Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Multiple Opponents and determining who won.

Expand Messages
  • Adrian Price
    ... state: When ... roll. ... he ... a ... which ... your ... I d go with the first answer too. ... is ... a ... Sounds right to me, since your usual basis
    Message 1 of 13 , Jun 13, 2004
      --- In FateRPG@yahoogroups.com, doyce@b... wrote:
      > Hey all, two quick conflict questions about fighting several
      > opponents (came up in a test run of combat tonight).
      >
      > The rules for multiple opponents on page 44 of the PDF
      state: "When
      > fighting multiple opponents, a character still only makes one
      roll.
      > [SNIP] If the character beats all members of the attacking group,
      he
      > may select one opponent (usually the one who rolled worst) and
      > inflict damage on them.
      >
      > My first question is simple: do you have to *tie* or *beat* the
      > best roll among those multiple opponenents to win the exchange?
      >
      > Example: Joe is fighting two mooks. Joe gets a +5; one mook gets
      a
      > +1, the other rolls a +5 as well.
      >
      > RESULT:
      >
      > One Interpretation: This is a MoS 0 vs one mook and MoS 4 on the
      > other. These are both 'wins' according to page 36 (albeit one
      which
      > is negligible), which means Joe (as the winner) can inflict MoS 4
      > damage against the Mook that rolled worse.
      >
      > Another Interpretation: You need at least MoS 1 against each of
      your
      > opponents to apply damage to any of them. A MoS 0 versus any
      > opponent means that both sides got a 'win' result and nobody gets
      > hurt.
      >
      > I think it's the first answer, but I'd like verification.

      I'd go with the first answer too.



      > ----
      >
      > Second question, which I think I have right but want to check:
      >
      > Statement: If you win an exchange against multiple opponents and
      > apply damage to a target as a result, the damage the target takes
      is
      > according to the MoS between you and that specific opponent you're
      > applying it to.
      >
      > Example: Joe is fighting two mooks. Joe gets a +5; one mook gets
      a
      > +1, the other rolls a +4.
      >
      > Result: Joe wins and applies a MoS 4 outcome against the mook that
      > rolled worse.
      >
      > Am I right in this or no?

      Sounds right to me, since your usual basis for choosing which
      opponent to injure would be which one your character would be hurt
      more by the attack.

      Adrian.
    • Darren Hill
      From: ... ... You re right - it is the first. ... ... Yes, you re right again. Note that the 2 mooks probably get a +1
      Message 2 of 13 , Jun 13, 2004
        From: <doyce@...>
        > My first question is simple: do you have to *tie* or *beat* the
        > best roll among those multiple opponenents to win the exchange?
        <sip>
        > I think it's the first answer, but I'd like verification.

        You're right - it is the first.

        > Second question
        <snip>
        > Example: Joe is fighting two mooks. Joe gets a +5; one mook gets a
        > +1, the other rolls a +4.
        >
        > Result: Joe wins and applies a MoS 4 outcome against the mook that
        > rolled worse.
        >
        > Am I right in this or no?

        Yes, you're right again.
        Note that the 2 mooks probably get a +1 bonus for flanking our hero.
        Since this is basically the Fudge combat rules, you can also use one of its
        optional rules if you really want mooks to be mooks. That is, apply the
        modifiers to their skill for numbers, but roll only once for the team - this
        works best if they have the same skill. (Superior opponents working with the
        mooks could get their own roll.)
        You could go further, and use a Challenge Track for the entire mook team,
        rather than individual wound tracks.

        Darren
      • Iago
        ... I think I would tend say, yeah, MoS 0 is enough, *but*, if you want, you can break a tie via a single-die roll-off, or whatever; you could also elect to
        Message 3 of 13 , Jun 13, 2004
          On Sun, 13 Jun 2004, doyce@... wrote:

          > I think it's the first answer, but I'd like verification.

          I think I would tend say, yeah, MoS 0 is enough, *but*, if
          you want, you can break a tie via a single-die roll-off,
          or whatever; you could also elect to choose either
          interpretation depending on whether or not the
          interpretation favors the PCs; etc.

          > Second question, which I think I have right but want to check:
          >
          > Statement: If you win an exchange against multiple opponents and
          > apply damage to a target as a result, the damage the target takes is
          > according to the MoS between you and that specific opponent you're
          > applying it to.

          Correct.

