mcv said:

Not 2nd edition. The change to d10 rolls for damage and the rules for Ulric's Fury meant that even the really tough Dwarves in armour have been menaced by lowly opponents who got lucky (see the Dwarf in full plate who got one-shotted by an incredibly lucky ghoul)

Yupsate said:

It would inflict Fatigue ? really ? Why ?

phobiandarkmoon said:

The same happened in my last session, the Dwarf knight lost a Fate point against a lowly thug. The thug dished out 25 points of damage in one lucky shot.

The absence of true explosive damage in V3 is a problem IMO. (Coupled with the wonderful invention that Fate points were, of course. One can't go without the other.)

mcv said:

Or, give more monsters access to Trollfeller Strike, Reckless Cleave, Double-Strike, etc. You know, the high-damage attack actions that the PCs have. They would only use those on the toughest PC, of course.

dvang said:

But why would monsters restrict themselves to using them only against the toughest PCs? If you do this, you're playing the monsters in an unrealistic way, and you're effectively taking away the advantages that the tough character paid for. It's better to honestly and openly ban stuff that breaks your game than to try to take it away behind their backs.

If monsters have access to high-power attacks, they will use them against all PCs. It's better to keep your group balanced than to invent weirdly skewed challenges for compensate for the imbalance.

Not necessarily. Why would a monster use a powerful strike (like Trollfeller strike) against a lightly armored opponent? That action is designed to give/use a lot of power in the blow. Why waste it against someone in cloth, when there is a foe in heavy armor that it is needed against? Monsters can and will use the appropriate action against appropriate enemies. So, no, high powered attacks might not be used against every PC (especially considering recharge). They might not be used at all, as the monster holds the action in reserve.

For example, an Orc (with trollfeller strike) is fighting an elf wardancer in leather, but nearby there is an Ironbreaker. The Orc might not use his Trollfeller strike against the elf, because he knows he'll need to use the powerful blow against the ironbreaker (should the IB join the engagement). Since his normal melee strike (or one of his other racial attack actions) will do decent damage against the elf, he'll use those and save up the Trollfeller 'just in case'.

Perfectly reasonable and realistic. So, in essence, you're wrong. (j/k)

dvang said:

Sure, but Trollfeller Strike is specifically intended for use against bigger or more numerous opponents.

I do see your point, though. If the monsters have one guy who has a big armour piercing attack, and the monsters are smart enough to be aware of that, then it makes sense that he goes up against the canned dwarf, and the others gang up on the more squishy types. And yes, a very slow attack is an attack that you save until you really need it.

But if you've got an attack that recharges pretty quickly (and Trollfeller strike isn't that slow, is it?), then it seems natural to me to use the best attack you have. Why would you hold back just because your opponent might die easily? Finish him off quickly before that Ironbreaker attacks you!

dvang said:

Hi, arch-grognard here. I've been reading this thread with some interest and I've no wish to derail it (or start a flame war) but I thought I should make this OT observation. The way you talk about actions here it is virtually impossible not to view them as 'special powers' ie. exactly what we were assured they would not be.

Aldred Fellblade said:

Aldred Fellblade said:

I'm not sure what you mean. They are action cards. Actions you can take every X rounds, depending on the recharge values. With only a few exceptions (spells and blessings, mainly), anyone can learn any action card. Doesn't sound like they are particularly 'special'.

@mcv

Well, I prefer my PCs and NPCs to not spam the same action every round (or even every other round) if they can help it. So, no, my NPCs probably wouldn't think to use a Trollfeller Strike on anyone who wasn't heavily armored. They've got several other attack actions that work just fine, so they don't need to use such a mighty armor-busting attack. That's not to say they definitely wouldn't use it at all, it might get tossed in occasionally to break the routine, but they wouldn't use it every time it was available ... unless it was necessary to break through a PC's armor and it is the only attack they have that can do so.

dvang said:

Well, on the one hand you have the recharges. In your example the Trollslayer strike recharges whilst you recover your energy and build up the strength to be able to do it again. However, you can apparently recover your strength to do this whilst actually continuing to fight. Not exactly restful. That clearly doesn't make any sense and the recharge is exposed as a purely mechanistic device.

Secondly you have the actions, which it seems clear are 'better' than a normal attack. Once you get enough of them to fill in over any recharge delays (collect them all!) you might need never make a 'normal' attack ever again.

If that's not bad enough it then snowballs onto the recharge mechanic because whilst you're 'resting' to build up your strength for one action, you can be performing another one for which you'll also need to spend some rest time before using again. You could be performing a 'tiring' action every round. Should we presume that only some very specific muscles are being exhausted by each of these actions?

