you think the Fate System as defined within hte Dresden Universe is balanced for PC's?
Do you think it is fair for NPC's and not PC's?
Is it unfair or fair for both?
D&D: characters get more actions through spells or more attacks as they level - fairly balanced
3rd ed. D&D/Spycraft/Star Wars: free actions, move actions, attack actions, full round actions and modified as above - abusable but fairly balanced
Star Wars - west end: D6 system, subtract a die to get an additional actioin, limited only by number of D6's rolled (turned out to make skilled players whirlwinds of death)
Shadowrun: initiative modifies how many actions one recieves (balanced unless someone munchkins initiative/actions)
White Wolf Vampire old school: celerity 1-5 geneates that many additional actions ( 6-10 exists but rarer)
White Wolf Werewolf: Rage rating 1-10 dictates actions (mildly broken unless context of the game is taken into account they need those actions to live...still pretty mean)
White Wolf Scion: similar to a cross between Old school vampire and Shadowrun fairly balanced considering the genre
DC Heroes Mayfair/Blood of Heroes MEGS system: one dice action two auto actions (moving, turning on powers etc) this does not change generally - balanced for a superhepr game
MechWarrior RPG: one action a round unless in a mech using the old Battletech system for combat seems balanced but combat out of mechs is clunky at best
I think this system should have one action a round as no powers in the book really get into having more actions even Mythic Speed. Multiple attacks per round could easily make mages far less useful. They also could out damage mages/wizards/evocators for no require of stress expended. I think Evil Hat has a near perfect recipe and multiple actions generally will unbalance and ruin the combat system… especially if someone found a way to cast multiple evocations at once. Spray attacks and zone wide attacks handle this just fine in my opinion.
I can definitely say if I were allowed to use a power or stunt that allows me multiple actions combat will be a lot less challenging and require far meaner encounters and more work to generate challenge on behalf of the GM.
People should do as they like in their games, but the above is my opinion and I’m seeking what others think/feel about it.
-
I think that anything allowing multiple actions should use spray attacks as a balancing point.
Spray attacks aren't all that strong, so that should keep things reasonable.
By the way, two more for your list:
Shadowrun 4E + Eclipse Phase: Characters have a speed stat, which dictates how many times they act per turn. Balanced in that it is as unfair as it is supposed to be.
Exalted 2E: No turns. Each action takes a certain number of ticks, which determines how long it will take before a character can act again. There are also flurries, which let you take multiple actions by taking penalties to all of them. About as balanced as a one-legged stool.
-
I think that anything allowing multiple actions should use spray attacks as a balancing point.
Exalted 2E: No turns. Each action takes a certain number of ticks, which determines how long it will take before a character can act again. There are also flurries, which let you take multiple actions by taking penalties to all of them. About as balanced as a one-legged stool.
But awesome especially when you can get a 2-3 tick attacks (abusive charm set up), which means you can flurry (up to a silly number of attack with no penalty with the right magical flurry charm which also reduces your enemies defence for each attack) two to three times for every action everyone else has.
-
A rather bad idea. It's already hard to get a PbP going with a single action per exchange. Imagine how slow it would be if everyone had to write down 3-4 actions...
-
Multiple Actions for PC... not ever. That is my opinion.
Regarding NPC:
If you give an NPC two instead of one action per round you essentially duplicate him.
Except for the one stress track it's no different from having two NPC instead of one.
So if you are, for example, facing a group of characters that would normally need 5 NPC to challange them, you could concentrate those 5 into two NPC, one with 2 and one with 3 actions per round.
The multiple action part then simply turns into an issue of description, and that's no problem at all.
That is really the only situation in which i would allow multiple actions.
-
The only example of mulitple action in the system already is WVC feeding and inciting which it get over by calling it only one action.
-
The only way I think I would allow multiple actions in one turn is if a PC or NPC were to make a spray attack on one person.
Basically divide up the attack and weapon between two attacks on one target.
The only real reason I could see for a player doing that is for maximum fate point spending.
-
A rather bad idea. It's already hard to get a PbP going with a single action per exchange. Imagine how slow it would be if everyone had to write down 3-4 actions...
(http://www.circvsmaximvs.com/images/smilies/happy/heh.gif)
I really shouldn't laugh... I'm in his PbP.
