03-17-2018, 10:44 PM | #71 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2018
|
Re: Fantasy Trip Glitches, Contradictions, Ambiguities
In any case, the rule regarding Reaction to Injury "-2 DX with 5 hits in one turn" situation on page 18 is in need of a re-edit for clarity-sake regarding the WHEN and DURATION; or you wouldn't have people interpreting the rule as "ON" the next turn, and "TO" the next turn, when the rule uses the word: "FOR".
Some people treat the penalty as an immediate reaction to the damage at the time it is incurred (as I do); whereas others allow the injured figure to act at the unaffected DX, and the DX penalty is not applied until following turn (as you do); and others are just not sure what to do; hence the OP's question, and our individual interpretations and applications. I can see people interpreting the rule both ways. Cleaning-up for clarity in a re-edit is always a welcome thing. I actually have that T-shirt LOL! Last edited by Jim Kane; 03-17-2018 at 11:57 PM. |
03-17-2018, 11:11 PM | #72 | |
Join Date: May 2015
|
Re: Fantasy Trip Glitches, Contradictions, Ambiguities
Quote:
|
|
03-17-2018, 11:15 PM | #73 | |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2018
|
Re: Fantasy Trip Glitches, Contradictions, Ambiguities
Quote:
Skarg - Under that, could not a lower DX figure that incurs the penalty on TURN 3, BEFORE he himself has a chance to act, would be at -2DX when his action phase finally comes in that same TURN 3, AND, would then continue to incur the DX penalty a SECOND TIME "until the end of the next turn" as you say above - being the whole of TURN 4; in effect, penalizing him TWICE? Would that also not mean a higher DX figure would only incur the penalty ONCE on his phase in TURN 4; as he would have already acted first, and before he was injured some time during TURN 3 - after he had already acted on TURN 3? As I say, I think a re-edit for clarity is warranted regardless. Last edited by Jim Kane; 03-18-2018 at 01:11 AM. |
|
03-18-2018, 01:05 AM | #74 | ||
Join Date: May 2015
|
Re: Fantasy Trip Glitches, Contradictions, Ambiguities
Quote:
Quote:
Realize though that looking at it that way simplifies the situation to thinking about two characters who only take the Attack option and don't use their DX for other things. For example, even though the higher-DX figure already acted before getting hurt, he too is at -2 DX until the end of his next turn (in our house interpretation, anyway), and it might matter on turn 3, for example if he gets forced to retreat someplace that requires him to make a DX roll not to fall, or some turn-3 event requires him to make a DX roll, or he gets a second arrow shot that turn, or whatever. Also, a figure suffering an injury penalty before his time to act comes, can choose to change his option if he wants to avoid the DX penalty. He could choose to do things which don't (in the current rules as-written, anyway) involve DX, such as Defend, or Disengage and hope to move first next turn and get away from combat for the next turn, or Disbelieve, or attempt to enter HTH combat. But that's just the way we settled on and liked. tbeard1999's method of just having it affect the victim's next action also solves the issue... though if someone's concern is about how many actions it affects, it could also be considered unclear or unfair how it applies to second arrow shots (i.e. the high-DX archer who gets hurt for a penalty between his two shots). So say we all! :-) |
||
03-20-2018, 03:39 PM | #75 | ||||||||
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Coquitlam B.C.
|
Re: Fantasy Trip Glitches, Contradictions, Ambiguities
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Agreed. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Warm regards, Rick. Last edited by Rick_Smith; 03-20-2018 at 03:42 PM. |
||||||||
03-20-2018, 03:48 PM | #76 | |
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Coquitlam B.C.
|
maintaining spells, trip saving throws.
Quote:
I would leave the current spells alone. TFT's summoned creatures are too powerful, IMO, I do not want to make them cheaper. I agree some new spells that have long durations would be nice tho. I agree, I've added (tough) saving throws to most thrown spells. Warm regards, Rick. |
|
03-20-2018, 03:55 PM | #77 | ||||
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Coquitlam B.C.
|
More odds and ends.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Warm regards, Rick |
||||
03-20-2018, 04:07 PM | #78 | ||||
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Coquitlam B.C.
|
Bookworm's suggestions.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Disagree. I would handle the problem differently. Sure. However, if the distinction remains, nerf wizard some. High powered wizards are far more powerful than 'high' powered heroes. (There are awesome spells but no awesome talents. Fencing btw is nice, not awesome by my measure.) Quote:
No problem. Warm regards, Rick. |
||||
03-20-2018, 04:18 PM | #79 | ||
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Coquitlam B.C.
|
Sha-ken are too powerful.
Quote:
Quote:
Warm regards, Rick. |
||
03-20-2018, 04:21 PM | #80 | |
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Coquitlam B.C.
|
Engaged by people who can't attack.
Quote:
This is a very good point. The reason, (I would guess), is to allow you to decide if you are engaged or not, by simply looking at the map. This way you don't have to remember which of these 50 goblins moved half their MA or not. I fairly often have big battles with lots of people on both sides. But I feel you have a strong argument. Warm regards, Rick. |
|
|
|