Aldred Fellblade said:

Point 1: Why do you assume that recharge is purely based on being tired and not something like being able to move into position, or readying a weapon?

Point 2: So what? Not everyone is a Simulationist.

Doc, the Weasel said:

Point 1: I don't see how continuing to fight, let alone using other abilities that require me to be in a specific position, or my weapon to be specially readied, is going to help to position me or ready my weapon for the other action.

Point 2: I guess you needn't worry then.

Aldred Fellblade said:

Aldred Fellblade said:

this is OT the OT discussion but how do you multi-quote?

fnord3125 said:

If that's the kind of thing that you like then of course that's fine, and as you say many people may have bought the game for precisely that factor.

My observation is simply that by eliminating the need for 'normal' attacks you are reduced to an escalating arms race for 'special power' actions. The lack of 'normal' attacks seems a bit wierd and unrepresentative to my way of thinking. The contest to see who's got the biggest... sorry, I mean the best collection of super attacks is a little vulgar and repetitive IMO.

Now the counter-argument is that having the special abilities enables more variety, and to at least some extent that is perfectly valid. The question is whether it's a fair trade off. Evidently your answer is yes, and that's fair enough.

Bindlespin said:

You have to sleep with one of the mods.

or with monkeylite in order to get the action card.

Well, on the one hand you have the recharges. In your example the Trollslayer strike recharges whilst you recover your energy and build up the strength to be able to do it again. However, you can apparently recover your strength to do this whilst actually continuing to fight. Not exactly restful. That clearly doesn't make any sense and the recharge is exposed as a purely mechanistic device.

As pointed out, it is less about 'being tried' and more about being in a position to make that particular attack as well as the time to execute it. 'Realistically' (always a danger) there are combination attacks, where the end of one leaves the attacker in a position to begin a different one.

Secondly you have the actions, which it seems clear are 'better' than a normal attack. Once you get enough of them to fill in over any recharge delays (collect them all!) you might need never make a 'normal' attack ever again

There has to be a 'basic melee attack' action card for those who don't want to purchase one. Some wizards and priests, for example, might not want to buy a fancy melee attack action card. It wouldn't be reasonable to not allow them to make any melee attacks, so everyone is given a basic one. Same with Ranged. Anyone can attempt to shoot a bow or swing a sword. It's not a fancy attack, just kind of a 'point the weapon in the direction of the enemy and thrust/shoot', but they get the ability to do so (as they should). The basic attack is expected to get replaced by any competent warrior. The basic attack is meant to be, well, very basic. A well-trained warrior will rarely use the simple thrust that they learned as a novice, when they have learned a more elegant thrust/lunge (in fact, a whole variety of different attacks for different occasions/opponents).

If that's not bad enough it then snowballs onto the recharge mechanic because whilst you're 'resting' to build up your strength for one action, you can be performing another one for which you'll also need to spend some rest time before using again. You could be performing a 'tiring' action every round. Should we presume that only some very specific muscles are being exhausted by each of these actions?

See #1. Its not really a matter of 'tiring' the attacker, but coorrdinating/timing the attack and getting set up/in position to use it, etc. It's rare that an attack ends with the user in position to perform the same maneuver immediately. Now, granted, not every attack 'realistically' will set up every other attack, yet WFRP doesn't restrict as long as its not recharging. Keep in mind this is a game, though, and not a simulation, so some line in simplicity and playability must be drawn over realism/simulation. This recharge mechanic seems to be a good compromise.

My observation is simply that by eliminating the need for 'normal' attacks you are reduced to an escalating arms race for 'special power' actions. The lack of 'normal' attacks seems a bit wierd and unrepresentative to my way of thinking. The contest to see who's got the biggest... sorry, I mean the best collection of super attacks is a little vulgar and repetitive IMO.

Well, sort of, I suppose, in a vague sense you could think of it that way. However, is it any more a race for who has the best weapons/armor, the highest Strength/Stat, etc? Many of the actions don't do any more damage than the basic action, but they apply special conditions/effects. Some actions do less damage than others, but ignore soak (good against enemies with armor, bad against low/no soak). Some actions allow hitting multiple opponents, but for the same or less damage than the basic attack. Some actions don't do any damage at all, but give bonuses to the user and/or their allies. And so on. So, there really isn't an easy "arms race" to "get the biggest", since the variety of actions is so large and diverse. What defines "the biggest" or "the best" varies widely. Keep in mind, that only those who have spent a bunch of xp in purchasing additional melee attack (or ranged, etc) actions will eliminate the 'need' to use the basic melee attack. In my group of 4 PCs, all rank 2, three of them have to use their basic attack at least some of the time, and only one rarely uses her basic melee attack (the primary fighter of the group, of course)

dvang said:

Those were your merely your terms.

not every attack 'realistically' will set up every other attack, yet WFRP doesn't restrict as long as its not recharging. Keep in mind this is a game, though, and not a simulation, so some line in simplicity and playability must be drawn over realism/simulation. This recharge mechanic seems to be a good compromise.