          > Example: Joe is fighting two mooks. Joe gets a +5; one mook gets a
          > +1, the other rolls a +4.
          >
          > Result: Joe wins and applies a MoS 4 outcome against the mook that
          > rolled worse.
          >
          > Am I right in this or no?

          You're right.

          --
          Fred Hicks * "Curse you iago and your fast fingers!" - Rob Donoghue
          Co-Author of Fate - Managing Editor of Fudge Factor - The 'fan' in fanatic
          Fate RPG * http://www.faterpg.com/ Fudge Factor * http://www.fudgefactor.org/
          Plink * http://www.rainlikely.com/ Jim Butcher * http://www.jim-butcher.com/
        • Landon Darkwood
          ... According to the default rules, this is correct, as has been previously verified. However, I do want to point out that this rule is an easily tweaked one
          Message 4 of 13 , Jun 13, 2004
            On Sun, 13 Jun 2004 07:33:47 -0000, <doyce@...> wrote:

            > One Interpretation: This is a MoS 0 vs one mook and MoS 4 on the
            > other. These are both 'wins' according to page 36 (albeit one which
            > is negligible), which means Joe (as the winner) can inflict MoS 4
            > damage against the Mook that rolled worse.

            According to the default rules, this is correct, as has been previously
            verified. However, I do want to point out that this rule is an easily
            tweaked one depending on your "in-game reality." Dave Hill's wiki has my
            mook rules from a few posts back posted on them, if you're interested in
            possible ways to alter that.

            > Second question, which I think I have right but want to check:
            >
            > Statement: If you win an exchange against multiple opponents and
            > apply damage to a target as a result, the damage the target takes is
            > according to the MoS between you and that specific opponent you're
            > applying it to.

            Also correct.


            -Landon Darkwood <darkwood@...>
          • DarkHost
            Ummm...what s a wiki ?
            Message 5 of 13 , Jun 13, 2004
              Ummm...what's a "wiki"?

              At 08:50 AM 6/13/2004, you wrote:
              >On Sun, 13 Jun 2004 07:33:47 -0000, <doyce@...> wrote:
              >
              > > One Interpretation: This is a MoS 0 vs one mook and MoS 4 on the
              > > other. These are both 'wins' according to page 36 (albeit one which
              > > is negligible), which means Joe (as the winner) can inflict MoS 4
              > > damage against the Mook that rolled worse.
              >
              >According to the default rules, this is correct, as has been previously
              >verified. However, I do want to point out that this rule is an easily
              >tweaked one depending on your "in-game reality." Dave Hill's wiki has my
              >mook rules from a few posts back posted on them, if you're interested in
              >possible ways to alter that.
              >
              > > Second question, which I think I have right but want to check:
              > >
              > > Statement: If you win an exchange against multiple opponents and
              > > apply damage to a target as a result, the damage the target takes is
              > > according to the MoS between you and that specific opponent you're
              > > applying it to.
              >
              >Also correct.
              >
              >
              >-Landon Darkwood <darkwood@...>
            • Dave Hill
              ... Another way of looking at this is that both the high-rollers have an MoS of 0, giving a scratch to each -- but the MoS over the low roller still takes
              Message 6 of 13 , Jun 13, 2004
                > On Sun, 13 Jun 2004, doyce@b... wrote:
                > > I think it's the first answer, but I'd like verification.

                --- In FateRPG@yahoogroups.com, Iago <iago@i...> wrote:
                > I think I would tend say, yeah, MoS 0 is enough, *but*, if
                > you want, you can break a tie via a single-die roll-off,
                > or whatever; you could also elect to choose either
                > interpretation depending on whether or not the
                > interpretation favors the PCs; etc.

                Another way of looking at this is that both the high-rollers have an
                MoS of 0, giving a scratch to each -- but the MoS over the low
                roller still takes effect.

                Or, if you want to play with the "splitting damage drops the damage
                impact by 1," then, assuming you can't drop a scratch below that (in
                this special case), the low-roller is damaged, but damaged less so
                for it being so marginal a victory.

                *** Dave
              • Darren Hill
                From: Dave Hill ... Note that a Scratch in FATE doesn t actually do anything on the wound track - you don t have scratch boxes
                Message 7 of 13 , Jun 13, 2004
                  From: "Dave Hill" <dave@...>
                  > Another way of looking at this is that both the high-rollers have an
                  > MoS of 0, giving a scratch to each -- but the MoS over the low
                  > roller still takes effect.

