We just finished Eye for an eye yesterday. Tons of rules questions surfaced.

1. Encounter mode: Can assess be used lots of times. For instance in every turn. It makes sense mechanicaly and thematically but I have my doubts.. Unless the object of the card is to sacrifice actions in return for stree/fatigue recovery.

2. Story mode: One player has the talent 'I will sleep when I am dead' (exhaust to recover 2 fatigue). I assume that recharge has no effect in story mode. He can use this as many times as he wants. So, in story mode, fatigue does not accumulate at all. Specifically, fatigue can be removed automatically since the player can use the talent as often as he wants (in story mode). Well, the same can be said about 'assess the situation' I think.

3. Player's fortune dice: Can players use more than one fortune dice in a single roll?

4. Can players use fortune as misfortune dice on enemies rolls?

5. The campaign ended with the High Elf being unconsious. When it wakes up, does it regain wounds (this is a DnD quirk I guess, sort of like having 1 hp in order to walk around).

6. Also, after the adventure end, and during the Interlude, the High elf has lots of wounds and 2 criticals. I assume (going by RAW), that she can make a first aid check once per day, in essence removing all wounds, and one resilience check per interlude where she will have ONE (1) chance to remove her criticalls. Otherwise she goes to the next adventure with her criticals, then get a resilience check per chapter (this makes not sense, but i think it RAW), and then get another resilience check during the Next interlude.

7. During combat, can enemies use Cunning dice in their spell-like abilities like the ones the Cultist Leader has? Is this supposed to be a mental task? Or is the GM restrained to use Aggression dice (and/or Expertise) only.

8, Ok, this caused a bit of a delay in our adventure. I got an enemy engaged with a PC, the enemy wants to move to medium range. I assume that he needs 1 manoevre to disengage (and be automatically considered in close range), then another manoeuvre to move from close to medium range (2 manoeuvres total). However there was an argument that disengaging does not put you in close range. You need to spent another manoeuvre, and then another one to move to medium range (total 3 manoeuvres). Which one is correct? I assume that disengage is the opposite of enganging, therefore 'close range to engaged is one manoeuvre, and hence the same is for the opposite. From enganged to close range, is 1 manoeuvre).

9. Blunderbuss confusion. The NPC Albrecht had a blunder buss. He fired it at an engagement with another NPC and 2 PC. I had trouble deciding whose Defence rating to use in the check. One PC had a Defence rating of 1, the other 0. Since blunderbuss has the blast ability, no matter who I chose to target, the outcome would be the same. Both (actually all 3) persons in the engagement would get shot. So mechanically it would make sense to target the one with the lowest defence rating. But it doesn't make sense to have 2 different dice pools, for the same action. Did I do something wrong?

10. Thematically it's forbidden, but Is there an explicit rule's mechanic that forbids a bright order to learn another order's spells?

plutonick said:

I'll answer some that I can as I have not run eye for an eye:

1. Yes, as long as it is not recharging. GM can add recharge to it if he wants. It does take the character's action for that turn though to use it.

2. No. It's difficult to gauge, but those cards due exhaust. I typically allow a recharge token on cards or actions to happen every "turn" of turn-based social sequence or at rally steps. They can spend fortune as usual to remove tokens.

3. Players can use as many as they like.

4. Technically no, but I house ruled they can and it doesn't make much difference in the way we play. If they want to live or stop the action, why not let them have some input in it.

7. I assume so. I don't know what the abilities you are referring to, but I'm pretty sure, yes.

8. Disengaging drops you close. Then close to medium. It takes a maneuver to engage/disengage. Fighters in close can engage.

10. No it is not mechanically forbidden. Ultimately it's your game so do what you want. There are some explicit rules mechanics about how they actually learn those spells and the penalties to using them in the Winds of Magic suppliment. Honestly, I wouldn't worry to much about the forbidden things in this system. It is largely up to the players/gm to figure out what they want to do, what they enjoy, what they think tells a cool story or a handful of scenes or a great meat-grind. Just play and have a blast

Thanks Commoner.

So, during story mode, if the PC uses 'I will rest when I am dead' you add 4 charge tokens and remove one at rally steps, or at significant 'changes of scenery' or scene transitions? It makes a lot of sense.

And disengage is actually just the opposite of engage?

The cult leader's action I had in mind was 'Blasphemous Litany' Guile vs Target Discipline. Can I 'charge' this up with Cunning Dice? Or Agression?

The questions I am still unclear are the following:

5. The campaign ended with the High Elf being unconsious. When it wakes up, does she regain wounds (this is a DnD quirk I guess, sort of like having 1 hp in order to walk around).

6. Also, after the adventure end, and during the Interlude, the High elf has lots of wounds and 2 criticals. I assume (going by RAW), that she can make a first aid check once per day, in essence removing all wounds, and one resilience check per interlude where she will have ONE (1) chance to remove her criticalls. Otherwise she goes to the next adventure with her criticals, then get a resilience check per chapter (this makes not sense, but i think it RAW), and then get another resilience check during the Next interlude.

7. During combat, can enemies use Cunning dice in their spell-like abilities like the ones the Cultist Leader has? Is this supposed to be a mental task? Or is the GM restrained to use Aggression dice (and/or Expertise) only. The cult leader's action I had in mind was 'Blasphemous Litany' Guile vs Target Discipline. Can I 'charge' this up with Cunning Dice? Or Agression?

9. Blunderbuss confusion. The NPC Albrecht had a blunder buss. He fired it at an engagement with another NPC and 2 PC. I had trouble deciding whose Defence rating to use in the check. One PC had a Defence rating of 1, the other 0. Since blunderbuss has the blast ability, no matter who I chose to target, the outcome would be the same. Both (actually all 3) persons in the engagement would get shot. So mechanically it would make sense to target the one with the lowest defence rating. But it doesn't make sense to have 2 different dice pools, for the same action. Did I do something wrong?

