Paradigm Concepts
http://forums.paradigmconcepts.com/

Ask the Stat Monkey!
http://forums.paradigmconcepts.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=182		 Page 15 of 19
Author:  Haakon_val'Ishi [ Fri Jan 01, 2016 8:17 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Ask the Stat Monkey!
That sounds somewhat familiar but I am still drawing a blank. :oops: To be fair "Ashen Council" sounds more like something out of Witch Hunter. :)
Author:  Nierite [ Fri Jan 01, 2016 8:37 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Ask the Stat Monkey!
Do you mean Born of the Fires of Hell where you meet the Erinyes representative of the Council of Ash before fighting a Big Infernal guy?
Author:  Haakon_val'Ishi [ Fri Jan 01, 2016 8:45 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Ask the Stat Monkey!
Now that sounds more familiar, although it's been a while...
Author:  Haakon_val'Ishi [ Fri Jan 01, 2016 8:47 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Ask the Stat Monkey!
"From the Ashes" would be a good mod title. Someone should use it.
Author:  ZCaslar [ Fri Jan 01, 2016 9:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Ask the Stat Monkey!
Nierite wrote:
Do you mean Born of the Fires of Hell where you meet the Erinyes representative of the Council of Ash before fighting a Big Infernal guy?


I do.

Thanks.

Not sure where I got "From the Ashes", to be frank....
Author:  Hat [ Sat Jan 02, 2016 12:14 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Ask the Stat Monkey!
ZCaslar wrote:
My sticking point is that as the effect is 12 ticks long the target must spend the duration under it's effect attacking the challenger.

Val'Holryn and I have gone around in circles a few times about this and hence my interest in an official response. The Talent isn't worded that the target "must use it's next action within 12 ticks to attack the Challenger."
<snip>


Here's the relevant section of the benefit from the ARG p.191
"If successful, the target considers you a significant threat and attacks you for the next 12 Ticks. This does not mean that your target will always blindly charge forth disregarding their own safety (unless the target is particularly simple minded); how the target attacks you is their choice. For example, they may command others to attack you, use a missile weapon, or simply charge."

That's the RAW.

First sentence, full stop period says they must attack for the next 12 ticks from when the challenge is issued. As written, every action that the target gets during that 12 tick window must be an attack on the challenger. The following sentences provide some leeway in how so that a frail noble with bodyguards galore can demand that his bodyguards focus on the issuer of the challenge rather than him getting up and closing.

Your question though is still very ambiguous.

ZCaslar wrote:
About the talent Challenge: assuming it's applied successfully can the Challenged target take aggressive actions that do not at least partially target the challenger?


How is an aggressive action that doesn't at least partially target the challenger supposed to be an attack on the challenger? Without one or more specific examples for Matt or Pedro to rule on, I don't see them providing a response. Otherwise it's still going to come back to GM adjudication which appears to be where you're having the problem in the first place.

Too little information to go on, at least from where I'm sitting.

With a sweep of his hat,

Paul
Author:  ZCaslar [ Sat Jan 02, 2016 4:35 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Ask the Stat Monkey!
Sir Hat:

Yup.

That's pretty much my reading of it, too. It's not "throw a fireball, lose interest and attack someone else," it's "dedicate the next 12 ticks to specifically attacking the Challenger."

My question does kinda suck, but as I'd said there have been multiple interpretations of what to me seems pretty specific mechanics and thus my mission is one seeking ultimate clarification.
Author:  Hat [ Sat Jan 02, 2016 10:18 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Ask the Stat Monkey!
ZCaslar wrote:
That's pretty much my reading of it, too. It's not "throw a fireball, lose interest and attack someone else," it's "dedicate the next 12 ticks to specifically attacking the Challenger."

My question does kinda suck, but as I'd said there have been multiple interpretations of what to me seems pretty specific mechanics and thus my mission is one seeking ultimate clarification.


You've obviously encountered examples that run counter to this interpretation. Perhaps provide an example or two of where there's been disagreement?

With a sweep of his hat,

Paul
Author:  acurrier [ Sat Jan 02, 2016 12:39 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Ask the Stat Monkey!
ZCaslar wrote:
It's not "throw a fireball, lose interest and attack someone else," it's "dedicate the next 12 ticks to specifically attacking the Challenger."

I have a 'sword and board' character who uses Challenge regularly, and I've never had a GM who thought he could just ignore the challenge and attack someone else. I've seen a lot of sweeping strikes and AoE spells which hit allies in addition to me, but offensive actions should be focused on the challenger for the entire 12 ticks.
Author:  val Holryn [ Sat Jan 02, 2016 6:33 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Ask the Stat Monkey!
It's been a long while since I ran HP 1-4 so I don't really remember the incident in question. Though I assume I was the judge in question that Zac is referring to, I don't really recall any specifics ...compounded by having run the mod several times so things blur together. Given the module I assume the challenge was delivered in the last fight against the summoned/birthed Devil King.

Without knowing more I can only offer a few thoughts on managing challenge from behind the GM screen. (1) Yes. I generally agree, if you are challenged then you spend 12 ticks "dealing with" the character who challenges you...though I think there are corner cases where this wouldn't apply.

Some possible exceptions: (2) Challenge doesn't make someone suicidal, so if the only way to reach you is swimming by through lava I think a bad guy might just stand on safe ground and scream insults at you. (3) Challenge (still) doesn't make someone suicidal so I think a bad guy who doesn't care about his/her honor can (try to) run away if they're on their last legs. (4) An enemy who has minions attacking a PC is (IMO) on top of the situation/challenge and can take reasonable actions (though in calculating what is reasonable the NPC still thinks the Challenging PC is a threat). (5) An adversary can always spend fate points if needed to do the impossible and ignore a challenge for any given action. And finally though I would be very careful about implementing this, (6)there may be plot reasons in a module or encounter for an NPC to ignore great threats to them to do "something important!" i.e. The noble mother doesn't care if she dies as long as her infant survives the scene. If the encounter describes such overwhelming motives I might have such an NPC run into a burning barn to try and rescue her infant even if the PC Nierite just challenged her.

So once again I think the circumstances and situations influence the outcomes. I definately think if you spend (precious) talents on abilities you deserve to get tangible benefits and should not have such abilities arbitrarily neutered ... but I also believe when it's appropriate that you don't necessarily get exactly the benefit you expected.

Given how long ago that mod ran I don't remember what issues arose. It might also have been my first real experience with the mechanics of challenge way back when. I come from the school of judging that says "good enough now mid adventure" is better than "perfect after 20 minutes of search or debate." I do my rules research after tables are run. ...So if that was my first time dealing with challenges then it's possible my ruling may have been less than perfect. Mea Culpa

If it was the last fight with the Devil King 4 and or 5 also would have applied.

My thoughts.
Page 15 of 19 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/