Help implementing spotting feints

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

There is a reason to roll "secretly" even if you have players that are good at firewalls. Sometimes people enjoy suspense. It's the same reason that people avoid "spoilers" after all.

At a level of plot development, I grant that that's valid, and I don't show the players cut scenes that would give away what's going on. But at a level of physical action, I don't see much relevance, for two reasons:

On one hand, suspense over what tactical moves a foe is making in combat doesn't have a very high payoff, and its loss is somewhat compensated for by the gain of being able to visualize the fight better.

On the other, it isn't as if knowing whether a foe's strike was a feint or a simple miss in no way lessens suspense over how capable the foe actually is, or who's going to win the fight, or at what price.

Bill Stoddard

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Fez

But if you roll the results out in the open, the defender will know that he's been feinted - perhaps it's one of those situations we see in fiction where the character does something and immediately realizes it was the wrong thing to do. So he reacts differently, perhaps precipitously, to try to correct for the situation, leaving him unable to capitalize on the actions of his opponent. Again, much like real combat could be.

On the other hand I'd note that if you wanted to use your Feint to keep your target from hitting you, we have Defensive Feints for that.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

On the other hand I'd note that if you wanted to use your Feint to keep your target from hitting you, we have Defensive Feints for that.

Very true, but this is more about making them "waste" an action reacting to your suddenly improved ability to prevent their defense against an attack, than simply denying them a hit. The former has the added benefit of potentially damaging them and ending the fight, while the latter is purely defensive.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by whswhs

At a level of plot development, I grant that that's valid, and I don't show the players cut scenes that would give away what's going on. But at a level of physical action, I don't see much relevance, for two reasons:

I was actually thinking about Perception rolls. Knowing whether you are walking into an ambush seems like worthwhile suspense.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

I was actually thinking about Perception rolls. Knowing whether you are walking into an ambush seems like worthwhile suspense.

If they succeed in the perception roll, they know they're walking into an ambush. If they fail, they don't know.

In my games, a lot of perception rolls occur at the initiative of the players; they want to know if their characters see anything interesting, and I ask if they're openly looking around, or trying to hide their interest, and tell them to roll Per or Observation. They might well be looking for things of interest when there's nothing there to see.

I may also ask them for a perception roll when they arrive in a new place, and give them more narrative detail if they succeed. Or I may say, "X and Y don't see anything, but Z notices that the woman across the room dressed in good quality clothing is watching the three of you." I certainly don't ask for perception rolls only when there's specifically something tactically relevant for them to perceive.

I'd also note that in my games, PCs succeed at the majority of their perception rolls! So that lets your suspense out right there.

Bill Stoddard

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by whswhs

If they succeed in the perception roll, they know they're walking into an ambush. If they fail, they don't know.

Yeah that's if they fail, and you tell them they may be perfectly well be able to firewall walking into an ambush, but you are spoiling the surprise for the players.

I'd also note that in my games, PCs succeed at the majority of their perception rolls! So that lets your suspense out right there.

In my games PCs sometimes fail at contested Perception rolls or rolls to spot well hidden traps.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Yeah that's if they fail, and you tell them they may be perfectly well be able to firewall walking into an ambush, but you are spoiling the surprise for the players.

Why on earth would you suppose that? It isn't as if I said, "Roll to see if you spot the ambush"—or as if, when they asked if there was an ambush, I only asked them to roll if there was an ambush, and said, "No, there's not" if there wasn't. Failing an ambush roll tells them only that their characters don't know if there's an ambush or not, because the answer is, "You can't tell," or "You don't see one."

Bill Stoddard

[Aneirin]

I have found (that with skilled individuals), rolling and say you miss doesn't work anyway, as if a player is the type to meta game, they will no the chances of someone missing are rather low unless they tried something specail, and will usually assume a feint.

I only have one metagamer in my ground and to compensate I always have NPC's of good skill do something fancy so they always have a chance of missing.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by whswhs

Why on earth would you suppose that? It isn't as if I said, "Roll to see if you spot the ambush"—or as if, when they asked if there was an ambush, I only asked them to roll if there was an ambush, and said, "No, there's not" if there wasn't. Failing an ambush roll tells them only that their characters don't know if there's an ambush or not, because the answer is, "You can't tell," or "You don't see one."

I mean if you say "Roll Vision (or Hearing or whatever)", you roll Stealth or Camouflage or whatever in the open, and they roll high, you roll low, then they at least know that their characters failed to detect something contested, by which they ought to reasonably suspect an ambush.

Originally Posted by Aneirin

I have found (that with skilled individuals), rolling and say you miss doesn't work anyway, as if a player is the type to meta game, they will no the chances of someone missing are rather low unless they tried something specail, and will usually assume a feint.

I only have one metagamer in my ground and to compensate I always have NPC's of good skill do something fancy so they always have a chance of missing.

I'm envious of those of you who play with all players who can firewall themselves from metagaming. I've yet to be so lucky.

And yes, if you have a highly skilled opponent and they're not trying fun things that bring their skill roll down to at least 16-, if not 14-, you're just not trying!