Just to clarrify the movement thing

Medium > Close > Engage = 2 maneuvers total (Medium to close then close to engaged).

Engaged > Close > Medium = 2 maneuvers total (Engaged to close then close to medium).

You could technically move from engaged to medium for 1 maneuver if you chose not to disengage first. However doing so would open you up for an attack from the enemy. Unfortunately there's no rule to support it so you are going into GM call territory there. The Disengage action is to allow you to safely step back from an attacker and the engage action I guess is to allow you to safely step up to an attacker.

While no one in our games has ever questioned this. Should it come up if someone wanted to move out of an engagement without taking a disengage action I'd allow the attacker to make a free basic melee attack at them. Likewise a character just charging right into a fight without doing an engaging maneuver first I'd allow prepared defender to make a free basic melee attack against them as they are effectively ready with their weapon for some idiot just running head first into them.

But those are just some house rules and not RAW. But they are in the spirit of the game.

1) Yes, it can be used every turn unless Delays are rolled to add recharge tokens to it. It does mean the character isn't doing anything particularly useful for the group, so it's a trade-off.

2) This is up to the GM. I personally would leave it exhausted until a reasonable amount of in-game time has passed. So, although the game might be in Story mode, if there's a tense scene with interaction I wouldn't let the PC use it multiple times to get rid of accumulated fatigue. Of course, should the Story period be lengthy (hours), I'd probably let them remove their fatigue.

3) Yes, they can use as many as they want/have available

4) No. NPCs can use their A/C/E pool this way, but PCs cannot use their Fortune dice that way.

5) Typically, to regain consciousness, the elf wound have had to been healed and thus regain Wounds. Whether through medical attention or a full night's rest. It's not the waking up that recovers wounds,though. It's the recovering of wounds that wakes him up. So, if he goes unconscious from Fatigue, then wakes up, he won't regain wounds, for example.

6) Yes, this is how I would work it. Essentially, assuming the Interlude is at least a few days and the PC isn't performing a lot of strenuous activity, all normal Wounds should heal, and I'd allow one modified roll to heal Critical Wounds. I'd personally allow the Resilience Check to heal *all* critical wounds with a severity less than the # of successes rolled.

7) Cunning dice can be used to anything mental-oriented, such as skill use, so yes, I would allow Cunning dice for spells. Of course, you're the GM, so you can really use what you want.

8) I always played that Disengaging puts you at Close Range. They are both range increments. Just think of the term "disengaging" as "moving out of the engaged range increment to close range".

9) You use the Defense rating of the primary target. So, target/shoot the PC with the lowest Defense Rating.

10) Yes, but I don't have my rulebooks in front of me. I'm pretty sure there is a line that says that Wizards may only acquire spells of their Order. I think it might be under character creation section, although I'm not positive.

Kryyst said:

This is the first time I hear of leaving an engagement without disengaging and thus attracting a free attack. Are you perhaps confusing this with the Dungens and Dragons' Attack of Opportunity mechanic?

plutonick said:

Nope, no confusion it's a side bar in the rule book in the Standard Maneuvers section

• Engage or Disengage from an opponent. • If a target is already within close range of a character, the character can perform a manoeuvre to engage that target. Once engaged with an opponent, a character must perform a manoeuvre to safely disengage, otherwise they may be attacked. Characters do not need to perform this manoeuvre to leave an engagement consisting only of friendly characters or allies.

Again not using the maneuver to engage/disengage is an interpretation of this not an official rule.

Kryyst said:

Incorrect. Check the FAQ. The "otherwise they may be attacked" is a thematic sentence explaining why a character HAS TO spend a manoeuvre to move from engaged to close. There are no attacks of opportunity; moving from engaged to medium takes 2 manoeuvres every time.

Littleteacher said:

sigh, Hence why I said "Again not using the maneuver to engage/disengage is an interpretation of this not an official rule"

RAW requires a maneuver to engage/disengage which is what I stated several post backs. Everything else since then was based on house ruling that i.e. optional i.e. not an official rule i.e. use it or don't.

The way you posted in answer to the confused person above made it sound like the attack was a RAW, and your interpretation of the sidebar made you believe that you should be able to move without disengaging and suffer an attack.

Interpretation of a rule does not equal a house rule. Answering confused people with unclear interpretations doesn't help clear up a rules question. Sighing gets you no where.

Littleteacher said:

Sure it's very confusing if you completely ignore phrases like "Unfortunately there's no rule to support it so you are going into GM call territory there" and "Should it come up if someone wanted to move out of an engagement without taking a disengage action I'd allow the attacker to make a free basic melee attack at them." oh and "But those are just some house rules and not RAW. But they are in the spirit of the game."

And you should never underestimate how good a well placed sigh feels.

What is more confusing is a pointless battle on semantics that derails a thread.

Not trying to battle in any way. Just trying to be clear. This is a terribly confusing rulebook, especially for new GMs, and it's going to take all of us to figure it out. I know you talked about house rules, I do read the posts I post in. My point was that, obviously that wasn't enough for the confused poster above. And it feels like you pointed to a rule in the book to show how attacks are made if you leave without disengaging, and that your interpretation of that rule was that you must be able to leave without disengaging.

We're both saying the same thing, I just feel like we owe to everyone to make sure it's clear since the rulebook didn't take it upon itself to do that. A player MUST disengage from an engagement, just as if it were another movement range. There are no attacks of opportunity as there is no way to move away without disengaging.

I also appreciate a good sigh. I do it every time I have to look up another rule in this book. Thanks for helping clear it up.