VKontakte.DJ
forum traveling
Welcome, Guest
Please Login or Register.    Lost Password?
Call Clarification (from the membership letter) (1 viewing) (1) Guest
Current Rules Questions
Go to bottom Favoured: 0
TOPIC: Call Clarification (from the membership letter)
#65
Call Clarification (from the membership letter) 8 Years, 10 Months ago Karma: 22  
I've just read (yeah I know kill me) the Jan membership letter and I am about to have a bit of a rant about this bit:

Rules Issues / Clarifications
There have been no major rules issues or clarifications required during the last few months. However, after receiving feedback we have decided to clarify the “No effect” or “Am I hurting you” areas. From now on there will be consistent shouts that are to be used by both players and monsters on events. Everybody should use the appropriate phrase below if they “Bounce” an effect/spell etc, “Resist” something, “Dodge” or use Kai. The “No effect” shout should be used by those few people who have special abilities that cause them to be immune to certain things.

Bounce = My protections aid me
Resist = (For the King / McBeast etc) I resist that
Dodge = Your blows cannot touch me
No effect = Your blows have no effect on me
Kai resist = (Toh, Shai, etc) I resist that

This is done to ensure that the event flows smoothly and everyone is aware of what is happening, without the need to stop enjoying the event and ask out of character questions. We hope that the above will make things much clearer and appreciate your cooperation. If you need any clarification on what you should shout then please contact Bruce Duncan.


I am confused are these supposed to be IC comments or OOC comments? If they are IC I am not a big fan of having what a character says being dictated by the rules. Gravesong for example would never say "My protections aid me" at the very least it would be "Our protections aid us" but either way it's not anything he would actually say.

We already use out of character combat calls (Quin Magic Five) so why do we feel the need to have an IC response when we already had an OOC mechanic for this. . "Bounce" "Dodge" and "No Effect".

Adding something to the end of a Kai shout seems even more pointless. SHY is a call which means "I am using monk powers to resist your spell" . . it's IC and obvious (and very evocative in a fight) adding OC clarification to it seems unneccessary.

I did like the playtest for the "resist" warrior skills where you came back with an IC retort but these were different for each person (Sky's I believe was "your going to have to try harder than that fella" ) which is fine but it would have to be tailored the characters way of talking, it should be obvious though what happened (in the Sky example he didn't get disarmed!).

In short the banter in combat should be IC (if you want to boast that the character you are fighting isn't hurting you then of course you should) but OC rules clarifications shouldn't be forced into a semi-IC statements. What about if I have been dumbnessed or playing a none-speaking monster part do I still say "My Protections Aid Me?". A Monk can't use Kai while Dumb (I believe) but a warrior can still merrily bounce blows due to his armour.

Sorry for the long and rantish post but I really don't like this idea!

Shaun.
shaunmcnally (User)
Calligraphus
Posts: 754
graphgraph
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
Gender: Male Shaun shaun.mcnally@hotmail.co.uk Birthdate: 1979-03-14
Logged Logged  
 
The administrator has disabled public write access.  
#77
Re:Call Clarification (from the membership letter) 8 Years, 10 Months ago Karma: 14  
Sorry you don't like it Shaun but it is in response to many complaints from numerous players who tell me they are unclear on whether or not they are hurting people. It would be great to say we can rely on people to roleplay this properly, but I am afraid this is not the case.

Over 2008 and i watched both monsters and players during fights and sometimes what I saw was was appalling. The responses we get are vast ranging from no response whatsoever, to people pretending to be hurt so that monsters target them with ineffectual spells - all unsatisfactory responses. I have seen several fights go tragically wrong because it was unclear to the party what they should do and what hurt monsters - spoiling otherwise good encounters.

Naturally there are some excellent role players out there who make it very apparent in their own way, what we now need is to encourage everyone else to do that. We will get them used to the idea of doing something and then hopefully evolve it so it becomes more in character.

I have received too many complaints now that something had to be done. At least there is no longer any confusion.

I also would prefer all of this to be in character and do not have a huge issue with it being personalised a bit, but until the complaints stop and it becomes clear what affects people, then I am afraid we must abide by this.

Bruce
bruced (Admin)
null
Admin
Posts: 422
graphgraph
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
null null null null null null Location: null
Logged Logged  
 
The administrator has disabled public write access.  
#78
Re:Call Clarification (from the membership letter) 8 Years, 10 Months ago Karma: 12  
For my fiftieth of a pound, and I want to test this shiny new forum, I sort of agree with both of you, depending on whether we're talking about players or monsters.

For players, some sort of in-character shout seems like a jolly good idea, as it's quite fun to shout a resisty phrase at a monster when they cast stuff at you. But it shouldn't be necassary for the protection to work though - as Shaun says, if I'm gagged, can I suddenly be bound?

For monsters on the other hand, I think just a simple "no effect" should be used. After all, knowing that you're not hurting a monster's important, but it probably makes for a better encounter in the long run if you don't always know why. It's much simpler too, which would be good for new players.

Basically, I just think it's more important for players to know they're not getting through than monsters* though obviously using the OOC limitations of the game mechanic for IC gain should be punished most inventively.

Phil

Though that might be because I don't monster very often
philwood (User)
Scrivener
Posts: 460
graphgraph
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
Gender: Male Location: oxford Birthdate: 1971-08-20
Logged Logged  
 
The administrator has disabled public write access.  
#79
Re:Call Clarification (from the membership letter) 8 Years, 10 Months ago Karma: 3  
Are we still classing damage that would bruise us even though the armour is greater than the damage, as 'bounce'?

