|
|
Post by Alex ST on Jun 23, 2016 10:09:38 GMT -5
Additional damage was never worthwhile (even if you could hit the Raises there were better things to do with those Raises). A +3 to the TN made roughly a 25% chance of missing; the +2 damage did not increase your odds of killing your opponent by 25% or even make it likely you'd increase his wound penalties. In dueling, even lethal duels, Knockdown is usually the best choice, which is just weird.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jim ST on Jun 23, 2016 12:51:47 GMT -5
My issue with Raises and Roll and Keep in general is that I strongly encouraged me to use charts with probability tables to figure out how likely I was to accomplish something. When I have to check probability tables, the game has become needlessly complex.
On a different note, on the topic of the wild swing of cards, how about just removing face cards? Watching people try to figure out what a Q represents adds time and annoyance to the process. 1-10 + Jokers. This aligns closely with the d10s used in the RPG.
|
|
|
|
Post by travislerol on Jun 23, 2016 12:52:20 GMT -5
I did it once in my lethal duel, but only because I knew exactly his wound penalties, TN, etc, and it worked out. But yeah, super weird.
In some contexts, it makes sense, I think, but not that one. Mostly, it works out for "additional different effect" stuff. For stuff like crafting competitions and the like, it's just odd. It ends up mostly being a "highest number wins" regardless of if raises are involved or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex ST on Jun 23, 2016 13:09:24 GMT -5
If we're going that way why not just switch to 1d10 (exploding). It's easy enough to roll, we don't deal with dice pools, it saves the time on shuffling cards, 10's explode more often than jokers show up, and if someone really wants to use a deck with face cards and jokers removed they can. The only issue it slows down is Void Points which now mean either rolling two dice (most people won't carry them) or re-rolling (takes more time).
|
|
|
|
Post by Jim ST on Jun 23, 2016 13:45:47 GMT -5
I think the cards are more portable and easier to work with in a LARP setting. You don't need a table or platform to roll on, they don't get lost under couches, etc. I like the decreased probability of explosion (Jokers vs. 10s) personally. In the end, I will give my proxy to the math/systems experts amongst us.  |
|
|
|
Post by travislerol on Jun 23, 2016 14:04:55 GMT -5
Huh. Single die does work. Probably way faster than normal rolling, and an identical card option allows players to pick either. Kinda cool.
I need to play with it to see how much the explosion factor matters, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex ST on Jun 23, 2016 14:10:19 GMT -5
I'm not convinced explosions matter or are a good thing for a single-source system. In R&K where you're rolling a pool you can reliably count on an explosion or two depending on your die pool and so you can reliably hit higher TNs. In a single-source system, whether it's a draw or die, you can never rely on that explosion so you don't factor it into your decision. The problem is that because Raises have to be declared before drawing or rolling, explosions are usually wasted: if I need the explosion to make Raises I'm not going to declare any, and if I explode without Raises the extra is worthless. There are a few exceptions (battle table draws, contested rolls) but even so, explosions + single-source is boring and wasteful.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex ST on Jun 23, 2016 14:13:20 GMT -5
Actually, that gives me an idea: if you explode instead of doubling your result/rolling another die/other method of adding to your draw, you instead gain a Free Raise that can only be used for additional effect.
This gives a benefit to exploding while still allowing Raises to be part of the system (you can still call Raises but this gives you a free one). It avoids the feeling of wasting high rolls for forgetting to declare Raises while still making called Raises more reliable and effective.
|
|
|
|
Post by travislerol on Jun 23, 2016 14:23:51 GMT -5
Oooh, I like that. It's essentially keeping the fun part while ignoring the +moar numbers that actually makes TN setting, etc harder.
|
|
|
|
Post by Charles ST on Jun 23, 2016 15:54:42 GMT -5
On the subject of raises - they're thematically appropriate for the setting, which is why they work they way they are. It's not supposed to be a sure bet that you succeed when you call a raise. It's supposed to be an Epic risk that results in an Epic victory - or failure. The current staff - at least initially - tried to stress the difference between eastern and western storytelling, and raises and their use are a part of it.
That you don't like them because you can't use them in a mechanically efficient way is cool - but they're not meant to be efficient. They're meant to be risky and worth the reward. I really don't like the idea of taking them away, but I AM for increasing rewards to make the risk more palatable.
|
|
|
|
Post by travislerol on Jun 23, 2016 16:00:57 GMT -5
Risk-taking, honestly, is usually more about decision-making.