-
One middle ground idea that I've been playing around with is allowing players to Invoke to create bonus actions and actions out of turn. For the cost of a fate chip you could throw up a reactive defense (Speed of thought) or use an appropriate aspect to toss out an extra attack during a scene.
-
One middle ground idea that I've been playing around with is allowing players to Invoke to create bonus actions and actions out of turn. For the cost of a fate chip you could throw up a reactive defense (Speed of thought) or use an appropriate aspect to toss out an extra attack during a scene.
I already allow reactive blocks anyway. It seem appropriate to me because a swordsman can block with a sword. Why can't a wizard block with a shield? The shield needs a lot less movement than a sword block does.
-
I had figured that DFRPG had already allowed multiple actions per turn. Those extra actions are supplementary actions. I think that there is only no multiple attacks in this game system.
-
For me multiple attacks exist as
A. Spray attacks
B. Declarations with weapons, guns etc, to use against a single target. Variable difficulty.
I've thought about allowing two rolls and taking the better of the two. But that already exists by invoking an aspect, presumably one that relates to speed.
-
I don't understand the widespread belief that multiple actions are inherently overpowered. As long as they aren't any stronger than spray attacks, what's the problem?
-
I don't understand the widespread belief that multiple actions are inherently overpowered. As long as they aren't any stronger than spray attacks, what's the problem?
Simply: some folks want more than the Spray Attack option provides, or feel that having the option is a necessity for a good (combat-based) game.
-
Uh, wait.
It sounds like you're arguing my side, which is that multiple actions are a viable mechanic.
But the context makes it seem otherwise.
The problem with multiple attacks is that people want more than spray attacks provide?
I don't understand.
-
It sounds like you're arguing my side, which is that multiple actions are a viable mechanic.
But the context makes it seem otherwise.
The problem with multiple attacks is that people want more than spray attacks provide?
I don't understand.
Yes, I agree with you: I use the RAW Spray Attack option, as well as supplemental actions, and feel they are just fine for a more narrative-based game.
What I am hearing (and I may be mistaken) is that folks want multiple attacks at their highest (or a slightly diminished) skill level, in sheer excess of the type of attack levels one gets from the Spray Attack rules.
-
Hm. Well, I'm hearing differently.
I see two sides here:
1. One action per round. Supplementals, sprays, fine. But no extra actions.
2. Extra actions can be added with powers, as long as they are comparable in power to spray attacks.
I am side two.
I suspect this thread may have started because of the Rapid Strike power that I posted to the master list. -1 power, allows you to spend a Fate point to make a number of attacks up to your skill by taking a penalty equal to the number of attacks to each.
I think that this is roughly comparable to spray attacks.
But some people disapprove of this power, and it seems like the main problem is that it offers multiple attacks. What I don't understand is, why do they like spray attacks and dislike this?
-
I have had a lot of fun having villains who are capable of multiple actions in an exchange. I had a monster that had mild control over bad luck and it was great fun having him maneuver against his target before attacking. The players thoroughly enjoyed the challenge as well.
As for multiple attacks for the players I'm against them but only because I'm lazy. Seems to me figuring out the cost for such a power and testing it's balance is too much work.
-
Sometimes there's a disconnect between the opposition and how effective the players are feeling. They want to fell a horde of mooks rather than take down each enemy in turn, perhaps. Maybe the game's dragging while this or that unimportant foe takes up too much of the party's time. There are legitimate pacing concerns that can result from misjudging how quickly a given group can clear the battlespace of fodder enemies.
Sometimes players are used to systems (a bunch mentioned downthread) where you DO get multiple attacks, even as an option. Part of it coming up here might be DFRPG (and FATE in general I believe) explicitly saying there are no multiple attacks (how about I call it multiple attack rolls so I don't get pedanted out of the room over Spray Attacks) and that hard "no" in a game full of "yes" is pushing gamers' buttons?
Anyhoo, I can really only offer a little input on that first scenario, and that's to use the mook rules from SotC. Basically a group of minions move as a unit and a single PC attack can take out 1 mook for each full stress track the attack deals. Say a unit of 5 mooks with 2 stress gets tagged by a Knight of the Cross who deals out 7 stress. The Knight takes out 3 mooks with a single attack roll; 2 stress takes out a mook, stress 3-4 takes out a second, and so on. It can be narrated how you like - maybe it's two thrusts and a headbutt or maybe just one massive swing that cleaves through three torsos.