E.g. A 'double' hitting a plate self, with no toughened skin mastery.
jemross (User)
Notary
Posts: 105
graphgraph
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
Logged Logged  
 
The administrator has disabled public write access.  
#91
Re:Call Clarification (from the membership letter) 8 Years, 10 Months ago Karma: 14  
As Phil states it is more important that Players know if they are effecting (affecting) monsters than the other way round.

However, that is not to say we don't want players to react. Monsters get just as frustrated as players if they are fighting somebody who is just like a machine and never reacts, dies etc and just keeps hitting - very frustrating. I think some of the best combats are when they are a bit slower, making calls, reacting, nice long hard fights etc.

It was discussed in some length whether we wanted a simple OOC no effect or if we wanted it in character. We decided to try and keep it in character where possible. So as long is it is blatantly clear, we don't mind some better in character slants (so for example Shaun could happily say Our protections aid us).

It should not be used for each blow but done early on to indicate that you (player/monster) are not being hurt by what is hitting you. So if you receive some damage (including just bruising) then it is not as important - although might be nice to laugh in character and taunt the monster that their blows are puny etc.

The aim of these calls is for people to know if what they are doing is having absoultely no effect and to stop players/monsters wasting resources. If it were all real, you would be able to see an effect from what you do (blood dripping, skin burning, totally avoiding your blow etc) - if you knew your blows wre not touching someone you woudl either stop or try to hit them in the back for example. This is difficult to emulate and is easier to do by exception, so unless someone says you are not hurting them, then you can assume that you are.

I like the fact that you will have some indication now of why you aren't hurting someone - do you just have to dispel their skin, curse them, hit them in the back or pull out the empowered spoon!

Like every rule in the HQ system no doubt this will evolve until we are all comfortable with it. We just need to get into a situation where it is very clear to both monsters and players if they are not hurting people and why.

Bruce
bruced (Admin)
null
Admin
Posts: 422
graphgraph
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
null null null null null null Location: null
Logged Logged  
 
The administrator has disabled public write access.  
#92
Re:Call Clarification (from the membership letter) 8 Years, 10 Months ago Karma: 13  
How does this effect monsters which aren't known for their conversational skills, for example undead or elementals?

Would seem a bit weird having a ghoul screaming "My protections aid me"...
sebsmith (Admin)
Admin
Posts: 413
graphgraph
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
Gender: Male Location: Darkest Lancashire Birthdate: 1979-04-25
Logged Logged  
 
The administrator has disabled public write access.  
#93
Re:Call Clarification (from the membership letter) 8 Years, 10 Months ago Karma: 4  
As long as this isn't perscriptive (both in terms of exact words and being needed to work) and common sense is applied I'm all for it.

I've been trying to do this with my characters that have resists or protections for some time, so that a monster knows that I didn't just not hear them or ignored them.

"Be gone with your petty magics", tends be be a Harlequin bounce from a bolt etc, "My mind is my own" or "Your will is nothing to me" for resists.

"Your evil holds no sway here", a no effect due to a good sphere prot from Kal.

Sorcerers/Wizards dispell already work well this way, "By my Mastery of Ancient Pacts!".

For monster on player, I'm not sure the monster really needs to know why (quite as much as the other way round) just that the player heard/took the effect and that it didn't work.

For monsters that don't speak, I'm personally more in favour of the shake of the head or the ooc phrase. I too would find it odd if the implacable silent wraith started shouting about his protections when hit with a magic blade (but see my inital comment about common sense ).

Cheers,
Fraser

(Who, like Shaun, has christened the new site with a longish post on a rules topic... oh dear).
fraserbohm (User)
Notary
Posts: 140
graphgraph
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
Logged Logged  
 
Last Edit: 2009/02/03 08:48 By fraserbohm.
 
The administrator has disabled public write access.  
#94
Re:Call Clarification (from the membership letter) 8 Years, 10 Months ago Karma: 14  
Fraser has it on the nose (so to speak) as always.

This is exactly the sort of thing we are looking for. It needs to be obvious so the monster/player knows they were heard etc and that for some reason it didnt work. As Fraser stated its really only players who now need to figure out what to do in order to kill the monster.

For those who are unable to or do not wish to come up with their own slants on what is said, they can use the generic ones. If a players shout is unclear, we may ask them to modify it slightly. However, as Fraser has said this really applies mostly to monsters, a monster doesn't need to know how a player resisted, just that they did.

As for those monsters where a call would be inappropriate, then an OOC shout would seem most sensible. However, how many Ghouls have you played with skins Seb? And who statted it!!

Bruce
bruced (Admin)
null
Admin
Posts: 422
graphgraph
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
null null null null null null Location: null
Logged Logged  
 
The administrator has disabled public write access.  
#95
Re:Call Clarification (from the membership letter) 8 Years, 10 Months ago Karma: 13  
bruced wrote:

As for those monsters where a call would be inappropriate, then an OOC shout would seem most sensible. However, how many Ghouls have you played with skins Seb? And who statted it!!

I statted it because I'd been sat in the rain for 3 hours... I was also immune to power and physical!

I was actually thinking more of a ghoul's immunity to physical damage, taking only magical and power...
sebsmith (Admin)
Admin
Posts: 413
graphgraph
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
Gender: Male Location: Darkest Lancashire Birthdate: 1979-04-25
Logged Logged  
 
The administrator has disabled public write access.  
#98
Re:Call Clarification (from the membership letter) 8 Years, 10 Months ago Karma: 8  
Unfortunately mys suggestion wasn't taken, which was that everyone is affected by everything therefore eliminating the need for any "no effect" type shouts altogether
petesutton (User)
Calligraphus
Posts: 798
graphgraph
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
Logged Logged  
 
The administrator has disabled public write access.  
Go to top

Have you noticed a problem with this website? If so, please e-mail one of our web team, who will fix it
admin@heroquest-larp.co.uk

© Copyright 2009-2014, All Rights Reserved