                  Note that a Scratch in FATE doesn't actually do anything on the wound
                  track - you don't have scratch boxes (IIRC!). I tend to ignore them -
                  Clipped is the lowest actual 'hit'.
                  Challenge Tracks might have effects on a Scratch if you build them that way.

                  Darren
                • Dave Hill
                  ... wound ... them - ... that way. I ve seen Scratch boxes on the wounds track in some instances. They re more for cumulative effect (resetting each turn) than
                  Message 8 of 13 , Jun 14, 2004
                    --- In FateRPG@yahoogroups.com, "Darren Hill" <Starscape@b...> wrote:
                    > Note that a Scratch in FATE doesn't actually do anything on the
                    wound
                    > track - you don't have scratch boxes (IIRC!). I tend to ignore
                    them -
                    > Clipped is the lowest actual 'hit'.
                    > Challenge Tracks might have effects on a Scratch if you build them
                    that way.

                    I've seen Scratch boxes on the wounds track in some instances.
                    They're more for cumulative effect (resetting each turn) than
                    anything else, but, yeah, not usually worth worrying about.

                    My point was more that an MoS 0 is still a success -- not with any
                    injury infliction, but still indicative of something having happened
                    that can be used in describing the outcome.

                    *** Dave
                    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                    You become a champion by fighting one more round. When things are
                    tough, you fight one more round.
                    -- James Corbett (1866-1933)
                    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                  • Iago
                    ... I run with boxes on Scratches so that if you take three hits in an exchange (conceivable), it ll roll over. Makes mobs-of-minions an effective villain
                    Message 9 of 13 , Jun 14, 2004
                      On Mon, 14 Jun 2004, Darren Hill wrote:

                      > From: "Dave Hill" <dave@...>
                      > > Another way of looking at this is that both the
                      > > high-rollers have an MoS of 0, giving a scratch to each
                      > > -- but the MoS over the low roller still takes effect.
                      >
                      > Note that a Scratch in FATE doesn't actually do anything
                      > on the wound track - you don't have scratch boxes (IIRC!).
                      > I tend to ignore them - Clipped is the lowest actual
                      > 'hit'. Challenge Tracks might have effects on a Scratch if
                      > you build them that way.

                      I run with boxes on Scratches so that if you take three
                      hits in an exchange (conceivable), it'll roll over. Makes
                      mobs-of-minions an effective villain strategy.

                      --
                      Fred Hicks * "Curse you iago and your fast fingers!" - Rob Donoghue
                      Co-Author of Fate - Managing Editor of Fudge Factor - The 'fan' in fanatic
                      Fate RPG * http://www.faterpg.com/ Fudge Factor * http://www.fudgefactor.org/
                      Plink * http://www.rainlikely.com/ Jim Butcher * http://www.jim-butcher.com/
                    • Doyce Testerman
                      Wikis in plain English: http://www.commoncraft.com/archives/000644.html Wiki and the Perfect Campaign Trip -- an example of using Wiki s for a rpg campaign --
                      Message 10 of 13 , Jun 15, 2004
                        Wikis in plain English: http://www.commoncraft.com/archives/000644.html
                        Wiki and the Perfect Campaign Trip -- an example of using Wiki's for a
                        rpg campaign -- http://random.average-bear.com/archive/004304.html

                        DarkHost wrote:

                        > Ummm...what's a "wiki"?
                        >
                        >
                      • Dave Hill
                        ... And, following up from Doyce s response, the wiki in question can be found in the Links section of the FateRPG Yahoo group, and, more specifically, here:
                        Message 11 of 13 , Jun 15, 2004
                          > DarkHost wrote:
                          >
                          > > Ummm...what's a "wiki"?

                          And, following up from Doyce's response, the wiki in question can be
                          found in the Links section of the FateRPG Yahoo group, and, more
                          specifically, here:
                          http://www.hill-kleerup.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/FATE/FATE

                          *** Dave
                        • DarkHost
                          Thank you for the replies. -DH
                          Message 12 of 13 , Jun 15, 2004
                            Thank you for the replies.

                            -DH

                            At 08:58 AM 6/15/2004, you wrote:
                            > > DarkHost wrote:
                            > >
                            > > > Ummm...what's a "wiki"?
                            >
                            >And, following up from Doyce's response, the wiki in question can be
                            >found in the Links section of the FateRPG Yahoo group, and, more
                            >specifically, here:
                            >http://www.hill-kleerup.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/FATE/FATE
                            >
                            >*** Dave
                            >
                            >
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.