The other counter to the "fights dragging because you can only kill 1 mook an action" problem is to use less enemies. Make the ones that ARE there more than simple mooks to make up for the lack of numbers.
-
Hm. Well, I'm hearing differently.
I see two sides here:
1. One action per round. Supplementals, sprays, fine. But no extra actions.
2. Extra actions can be added with powers, as long as they are comparable in power to spray attacks.
I am side two.
I suspect this thread may have started because of the Rapid Strike power that I posted to the master list. -1 power, allows you to spend a Fate point to make a number of attacks up to your skill by taking a penalty equal to the number of attacks to each.
I think that this is roughly comparable to spray attacks.
But some people disapprove of this power, and it seems like the main problem is that it offers multiple attacks. What I don't understand is, why do they like spray attacks and dislike this?
Tut has a fists skill of 6.
He has 3 fate points.
His opponent Steve has an athletics of 4.
If Tut attacks Steve normally using all of his fate points and everyone rolls a 0, Tut will do a 12 shift attack and Steve will take 8 stress if Tut has a weapon 0.
If Tut uses the Rapid Strikes power, he pays 1 fate point to use it.
He then rolls 2 4 shift attacks. He adds 2 points to each (with his remaining 2 fate points) and gets a total of a 12 shift attack.
Steve rolls twice for defense, for a total of 8 (4x2). Tut only does 4 shifts of stress.
8 shifts of stress (normal attack) vs 4 shifts of stress (Rapid Strikes Attack).
Rapid Strikes is underpowered. It's pretty much a spray attack that you have to use a fate point to use.
I'm with Sancta on this one.
That said, allowing a PC to ever make another attack as a supplemental action would be shenanigans, though.
-
But some people disapprove of this power, and it seems like the main problem is that it offers multiple attacks. What I don't understand is, why do they like spray attacks and dislike this?
The problem (for me) isn't *that* it allows multiple attacks (because Spray Attack certainly does) but that Rapid Strike appears to be much more powerful than a Spray Attack, and though it sounds like a bonus to the Spray Attack rules, it is in truth a somewhat different equation. The best one usually gets with a Fate Point is +2. With this Power (and 1 Refresh) it seems that a character can gain much more.
However, I just did some numbers:
Spray Attack and Fate Point with +6 Fists:
3 targets (2 at +3, and 1 at +2);
4 targets (4 at +2); or
5 targets (3 at +2, and 2 at +1)
Rapid Strike with +6 Fists:
3 targets at +3;
4 targets at +2;
5 targets at +1
I'm actually not sure that the Rapid Attack mechanism is a consistent advantage.
-
Wouldn't it be two 5 shift attacks? With one fate point per they're 7 shift? making 6 as opposed to 4? or am I reading the stunt wrong?
Also, I think stunts that add damage, and powers that add damage and a weapon rating would modify that result as each attack would have the option of using the additional damage multiple times.
One attack that deals 0. (equal attack and defense) would deal 2 with a weapon rating after the accuracy shifts which = 0.
With two attacks that equals 4 damage yes?
more with stunts and powers per hit. Even on ties it should turn out more efficient that a single attack. Also, a player with an excess of fate points could concieveably use 1 for rapid strikes and 2 or more per attack.
meaning it *can* indeed do more damage. The damage potential is the part i would worry about. having played OWBN WW (one world by night white wolf) I've seen more munchkins than most...and i fear the unbalancing such players can and will do if the option is present.
meaning one colossal attack - 1 skill to hit..could turn into 2 colossal attacks doing one point of damage each less so...10 X2 = 20 - 2 = 18 instead of 10.
The rapid strikes never says you cant hit the same person multiple times. Thus: an attack dealing 5, -1 for an additional attack...wil deal 4...twice...8 as opposed to 5....this gets worse the more each attack does...with semi diminishing returns.
Fate points really unbalance it…where as most characters can only finagle 2-3 tags of aspects..1-2 consequences for free or by spending fate+1 just cuz you can…that’s deadly on one attack that hits…it will annihilate something when that is doubled. –1 (2?) for one additional attack… plus strength and a weapon… may be even nastier done thrice if one can still hit….and with all those fate points you can.
