Steve Jackson Games Forums

Steve Jackson Games Forums (https://forums.sjgames.com/index.php)
-   The Fantasy Trip (https://forums.sjgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=100)
-   -   Optional Rule Concept for Turning a Defender's Shield in TFT (https://forums.sjgames.com/showthread.php?t=156561)

Jim Kane 03-19-2018 06:44 AM

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


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:14 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.