[0.8] Chaining Martial Skills

[A.mungo]

Through the other post (disarm and mediate) it occurs to me that the idea of Chaining martial skills is handled differently in different chapters.

With the removal of PTD and no flurry/powerful blows rules, but the inclusion of oversized shield, we experienced some very face paced combat where Shields/NPCs were at a disadvantage against multiple martial skills/spells being chained into them.

No holds were issued for safety in combat, but we did have one or two clarification pauses amongst smaller groups due to multiple effects hitting at the same time. This had its own slowing effect on combat and drew people out of game during those times.

The idea of removing PTD was said to be for speeding up combat, and allowing fighters to beat the speed of a character putting up new defenses, but in the disarm and mediate thread we were told that we should wait for each ability to resolve before pressing (Ala powerful blows, something we were not play testing), else we were being unsportsmanlike.

Has anyone else experienced game play issues from Chaining martial skills against other players? What about Chaining skills or spells in general, is this considered bad form in your chapter?

With Shields, without Shields, etc?

What has been your experience regarding utilizing multiple effects to achieve your desired results?

In Seattle, and Oregon, chaining has been a common tactic for my entire time playing, some of the things we fight in Oregon have upwards of 8-10 spell gaurds and swing for massive (you can bet we are Chaining as fast as we can into those). Is the style of play that includes using mutliple effects standard, or an outlier?

-Tony

 

[Auric]

Is the style of play that includes using mutliple effects standard, or an outlier?

Chaining is common here on the east as well.

 

[Dan Nickname Beshers]

0.9 is not officially released yet, but I can tell you that the Flurry rule is being reintroduced based on owner concerns in the exact vein you have brought up. We do like the weapon Disarm/Shatter paradigm, but are very aware of how easily it could get out of control and frustrating. We are also looking at (and could use more data on) the disparity in value of those skills when claws are involved.

 

[bgardner]

Has anyone else experienced game play issues from Chaining martial skills against other players? What about Chaining skills or spells in general, is this considered bad form in your chapter?

Chaining is common because is advantageous. It's allowed by the current version of the rules and is not considered bad form where I have played.

Yes I've seen and experienced issues with chained effects. To be clear I'm talking about 4 or more effects. The issues crop up when the effects vary or are unexpected. For example an alchemist throwing 4 different kinds of alchemy in quick succession. Or a player mis speaks a verbal (sometimes deliberately to get an advantage).

for me, it becomes too difficult to process in real time. It causes me to have to pause to think through which effects were blocked and what the verbals are to call them. A literal pause, I'm just standing there working through what just happened. Some players will just keep wailing on me taking advantage of that pause. Others will cause a mini hold to come about by questioning whether I fired all my defenses correctly. ("Did you get the paralyze which was the third effect in my five attack chain" for example).

A flurry rules gives defenders an opportunity to process what just happened.

This is generally only going to happen when the attacker is a PC. Most npcs are crunchies and don't have a lot of variety in their attacks.

If attack type is expected it's easier for me to respond quickly. If I'm fighting spiders for example a web or pin packet attack is expected since it's a common attack. If the spider threw a combination of web, alchemy, and spells in quick succession and random order it would be much harder.

 

[Gilwing]

To echo Matt's statment, chaining is the norm on the EC.

The idea of removing PTD was said to be for speeding up combat, and allowing fighters to beat the speed of a character putting up new defenses

Was it realy difficult to work with a friend to have two people come at the person to take care of them putting up a defense? If we want players to rely on each other I feel we should keep PTD.

*edit* I'm not refering to you saying that it was difficult Tony. Its more of a universal question.

 

[Gilwing]

for me, it becomes too difficult to process in real time. It causes me to have to pause to think through which effects were blocked and what the verbals are to call them. A literal pause, I'm just standing there working through what just happened. Some players will just keep wailing on me taking advantage of that pause. Others will cause a mini hold to come about by questioning whether I fired all my defenses correctly. ("Did you get the paralyze which was the third effect in my five attack chain" for example).

This sucks and I'm sorry that you went through this. What I put in bold shouldn't happen. Players should be nice and ask what you got and what you took and then proceed from there. Mini holds suck but some times they are necessary to solve the issue.

A flurry rules gives defenders an opportunity to process what just happened.

I have to agree that only when its a 1v1 situation. If it's any other number the 3 hits will be meaningless because each person gets those 3 hits vs 1 person only getting one set of hits.

 

[Avaran]

Or a player mis speaks a verbal (sometimes deliberately to get an advantage).