5 damage becomes 8,…4X2…perhaps if tripled…5 becomes 9…3X3…it becomes no good after that…but…. 10 becomes 18…9X2…or…24…8X3… a weapon 6 isn’t hard to get with a sword plus supernatural strength + custom stunt weapon specialization would be 8… most abusive in melee or with lots of fate points, but guns and weapon specialization can do it too.
Even vs multiple foes...it is better than spray like Devonapple said...espeicalliy given the opportunity to tag more aspects and such per roll per foe.
Easy argument: that’s assuming they have a lot of fate points…
My response: always assume the worst, not the best…which would be the weakest and worse use of the power/stunt…someone with only three fate points…no weapon and no strength. I see tons of room for abuse.
-
Ah, good. This is what I was asking for.
Before I go into detail, let me make clear that the penalty should be equal to the number of attacks, not the number of extra attacks. The way I wrote it in the master list is bad. I changed it in my own mind, but I never got around to editing the power here. Sorry about that.
Also: Fate Points must be spent to boost the individual attacks of a Rapid Strike. One invocation doesn't boost them all. Also, you have to roll individually for each attack.
Anyway, I already know that Rapid Strike gets better in comparison to spray attacks as your skill rises. At Great skill, you'd be a fool to use Rapid Strike. At Fantastic skill they're about even. At Legendary skill, Rapid Strike is clearly better. But even at Legendary, it's not such a huge deal. You get 2 attacks at Superb with a spray attack and 2 attacks at Fantastic with Rapid Strike.
If accuracy goes much past Legendary, Rapid Strike is borked. Fortunately, I don't think it does. (Ignore evokers, they can't use this power.)
Of course, all this leaves unanswered the question of whether single-target spray attacks are a reasonable effect. I'd allow them if a player spent a refresh on a stunt granting the ability, personally. Here's why:
As BumblingBear showed, normal attacks are better than spray attacks when the weapon rating doesn't exceed the armour rating by much and the attack skill doesn't exceed the defence skill by much. Spray attacks become better when you are superior to your opponent. But if that's the case, you don't need any extra power to win. And if your opponent has any reasonable chance of dodging, then the spray attack is lousy.
Also, 2 9 stress hits is not as good as 1 18 stress hit.
Anyway, that's my reasoning.
-
my examples still stand when only one additional attack is made...espeically against one target. The math doesn't lie. .
Still: one 6 stress hit turns into : 6-2=4 2 4stress hits = 8...meaning more damage. add in weapons and stress boosters...it means more damage. likely 2 8 stress hits meaning it equals 16 instead of 6. I know one fate point doesn't apply to both rolls...I know you need to roll multiple times. being able to tag...twice as many times for twice is many fate points is way more than only doing so once. This means HUGE numbers. I will concede armor does get applied twice then..but done right...the combat monkey taking extra actions is still coming out on top. As with any combat system there is a wrong way, a right way, and a efficient and almost or (totally) broken way.
I'm obviously not going to change your mind however. Which is fine. I just hope some GM's and players see this and know it can be abused and I hope they choose not to do it.
Also...pet peeve: multiple attacks plus multiple defenses bogs down combat leaving less time for roleplaying and storytelling :(
-
Well, I think I'm open to persuasion. Unfortunately, I'm having trouble following your most recent post.
Here's an example where Rapid Strike is clearly awesome. Assuming all rolls are 0.
Legendary accuracy, weapon 6 against Great defence.
Normal attack + Fate Point is a 10 stress hit.
Two attacks with Rapid Strike is two 8 stress hits.
Three attacks with Rapid Strike is three 7 stress hits.
Four attacks with Rapid Strike is four 6 stress hits.
Two attack spray + Fate Point is two 7 stress hits.
So, Rapid Strike looks better than the normal attack here. But even here, it's not that huge a deal. Four 6 stress hits is not nearly as good as a 24 stress hit. It's not even always better than a 10 stress hit. A character with Average Endurance and Supernatural Toughness would have to take a consequence against the normal attack, but would remain standing against the Rapid Strike.
Please note that the assumption of average rolls heavily favours Rapid Strike.