When thinking back to cool risks/epic victories players achieved, none of them were "and then he called three raises".
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex ST on Jun 23, 2016 16:01:28 GMT -5
I really don't like the idea of taking them away, but I AM for increasing rewards to make the risk more palatable. +1 |
|
|
|
Post by Charles ST on Jun 23, 2016 16:48:49 GMT -5
Risk-taking, honestly, is usually more about decision-making. When thinking back to cool risks/epic victories players achieved, none of them were "and then he called three raises". Choosing to call three raises for a specific effect is making a decision? And there aren't really risks taken in our current game. You, Ressler, Mitch, Tim - so many people have found builds that completely minimizes risk. That's a failure of the current card-draw system - not in raises. In TT, there's a much higher chance of Raises paying off, and it's a lot harder to calculate on the fly your chances of success when calling raises. Not everyone who plays is a Mathmagician and will be thinking about that sort of thing. Edit: Raises are also more effective when used in conjuction with void points and school techniques, many of which had their value reduced by the current larp system. An example of HOW raises can be awesome... You are Doji Tatsume and you have gotten in a fight with a Hida Bushi. You KNOW you can hit his armor TN. But his reduction and ability to ignore wound penalties make that a really long fight for you. He's really strong but has trouble matching your armor TN. But if he hits you, it'll hurt you enough to push the battle clearly in his favor. Early fight, you have to do something dramatic to push the fight in your favor, because you won't survive a prolonged battle with him. So you decide "'Im gonna cut the motherfucker's arm off." You take some raises and go for his arm - if you fail, that's another chance for him to hit you and end the combat. But if you succeed, you've not only moved the combat in your favor - you've done something cool - something you can brag about in court. I'm even okay with saying "I'm gonna cut this Motherfucker's head off" and making 5 raises to just end a fight. It's quick, decisive, and brutal but it's risky. Think less about what the raises mechanically provide, and more about what they actually do - that's the cool part. |
|
|
|
Post by travislerol on Jun 23, 2016 17:07:02 GMT -5
We built specialist characters. We all took risks. 'snot really the same thing. Don't know if I'm explaining it right, but there's a subtle difference between what raises do and risky decisions. Usually, the epic risk for epic victory or whatever ends up being player choice. Someone chooses to stay behind so others can be saved. Someone walks into a duel knowing they'll lose. These are things that are not the result of raises.
Raises for special effects are rather better than raises for more damage, which, thematically, isn't *that* interesting, usually. However, under the current system, five raises to lop off someone's head is generally just not going to work. Even in tabletop, it usually just results in a fairly undramatic miss(assuming you haven't built specifically to do this in some crazy way), but in the EH system, they're going to void the damage, and even if you tag the hit with a lot of luck, you have to roll stupid damage to pull it off. Whereas if you'd taken the same amount of raises for damage and drawn the same stupid damage, you'd win anyway. And if you drew less, at least you'd make progress. So, raises for damage, an already usually weak and not selected option, ended up being almost invariably superior to raising for called shots.
If the cool things never work, people will never do the cool things.
Thinking about it, +2 to damage is almost never a cool thing. It's number crunching*, and it might be efficient, but I don't know that it actually contributes much to the story. I'm not sure that changing the numbers changes that. I think while this can work for raises for special effects, raises for damage need to be justified on some other grounds.
*Mechanically, it's a push your luck system.
|
|
|
|
Post by Charles ST on Jun 23, 2016 17:30:16 GMT -5
I agree that the raises for extra damage aren't really great - except for those groups that can make them with little effort (Akodo Bushi comes to mind) and I think that was an intentional part of the design. A single raise for extra damage is worthless, but when you start to stack them as, say an Akodo Bushi, they do (or at least should) add up - which makes it a relevant part of the story. You should be afraid of the Akodo Bushi simply because they are adept at maximizing the amount of damage they do in a skirmish.
But everything in this game should be Drama. Every swing in combat, every word spoken in court. A decision to hold the line should be just as potent as a decision to just go for the throat because just as much is on the line.
Also, I apologize if I offended anyone, you guys are just the crunchiest people I can think of.
As an aside - I don't think there are published rules for limb-removing, but I'd like to see them if there are. I've seen it run that all you need to do to lop of a limb is do enough damage to push the person into the next wound-rank - so I suppose in the above example it would NOT be a worthwhile risk because you're fighting a Hida Bushi.
|
|