Evidently one man's 'good compromise' is another's fig leaf. It seems very mechanistic to me.

The basic attack is meant to be, well, very basic. A well-trained warrior will rarely use the simple thrust that they learned as a novice, when they have learned a more elegant thrust/lunge (in fact, a whole variety of different attacks for different occasions/opponents).

I guess that's fair enough. How does that work then?

So, there really isn't an easy "arms race" to "get the biggest", since the variety of actions is so large and diverse. What defines "the biggest" or "the best" varies widely.

Oh right, I see. That covers the lack of need for a basic attack then. I'm not so sure that more choice means less of an arms race though?

Keep in mind, that only those who have spent a bunch of xp in purchasing additional melee attack (or ranged, etc) actions will eliminate the 'need' to use the basic melee attack.

Now hold on, make your mind up. Do you get a wide range of actions that make the concept of the basic attack irrelevant or do you get very few actions that mean you still have to use it during the lull when you can't spam your special abilities? Even the wide range of options seems to rely on the idea that you learn to use a weapon only one stroke at a time. ''Cower before my Lightning Thrust! I would follow up with a Dazzling Slash but I haven't learnt that one yet so I'm going to go with my Goblinmasher Strike again''. I do wonder whether making the basic attack irrelevant in the way you describe is feasible or even desirable.

However, is it any more a race for who has the best weapons/armor, the highest Strength/Stat, etc?

No, that's perfecly fair. The difference is that those things affect the conditions of play not your choice of action. The danger is that the better the action cards are the less likely players will be to do something unexpected as they will be tempted to use their super power. In that sense you aren't comparing like and like.

I think we need to be wary of hijacking this thread.

Aldred Fellblade said:

Ignore all that. We'll ruin this thread if we get into all that stuff. The real point is that recharge times show that it isn't about positioning. Nothing is going to take more than a round to get into position for. Smilarly with something like Accurate Shot, how can you be able to shoot accurately once immediately and then need 4 rounds before you can do it again?

blahblahblah...yourself. why don't you make your own thread and complain about whatever you want there? you did hijack this thread and you are still doing it. i' ve got a question for you: "if a train leaving seattle traveling at seventy miles an hour flips a card that takes four round to recharge did it really need to...?" Who cares?

Aldred: I have numerous points replying to all your nonsensical complaints (like ... you brought up recharge "tiring", not me as you claim. Check reply #35, which is yours). However, as suggested, I'm going to refrain from derailing the thread more and won't post them. I'll just leave it at ... no matter how much you say it, there is no best action card, action cards aren't an arms race, and the basic actions are not pointless. I suggest you look take a step back and reconsider.

Aldred Fellblade said:

I'm sorry, but saying that a post should be ignored just doesn't work. It essentially means that your post will stand completely unopposed, and I would go as far as to call it threadcapping (no offense meant by that, just stating my point of view). I think the thread subject is encompassing enough to host this discussion so I will make some comments.

There is no difference, conceptually, in raising your abilities, replacing your rusty old pigsticker with a finely crafted dagger, training your weapon skill and getting new action cards. They are all about two things, becoming more powerful and versatile. Note that this discussion is only relevant when discussing pure mechanics of the system, it's completely irrelevant for the non-mechanic side of character development.

Take abilities as an example. They will increase power of your attacks/soak/"power" of skill use/..., but also increase versatility by, e.g. allowing actions with requirements to be bought, making certain actions (primarily the opposed ones, that are very dependent on the ability score) viable options to use. It can also tie into the versatility of how you play your character. E.g., if you raise your Toughness one step you can roleplay that as your character becoming more used to a rough life on the road and becoming more resistant to pain/injuries, since he now has experience of actually having been wounded. This makes the character more versatile in how you play him, he now has the guts to stand up to a thug, instead of running away screaming.

The same kind of arguments can be used for getting better gear, training skills, getting additional talents and buying aditional actions. Getting a new action will, make you more powerful (e.g. Reckless Cleave, Improved Dodge, Rapid shot), more versatile (e.g. Riposte, Extreme shot), or both (Ritual dance cards, Thundering shot, Sword and Board). Action cards will always increase your choice of actions, not the other way around. I can of course roleplay my attack as being a "Reckless Cleave" or my pistol shot as a truly "Thundering shot", but it is nice to have some game mechanical clout behind the words.