That's the best case scenario. The vast majority of the time, Rapid Strike will be weaker than that. So the power you spent a refresh to buy and a fate point to activate will occasionally be better than a normal attack. I see no problem here.
-
Well, I think I'm open to persuasion. Unfortunately, I'm having trouble following your most recent post.
Here's an example where Rapid Strike is clearly awesome. Assuming all rolls are 0.
Legendary accuracy, weapon 6 against Great defence.
1.Normal attack + Fate Point is a 10 stress hit.
2.Two attacks with Rapid Strike is two 8 stress hits. which = 16 add a few more fate points for sick results
3.Three attacks with Rapid Strike is three 7 stress hits. which = 21 add a few more fate points for sick results
4.Four attacks with Rapid Strike is four 6 stress hits. which = 24 add a few more fate points for sick results
Two attack spray + Fate Point is two 7 stress hits.
So, Rapid Strike looks better than the normal attack here. But even here, it's not that huge a deal. Four 6 stress hits is not nearly as good as a 24 stress hit. It's not even always better than a 10 stress hit. A character with Average Endurance and Supernatural Toughness would have to take a consequence against the normal attack, but would remain standing against the Rapid Strike.
Please note that the assumption of average rolls heavily favours Rapid Strike.
That's the best case scenario. The vast majority of the time, Rapid Strike will be weaker than that. So the power you spent a refresh to buy and a fate point to activate will occasionally be better than a normal attack. I see no problem here.
I bolded something I quoted of Sanctaphrax's.
His original post did not include thefollowing:
" = X nor "add a few more fate points for sick results"
Adding those fate points I mentioned to each attack adds 4 to 6 damage per attack...making:
example 2. - each hit would do 10 or 12 or more = 20 or 24
example 3. - each would do 9 or 11 or more = 27 or 33
example 4. - each would do 8 or 10 or more = 32 or 40
These examples are at weapon 6...it is possible to get more damage with a higher strength or adding more stunts or weapon value. These are not maximum damage values...this means even with Mythic Toughness that has a catch at +0 (cannot be satisfied) nearly anything in the game can be dropped in one round with those rolls.
Something with Unthinkable Size ( hulking size X3...9 endurance, a stunt for one more mild consequence, and all of its consequences open...gives the creature 16 stress plus 28 in consequences...adds up to 44 and that critter would be almost dead.
In said combat the creature would then have many tags (consequences) thrown at it next round or from the next character in order in the current round
That is as many stresses as I can easily add to a monster and with 4 attacks from the above example; with 2 fate points per ( costing 9 fate poitns total [one to activate the stunt and two tags per roll]
...40 damage can be done...and that can be exceeded. That sort of damage would take a 20 shift evocation to equal thhat melee exchange.... roughly. Imagine what that sort of damage will do to a smaller, less stalwart foe.
It makes doing that much damage way too easy. Many characters will never be able to do that much damage in a round. I think challenging a character that can do that sort of damage with ease could be difficult...wizards like McCoy likely don't chuck 20 shift spells without batting an eye. I feel the system was created with people doing one attack a round in mind...so the powers and spells are not balanced for it.
-
I will admit I forgot to account for armor in my example of the giant monster. That would subtract 12 from the 40(3 each)... making that attack do 28. Still quite respectable from a non caster...and still just as destructive to less stalwart foes.
If the power were altered to only allow the attacks to target seperate foes the damage would still be 4 stress 10 hits or 2 stress 10 (12) hits or so which is substantially less...still a lot fo damage to throw around but much more manageable. I think spray attacks handle it fine, but I can see why people might like rapid strikes. I'd reccommend it costing more than -1 but then it wouldn't be a stunt anymore... :-\
As is: targeting one foe repeatedly could very easily make one dead foe of almost any power level with a high skill and a good weapon value.
Sure, rolls could make those numbers I came up with much lower...they could also make them much higher The power has the potential to be quite destructive that's al I'm saying. It won't always be. It may be quite inefficient at times, but I'd rather be safe than sorry and take into account the worst case scenario (or best if you are the one delivering attacks not on the recieving end) when it comes to game balance. It could make other combat characters feel un-needed or be something every character wnats to boost their damage total whether it makes sense on a character or not.
I wont lie, I do see things through crap colored glasses and assume hte worst, but I'm usually right in my pessimism. Most groups I've gamed with....(7+ different groups with few overlap in players over 14 years) would abuse that if they could.