This is explicitly not allowed within the rules - if you as the person being attacked cannot understand what someone says, you DO NOT have to take their effect AND their effect/skill is expended/wasted.

This goes for both Melee skills and Spells.

---

With regard to the rest of the topic:
People are going to have to deal with multiple things being done to/at them; I feel like this is just part of the game. This is especially true of NPC's, Plot, and Staff who regularly find themselves outnumbered.

Is there going to be a rule about only being able to have up to a certain number of players being allowed to engage in combat against each other as well?

If there are six or seven people attacking one person, are they being poor sports?

I've been in countless situations as an NPC, a member of Plot, and as the Head of Plot where I was actively fighting against 10 or more people at the same time. (For the record, I created the "Swarm Monster" ability when I was Head of Plot in Oregon to try and deal with/solve some of these issues, though that isn't what I called it; I used it for nearly 3 years on one NPC character and only one NPC character, though my original plans were to include in on several 'themed' NPC's).

It's not uncommon to have a 1v1 or a 2v1 all the way up to a 10v1 depending on how combat shakes out.

but I can tell you that the Flurry rule is being reintroduced based on owner concerns in the exact vein you have brought up

This genuinely makes me sad and disappointed.

 

[mythic]

Again, this is all about Chapter culture. We have repeatedly asked our players not to "dog pile" our NPCs. The new "Swarmed by" is an effective way of controlling that. But, again we just ask our players not to do that (we ask for a "soft cap" of 3-4 melee on a NPC) and guess what? Our players don't dog pile our NPCs. (and vice-versa).

And before people say "well this is the how we play in XX area", this is how we used to play as well. We just asked players to not do these things. We installed our own "Flurry 3" rule (again, this was mostly due to bad weather, but it has since morphed into all combat situations). We asked players not to "dog pile" etc. And after several months of reminding players, it has become the normal. To the point where going to other chapters or nationals where this is not the culture seems more odd to us than it is normal to everyone else.

All it takes is for players, Marshals, Owners, NPCs etc. to come together and say "we want this to change" and start changing it themselves. And keep at it. Keep reminding players (on both sides) that this is how you want to play your game. Eventually, it just becomes second nature.

 

[Ardos]

I feel like a happy medium could be reached if there was a timed defense with a specific call, something like "knockback" that could signify a person stopping weapon skills for a 2-3 second window could prevent a bbeg from calling defenses for 3 min straight while a group uses continuous weapon skills. It would allow some things to be teamed up on, allows damage to still be done to the bbeg that used the defense, and keeps players from feeling like they wasted a skill that the bbeg used one of his hundreds of defenses on. Thematically and logistically I think this might allow a happy medium, but a disclaimer in that I haven't played a 2.0 playtest, just read complaints on both ends on the forum. It also makes sense that learning to fight a group is a very different thing than fighting one on one.

 

[Avaran]

The new "Swarmed by" is an effective way of controlling that.

Speaking from actual game-play experience with this ability - it is only really effective if people know that this ability is being used. The last version of the rules I saw, there was no verbal indication that an ability was supplied to the NPC by this ability - they just call the defense/ability as-normal.

Again, speaking from actual experience with the ability, this causes frustration and confusion on the players' part. Further, there is no way to communicate how many opponents trigger the ability without long, drawn-out, frustrating fights on the part of the PC's (this is more true if the NPC is especially tough; the weaker the NPC gets, the more difficult it is to tell that this ability is even being used).

One of the worst things you can do in a game like this, is to remove verbal calls to relay what is going on - it sews confusion and can cause some serious OOG issues with invalid cheating accusations, etc.

This is one of the reasons why out here, we had to include ALTERED, HEALED, and REDUCED calls to our NPC defense calls because spells and abilities that didn't act normally caused confusion and (rightfully) unhappy players.

Yes, having a Monster Marshal is an okay solution most of the time, not every chapter is going to have the NPC/staff resources to commit to that, and without a consistent verbal queue for abilities like Swarm Monster, and an indicator of how many players it takes to trigger it, your players won't have as much fun as you hope, leaving to them just not coming back to your game.