Now, if the concept of recharge would be dropped, then you would get a situation where a PC would be subject to a real arms race to buy the very best action card and then only ever use that one. Is that how you think it should be? Incidentally, this is how things stood with the Double Strike action card until an errata was issued. The card was just too good to have 0 recharge, there was almost no point for PC's to use any other action.

I fail to see the meaning in discussing recharge from a simulationist point of view. I can probably think of about a 100 reasons to why the mechanic simulates reality, I'm sure you can think up 100 that it doesn't. I think the recharge mechanic is the way it is in this game due to two things:
1. The game is designed to give exciting and unique combat encounters where you're encouraged to use different actions and tactics to beat your opponent. Recharge forces the players to use many different actions instead of just "the best". This makes combat more interesting story-wise and caters to people who like a narrative approach.
2. The mechanic makes for a lot of tactical thinking, how to use your actions in the best order to maximise your chances of surviving a combat. For some cards this is taken to an extreme (War dancer ritual dances). The mechanic is also used as a tracking tool to see for how long temporary beneficial effects stay up. This is a very gamist approach, some people will just hate this, but you don't have to play it like this, see point 1.

As to the specific issue you raise, i.e. how to explain that Accurate shot has a recharge of 4. With the caveat above in mind I can still think of a couple of reasons. Positioning is one, during combat you move around quite a bit, perhaps you can only expect to find footing that is good enough to fire this action once every third round. Outside circumstances is another one, in normal weather conditions you can only expect to winds at their minimum once every third round. Enemy perception can also play a role, after being hit by one Accurate shot (or seeing his ally get shot), the enemy is wary about being shot again and is moving in an erratic fashion, making it impossible to perform the shot. After three round he has forgotten all about that in the thick of battle. I can go on and invent more and more explanations, but I'm sure you see my point .

Personally, I think recharge token management is one of most annoying features of the game. I like the concept, and it makes for very nice playing (personally I'm somewhere between point 1 and 2 above), but it's somewhat messy to keep track of. But I don't really see how it could be done differently.

gruntl said:

Yes, I appreciate that. You're not wrong. Unfortunately I was too late to edit my post. My point was that the recharge element was the most important and should be focused on rather than the other stuff.

There is no difference, conceptually, in raising your abilities, replacing your rusty old pigsticker with a finely crafted dagger, training your weapon skill and getting new action cards.

I'd certainly agree that these issues aren't mutually exclusive, but I do think that there is actually a conceptual difference.

I fail to see the meaning in discussing recharge from a simulationist point of view.

To be honest I fail to see the point of discussing anything from a GNS POV but I suppose you're entitled to your opinion. If that's what you like in a game I wouldn't dream of saying that you shouldn't though.

I can probably think of about a 100 reasons to why the mechanic simulates reality,

I don't think anyone's come up with anything that's convincing though. They're just fig leafs, that leave the reality far too exposed.

Positioning is one, during combat you move around quite a bit, perhaps you can only expect to find footing that is good enough to fire this action once every third round. Outside circumstances is another one, in normal weather conditions you can only expect to winds at their minimum once every third round.

Yet these don't explain why you won't have to wait for/find the right conditions the first time you use the action in an encounter.

Enemy perception can also play a role, after being hit by one Accurate shot (or seeing his ally get shot), the enemy is wary about being shot again and is moving in an erratic fashion, making it impossible to perform the shot. After three round he has forgotten all about that in the thick of battle.

This doesn't explain why other missile fire actions aren't affected, or why you can't use it against another target. Worse still, if the character who used Accurate Shot was standing right next to someone with the same ability then that other character could use it whilst the first shooter could not.

Personally, I think recharge token management is one of most annoying features of the game. I like the concept, and it makes for very nice playing (personally I'm somewhere between point 1 and 2 above), but it's somewhat messy to keep track of. But I don't really see how it could be done differently.

Far be it for me to spoil your fun. I am merely observing that, contrary to some protestations in the past, discussion of these traits is revealing their use to be just as mechanistic and non-sensical as some of us feared it would be.

dvang, I'm sorry that you feel the need to take your ball home with you and sulk. I actually quoted the post of yours(reply #30) in which you went on about the Trollfeller Strike's recharge being due to it being tiring (at least it appears so, it's had to imagine what else you might be suggesting in the context). Apparently it's only tiring for NPC opponents to use though?