-
I bolded somethign I quoted of Sanctaphrax's his original post did not include the = X nor "add a few more fate points for sick results" Adding those fate points per attack adds 4 to 6 damage per attack...making:
2. each hit would do 10 or 12 or more = 20 or 24
3. each would do 9 or 11 or more = 27 or 33
4. each would do 8 or 10 or more = 32 or 40
these examples are at weapon 6..it is possible to get more damage with a higher strength or adding more stunts or weapon value...these are not maximum ddamage values...this means even with Mythic Toughness that has a catch at +0 (cannot be satisfied) nearly anything in the game can be dropped in one round with those rolls....somethign with Unthinkable size ( hulking size X3...9 endurance, a stunt for one more mild consequence, and all of its consequences open...gives the creature 16 stress plus 28 in consequences...adds up to 44 and that critter would be almost dead and have many tags thrown at it next round or from the next character...thats as many stresses as I can easily add to a monster and with 4 attacks from the above example with 2 fate points per costing 9 fate poitns total (one to activate the stunt and two tags per roll)...40 damage can be done...and that can be exceeded. that would take a 20 shift evocation to equal.... roughly. Imagine what that sort of damage will do to a smaller less stalwart foe.
It is way better than not having the option of having multiple attacks at all though. It also makes doing the 24 stresses far easier(capable eariler) than being an evoker or uber refresh character. Many characters will never be able to do that much damage in a round. I think challenging a character that can do that sort of damage without being a wizard that efficiently and at a low refresh is too much. I feel the system was created with people doing one attack a round in mind...so the powers and spells are not balanced for it.
^^^ I am really not trying to be a jerk here. Could you please clean up your grammar and space apart or organizing your thoughts a little better?
I would love to read what you have to say and I feel like you have some interesting points to read, but I just cannot get past the first few sentences. /sadface
I can usually grasp what you're trying to say but this post just turned my brain in knots.
-
^^^ I am really not trying to be a jerk here. Could you please clean up your grammar and space apart or organizing your thoughts a little better?
I would love to read what you have to say and I feel like you have some interesting points to read, but I just cannot get past the first few sentences. /sadface
I can usually grasp what you're trying to say but this post just turned my brain in knots.
will do.
tired and typing too fast. playing MMO's made my grammar when typing on the internet abyssmal. I used to be a grammar nazi><
-
Isn't the real reason rapidstrike is better is that it multiplies the weapon rating, so if you have a weapons rating of 11 and say an Epic skill with swords you can make 2 hits at Superb with +11 weapons rating which will stack very nicely, this power is useless against bosess (unless they are substantially worse than you) but could be very useful against a bunch of mooks.
-
Isn't the real reason rapidstrike is better is that it multiplies the weapon rating, so if you have a weapons rating of 11 and say an Epic skill with swords you can make 2 hits at Superb with +11 weapons rating which will stack very nicely, this power is useless against bosess (unless they are substantially worse than you) but could be very useful against a bunch of mooks.
For the most part I'd say yes. However, from my experience...unless my GM's were doing something wrong. The Boss usually had skill of equal or only slighlty greater than our combat fanatics in the group. The stunt isn't so good if the target has a skill of 2 to 3 higher. one higher, equal or ...god forbid less skill...ouch. Bad or good rolls can change anything though.
So yeah, it multiplies weapon value and gives a player the option of dumping a lot more fate points than one attack does.
-
I bolded something I quoted of Sanctaphrax's.
His original post did not include thefollowing:
" = X nor "add a few more fate points for sick results"
Adding those fate points I mentioned to each attack adds 4 to 6 damage per attack...making:
example 2. - each hit would do 10 or 12 or more = 20 or 24
example 3. - each would do 9 or 11 or more = 27 or 33
example 4. - each would do 8 or 10 or more = 32 or 40
These examples are at weapon 6...it is possible to get more damage with a higher strength or adding more stunts or weapon value. These are not maximum damage values...this means even with Mythic Toughness that has a catch at +0 (cannot be satisfied) nearly anything in the game can be dropped in one round with those rolls.
Something with Unthinkable Size ( hulking size X3...9 endurance, a stunt for one more mild consequence, and all of its consequences open...gives the creature 16 stress plus 28 in consequences...adds up to 44 and that critter would be almost dead.
