just one question that u both so stedily avoid (inle_badger and mahkra) ? Can you take movement actions that require more than 1 movement point at a time or not ( in your opinion)... openig doors, jumping pits... , because that is where the answer lies.. and i dont understand the problem with landrec ether, why is that any diferent than, lats say spending the movement points in between, for whatever reason and doing exactly the same, just so, that the movement points are spent one at a time?
Fatigue movement "any time" contradiction and question
Antistone said:
mahkra said:
So he could spend twice his maximum "stamina" on one swing of a sword.
No, he couldn't. Because adding power dice to an attack costs fatigue , not movement points .
Sorry, poor phrasing. I just meant "one action". He could spend twice his maximum "stamina" on one jump, if you want an actual game term.
svarun said:
just one question that u both so stedily avoid (inle_badger and mahkra) ? Can you take movement actions that require more than 1 movement point at a time or not ( in your opinion)... openig doors, jumping pits... , because that is where the answer lies.. and i dont understand the problem with landrec ether, why is that any diferent than, lats say spending the movement points in between, for whatever reason and doing exactly the same, just so, that the movement points are spent one at a time?
We convert fatigue to MP in batches, if you want to do something that costs more than 1. Basically we play the same way as inle_badger described, spending fatigue instead of MP as actions are performed.
Corbon said:
For the most part there is not a lot of difference between playing a substitution rule and the strict RAW rule. It generally means that a hero can be
slightly
more efficient if using RAW. For example, if coming to a door when out of MP and with 2 fatigue left, spend both fatigue for MP, drink a fatigue potion with 1 MP (temporarily 'storing' the other) then spend one more fatigue to open the door (total saving, 1 fatigue, and only because of the exact placement situation of the door - one space either way and it would all be the same...). For the most part it is a minor detail - it
can
help a little more when you have very expensive actions to do - like 3MP at a time for using a ship station in SoB or 5MP for Thorn's Teleport.
Generally I would be surprised if we ever actually use the difference between these two rules more than once per session (not playing with Thorn in any current campaign).
It makes a big difference for Thorn, because his base fatigue is only 4. So (unless his base fatigue has been increased by something) it's impossible for him to teleport just using fatigue; he can't teleport on a battle action.
And it's pretty significant for things like leaping off the side of a ship, if you're trying to clear a good deal of water before landing.
But for things that cost just a couple MP, it usually just requires a bit better planning. In your example, the hero should've used 1 fatigue for the last movement approaching the door. Then he'd have 1 fatigue and 1 MP left. He'd spend 1 fatigue to drink a potion, then use 2 fatigue to open the door. He'd still have 1 MP left for use after the door opened. (If he doesn't actually want to move any farther, then he's spent 1 more fatigue than he would have using a different rule, but if he does continue moving then it's effectively the same.)
svarun said:
just one question that u both so stedily avoid (inle_badger and mahkra) ? Can you take movement actions that require more than 1 movement point at a time or not ( in your opinion)... openig doors, jumping pits... , because that is where the answer lies.. and i dont understand the problem with landrec ether, why is that any diferent than, lats say spending the movement points in between, for whatever reason and doing exactly the same, just so, that the movement points are spent one at a time?
Nuts... I'm drawn in...
Yes the way we play (which I'm already happy to admit in light of this thread is effectively a house-rule and this is in answer to your question only) one can spend two fatigue in lieu of spending two movement points. I'm not sure I was really "stedily avoiding" this question given that Corbon seemed to understand my phrasing as regards this.
The point of the Landrec example does not really touch on the issue of spending movement points one at a time, it is that a hero on maximum fatigue cannot gain further fatigue from, say, Vampiric Blood because it is their maximum. So the way we play it would run:
Declares Battle action
Does not want to spend fatigue on movement at start of turn because does not want to move yet.
Attack (cannot regain fatigue from Vampiric blood because already on maximum.)
Does not want to spend fatigue on movement points yet because does not want to move yet.
Attack (cannot regain fatigue from Vampiric blood because already on maximum.)
Now wants to move, but only has 5 fatigue to spend + extra from fatigue potion for 9 movement points instead of 19
What I equally wouldn't have a problem with is a scenario that runs
Declares Battle action
Can spend up to all remaining fatigue to move
Attack (regains fatigue up to maximum)
Can spend up to all remaining fatigue to move
Attack (regains fatigue up to maximum)
Can spend up to all remaining fatigue to move
Apologies if you understood all this the first time round.
I'm genuinely surprised to hear that most groups wouldn't play it this way. Just goes to show how there'll always be a Descent rule that you've missed even after years of playing!
Oh come on.. how can u be surpeised when you are making up rules (restrictions), plus your fatigue never goes over its max value its just the movement points (that clearly dont have a max value), ... well whatever... play as you wish but there is nothin to support your assumptions in the rules...
mahkra said:
But for things that cost just a couple MP, it usually just requires a bit better planning. In your example, the hero should've used 1 fatigue for the last movement approaching the door. Then he'd have 1 fatigue and 1 MP left. He'd spend 1 fatigue to drink a potion, then use 2 fatigue to open the door. He'd still have 1 MP left for use after the door opened. (If he doesn't actually want to move any farther, then he's spent 1 more fatigue than he would have using a different rule, but if he does continue moving then it's effectively the same.)
Unless you took an action that didn't give you any movement points that turn, in which case your suggested optimization doesn't work.
If the concept of "saving" MP from fatigue still bothers you, you might try thinking of it instead as being allowed to go over your normal maximum fatigue as long as you immediately spend the extra (that's slightly different, tactically, but it's close). So instead of spending an extra fatigue to "save" before you drink a potion, you drink a potion with 1 fatigue left to give you max+1 fatigue, and then you lose the extra fatigue unless spending it is the very next thing you do. Sort of "overcharging."
Not really endorsing that as a house rule, just suggesting a way of thinking about the thematics that may be more satisfactory...
Antistone said:
Unless you took an action that didn't give you any movement points that turn, in which case your suggested optimization doesn't work.
True, but I don't think that's the situation I was addressing. I read Corbon's example as a hero who ran out of MP in the act of approaching the door. This could only happen if he had MP to start with, which only happens if he takes an action that gives him MP.
Antistone said:
just suggesting a way of thinking about the thematics that may be more satisfactory...
Kudos for that creative explanation, but I don't find it particularly compelling. And I'm not looking for a thematic justification so that I can accept the rule, anyway. As I mentioned a bit earlier, I think the gameplay is better the way we play, as fatigue requires a bit more thought to use. I don't think we make any rules decisions (at least, not consciously) based only on thematic reasons.
svarun said:
Oh come on.. how can u be surpeised when you are making up rules (restrictions), plus your fatigue never goes over its max value its just the movement points (that clearly dont have a max value), ... well whatever... play as you wish but there is nothin to support your assumptions in the rules...
Yes. I agree with you. There is nothing to support these assumptions in the rules as I understood upon reading this thread. Learning this, and realising that most groups wouldn't play this way, surprises me.
The example I gave was in response to a tangential point with Corbon about the ramifications of playing the way we do. I'm afraid I genuinely thought that you had misunderstood what I was saying given your phrasing of the question. (sorry)
Anyway. I think I remember now why I generally avoid any threads touching on the rules.
Bye, all!
(mahkra, you're on your own!)
1 more to go............ hehe ... joke
