Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > The Fantasy Trip

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-19-2018, 05:44 AM   #1
Jim Kane
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Default Optional Rule Concept for Turning a Defender's Shield in TFT

This optional-rule concept is the result of considering the idea of reflecting the effects of blows as they hit a figure who is using a shield for protection.

We have a rule under Reactions to Injury on page 18 of TFT:AM regarding "a figure who takes 8 or more hits in one turn immediately falls down." We also have another rule which states: "A figure which takes 5 or more hits in one turn has it's DX adjusted -2 for the next turn only." I am conceptualizing the application of a parallel logic, applied to combat situations wherein an attacker could deliver a blow which could "turn" the shield of his opponent from the force of a single blow.

The GOAL is: to cinematically simulate those incoming blows where an attacking figure gets the effect of knock-downing, knocking-away (make unready) the shield of a defender - but without altering the damage incurred by the established rules.

Examples of Play:

For Large Shield:


Scenario 1a:
A attacks D (Lg. Sh) for 10 hits of damage. D's shield stops 2 hits. D takes 8 hits (10-2=8) and D immediately falls down. - as per normal.

Scenario 1b:
A attacks D (Lg. Sh) for 7 (or more) hits of damage. D's shield stops 2 hits. D takes 5 hits (7-2=5) and D has his DX adjusted -2 for the next turn only. - as per normal.

Scenario 1c:
A attacks D (Lg. Sh) for 6 hits of damage. D's shield stops 2 hits. D takes 4 hits (6-2=4) and D's shield has been turned. - see Turned Shields.

Scenario(s) 1d:
A attacks D (Lg. Sh) for 5 or less hits of damage. D's shield stops 2 hits; for 3 to 0 damage - no effect to D's shield; fight-on!

For Small Shield:

Scenario 2a:
A attacks D (Sm. Sh) for 9 hits of damage. D's shield stops 1 hits. D takes 8 hits (9-1=8) and D immediately falls down. - as per normal.

Scenario 2b:
A attacks D (Sm. Sh) for 6 or more hits of damage. D's shield stops 1 hits. D takes 5 hits (6-1=5) and D has his DX adjusted -2 for the next turn only. - as per normal.

Scenario 2c:
A attacks D (Sm. Sh) for 5 hits of damage. D's shield stops 1 hit. D takes 4 hits (5-1=4) and D's shield has been turned. - see Turned Shields.

Scenario(s) 2d:
A attacks D (Sm. Sh) for 4 or less hits of damage. D's shield stops 1 hit. D takes 3 to 0 damage, with no effect to D's shield; fight-on!

Turned shields: are immediately made unready due to the force of the blow which struck them in one blow. A shield needs to be re-readied or it will not stop any hits from any/all subsequent attack(s) until it has been readied again.

I purposely did not have the shield turned when 5 hits pass through, as I feel the -2DX is penalty enough; and I am just trying to add cinematic COLOR more than anything.

"... and the berserking orc moved in; raining down blow after blow, so viciously, that the surface-dweller had no opportunity to counter against the flashing ax-head bashing out it's murderous tattoo-rhythm against the falling shield of Kanen. Driving him backward, off-balance and reeling to keep his footing and shield held firm, until the orc would tire and the whirl-wind arm-of-death would finally slow, and miss it's mark. Then, finding his opening, Kanen buried the razor-tip, followed by half his sword, straight through the bull-neck of the inhuman creature; dropping the monster to it's knees, as it's yellowed-eyes rolled up into their sockets, and it's dark and fetid blood spattered and gushed forth - in sputtering, uneven, grotesque eruptions; until the thing's lungs fully collapsed - as the vile, gurgling, hissing sound of it's breath, escaped slowly through the pulsating, bloody gash of the deadly open neck-wound." - JK

Okay, that's the very general concept at this stage and the play I am trying to capture with this optional rule. I am mostly wondering if such an optional rule would be a bonus or a burden.

Thoughts?

Thank you.

JK

Last edited by Jim Kane; 03-21-2018 at 07:45 PM. Reason: Tupo,... I mean Typo
Jim Kane is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:39 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.