In said combat the creature would then have many tags (consequences) thrown at it next round or from the next character in order in the current round
That is as many stresses as I can easily add to a monster and with 4 attacks from the above example; with 2 fate points per ( costing 9 fate poitns total [one to activate the stunt and two tags per roll]
...40 damage can be done...and that can be exceeded. That sort of damage would take a 20 shift evocation to equal thhat melee exchange.... roughly. Imagine what that sort of damage will do to a smaller, less stalwart foe.
It makes doing that much damage way too easy. Many characters will never be able to do that much damage in a round. I think challenging a character that can do that sort of damage with ease could be difficult...wizards like McCoy likely don't chuck 20 shift spells without batting an eye. I feel the system was created with people doing one attack a round in mind...so the powers and spells are not balanced for it.
OK I definitely hear what you are saying, but what about the enemy's multiple defense rolls (that they can also use fate points on).
As has already been mentioned too, boss or challenge monsters tend to have equal or better skills than a PC group.
I think that Rapid Strikes would really shine with a higher weapon rating. That way, as long as you connect you're doing significantly more damage.
-
OK I definitely hear what you are saying, but what about the enemy's multiple defense rolls (that they can also use fate points on).
As has already been mentioned too, boss or challenge monsters tend to have equal or better skills than a PC group.
I think that Rapid Strikes would really shine with a higher weapon rating. That way, as long as you connect you're doing significantly more damage.
Still drains the NPC's fate poitns for the rest of the crew to kill it. Most NPC's have less fate poitns than NPC's.
Maybe it's not overpowered in many games...but i think it has potential....lots of potential to be broken. Bosses aren't always combative...I'd consider Marcone a boss. He is no slouch in combat, but I think that stunt would end him.
Some bosses have high fists, but low (lowish) athletics rapid strike plus a gun could spell doom no?
In any case. I don't think i can be more clear on why I think multiple actions especially against the same foe can be devastating.
I won't concede my point, but it may not be quite as bad as I predict.
-
If Marcone is in a melee situation against a supernatural bruiser he should go down as easily as the next man he is only human, though be in such a situation would represent an absolute mistake on his part which is unlike him.
-
If Marcone is in a melee situation against a supernatural bruiser he should go down as easily as the next man he is only human, though be in such a situation would represent an absolute mistake on his part which is unlike him.
I disagree. Harry had opportunity to shoot him in the face with a evocation anytime he wanted. He simply didn't because it wouldn't accomplish anything. Also from a narrative standpoint killing Marcone would be bad for future plot. If harry could do it, plenty of others could too.
Also, Knights are only human and go toe to toe with supernatural heavy weights all the time. Marcone can go toe to toe with Denarians...I bet he can't fight one with rapid strike. ;D
Perhaps people could use it in their next game or in a mock combat and test it? Not just take my word for it?
-
Here's what I'd do:
Flurry of Blows [-1] (Mortal Stunt, Weapons OR Fists but must be taken separately for both)
Effect: You know how to attack quickly, with multiple strikes. You may make a spray attack with any weapon against any target provided that you can reach that target (spray attacks with swords must be against adjacent enemies, etc).
[Note, this is just adding a trapping to the skill]
Quick Strikes [-1] (Mortal Stunt, Weapons OR Fists but must be taken separately for both)
Effect: You make multiple, quick attacks. When attacking a single opponent, your quick strikes are more difficult to stop but produce shallow wounds. You may gain +1 to your attacks but take a -1 penalty to your weapon rating.
[Note, this is still advantageous and has the same potential damage output but is more likely to hit]
Then I'd add this trapping to the speed powers:
Rapid Strike: [-1]
You make multiple strikes very quickly against your opponents. You may make a spray attack with any weapon against any target provided that you can reach that target (spray attacks with swords must be against adjacent enemies). You may also make spray attacks against a single target, targeting them with multiple attacks that they must defend against separately (and that deal stress separately if they hit). Supernatural Speed grants +1 to these types of attacks, Mythic Speed grants +2.
If I wanted to really push things:
[Insert some speedy name] [-1]:
You may take two supplemental actions in a round. If you have any Speed Powers, you may take an additional action (maximum of 3). The penalties from these actions do stack (to a maximum of -3).
-
THE BONUS FROM THE INVOCATION OF AN ASPECT ONLY APPLIES TO ONE OF THE ATTACKS IN A RAPID STRIKE!
Sorry if that wasn't clear before.
I can see why you thought that this power was broken, if you were operating under the belief that it was otherwise.
You know, the lack of a clear writeup for Rapid Strikes has caused a lot of trouble. I'll write up better later today.
-
I disagree. Harry had opportunity to shoot him in the face with a evocation anytime he wanted. He simply didn't because it wouldn't accomplish anything. Also from a narrative standpoint killing Marcone would be bad for future plot. If harry could do it, plenty of others could too.
Also, Knights are only human and go toe to toe with supernatural heavy weights all the time. Marcone can go toe to toe with Denarians...I bet he can't fight one with rapid strike. ;D
Perhaps people could use it in their next game or in a mock combat and test it? Not just take my word for it?
Marcone can't go toe to toe with a Denarian in a physical fight, he does not for one have a sword of catch or any physical powers, Marcone is human and human need to fight supernatural horrors in ways that are not a direct confrontation to survive. The reason Marcone allows Harry is in firing range is because Marcone knows Dresden and knows he wouldn't attack him (its a calculated risk allways for some gain), Harry could without a doubt torch Marcone and his whole orginisation (other than Gard) if he wanted but he doesn't because he isn't Cowl.
-
Better Rapid Strikes write-up, only slightly late.
You may spend a fate point to attack multiple times in a single exchange. Doing so reduces your attack skill by the number of attacks that you make. All attacks made with this power must use the same weapon.
Each attack is a fully independant event, but all occur simultaneously. Each attack involves a separate attack and defence roll, and bonuses from fate points or aspect invocations only apply to one attack at a time. Consequences from one attack may not be invoked to provide a bonus to other attacks in the same action.
-
You swayed me, Sanctaphrax. I'd allow your Rapid Strikes writeup into my game. :)
-
LOL! I should just take rapid strikes as a power in my PbP game later on to see how it balances.
I'm kidding- kinda.
-
I still think rapidstrikes is powerful but that is mainly because I am mentally adding it to my accuracy 8 weapons 7 character I suppose for a less optomised character it would be more balanced.
-
Better Rapid Strikes write-up, only slightly late.
You may spend a fate point to attack multiple times in a single exchange. Doing so reduces your attack skill by the number of attacks that you make. All attacks made with this power must use the same weapon.
Each attack is a fully independant event, but all occur simultaneously. Each attack involves a separate attack and defence roll, and bonuses from fate points or aspect invocations only apply to one attack at a time. Consequences from one attack may not be invoked to provide a bonus to other attacks in the same action.
So I need to be clear....players are not allowed to spend fate points at all on the seperate attack rolls except the first?
-
@admiralducksauce: Looks like all those years of debate club payed off. I actually convinced someone over the internet.
@BumblingBear: Actually, I'd appreciate some playtesting. I'll be tossing some custom-power equipped goons at the players in EtA soon (assuming they're alright with it), but a second opinion would be great.
@ways and means: Everything will be powerful on that character. But ideally, Rapid Strike wouldn't be more so than 1 refresh of Strength or something along those lines. So please, tell me if you think it's too much.
@Silverblaze: What I had in mind is that players could spend fate points on each attack individually.
-
@admiralducksauce: Looks like all those years of debate club payed off. I actually convinced someone over the internet.
@BumblingBear: Actually, I'd appreciate some playtesting. I'll be tossing some custom-power equipped goons at the players in EtA soon (assuming they're alright with it), but a second opinion would be great.
@ways and means: Everything will be powerful on that character. But ideally, Rapid Strike wouldn't be more so than 1 refresh of Strength or something along those lines. So please, tell me if you think it's too much.
@Silverblaze: What I had in mind is that players could spend fate points on each attack individually.
Ah then my concern stands.,...but I'll drop the topic for the most part.
-
@BumblingBear: Actually, I'd appreciate some playtesting. I'll be tossing some custom-power equipped goons at the players in EtA soon (assuming they're alright with it), but a second opinion would be great.
I will add the power to my character in my physical game and play it this weekend. I will post my results.
-
Thanks in advance.