Here is the text from 0.8 for reference:

A new Monster Ability has been added to help NPCs who get surrounded by multiple PCs and are unable to engage them properly due to flurries of blows. The Swarmed ability may be used by Plot teams as a standard rulebook ability, and works as follows:

Swarmed by <number>: <ability>. Any card with this ability allows an NPC to use the named ability without limit when they are actively engaged (meaning approximately 10 foot range unless otherwise defined locally) by <number> or more foes. For example, "Swarmed by 4: Spell Death by Weapon" would allow the NPC to swing for "Spell Death" with their weapons so long as 4 or more enemies are within approximately 10 feet. The named ability may alternately be called by OOG Marshals in the fight.

Note that when this ability is used, only the bonus effect needs to be called – “Swarmed by <number>” is just the name of the ability, it does not need to be announced.

There is ZERO means of communicating with the players what is happening. You simply keep calling "Dodge" or "Spell Death" or whatever ability/abilities you have assigned to it. And that was the biggest downfall I found when actually using the ability (again, I didn't call it Swarmed By, but the ability I used from 2012-2015 functioned the exact same way). That's a big reason why I didn't expand it beyond the 1 NPC that had it (and I toned it down as things progressed because of Player feedback and a general sense of things I had while fighting as the character) despite having plans to use it on multiple NPC's for the duration of that story arc (I ended up using alternative ideas).

Depending on the size of the game, you also run the risk of alienating players from fights, multiple times in an event, because only 3-4 people can attack an NPC without giving the NPC an unfair advantage. Keeping 80+ PC's engaged and busy with a 30-35 NPC-camp (sometimes as high as 45) isn't easy; there's a balance to be had, but ultimately, it is plot's job to give players things to do, things to fight, people to talk to, etc.

Combat is a big part of this game, and punishing players for wanting to get involved in that aspect of the game because there's already 2 or 3 people attacking each NPC...you're failing as a Plot team at that point, in my humble opinion. While you may not be actively trying to punish players, I can guarantee you there may be lower-level characters who feel left out or useless because it's best to have the most efficient people killing something if you can only have 2-3 people fighting it. It sucks being the odd-person out in that scenario, and it happened a few times at my games (sadly), and I took great pains to ensure it didn't happen (though sometimes it was unavoidable, sadly, because of Swarm Ability).

 

[mythic]

We just called it. Pretty simple fix. I agree the verbal has to go back in. We saw that pretty much right away.

 

[Muir]

Speaking from actual game-play experience with this ability - it is only really effective if people know that this ability is being used. The last version of the rules I saw, there was no verbal indication that an ability was supplied to the NPC by this ability - they just call the defense/ability as-normal.

Again, speaking from actual experience with the ability, this causes frustration and confusion on the players' part. Further, there is no way to communicate how many opponents trigger the ability without long, drawn-out, frustrating fights on the part of the PC's (this is more true if the NPC is especially tough; the weaker the NPC gets, the more difficult it is to tell that this ability is even being used).

We saw this ability as an LCO thing at last weekend's SoMN closer, and I really liked how it worked in play. The monster with the ability did voice radius damage increasing with time it was mobbed, and the NPC running it called a mini hold after the first time it happened to make sure that people understood what was going on since it was a new thing and check what defenses they were using because it was a whole bunch of chaos damage and a lot of people were still on their feet.

It didn't really feel exclusionary because there were a number of other NPCs out with the big bad, so it just meant the rest of us fought them instead of turning into a 30-man gang beating on the BBG.

 

[Dan Nickname Beshers]

Our version of Swarmed used a three count as a way to warn PCs the effect was being triggered. We have never had any problems implementing it or negative feedback about it.

 

[Muir]

Yeah, the version we saw started with a small amount of voice radius damage, that scaled over 30 seconds or so from 2 to 30. It seemed very effective as I didn't hear it again.

 

[mythic]

Cool. @Dan Nickname Beshers we should ask ARC to amend or include some of these suggestions into Swarmed By. I love the Voice Radius effect. Well done!

 

[Avaran]

The monster with the ability did voice radius damage increasing with time it was mobbed, and the NPC running it called a mini hold after the first time it happened to make sure that people understood what was going on since it was a new thing and check what defenses they were using because it was a whole bunch of chaos damage and a lot of people were still on their feet

That sounds like a neat way of doing it, for sure.

My issue with the ability is when you start adding in normal, per-day skills that PC's have access to (like Slay, Dodge, Spell Shield, Dragon's Breath, Prison), not abilities that PC's can never buy (like a voice radius effect; they automatically know it's a special case for an NPC that plays by different rules). If an NPC can call dodge over and over and over again, a lot of times people will just read that is: Oh man, it's a REALLY BBEG and we should pile on even more! Or with Slays; if you're throwing out 10, 12, or 18 or more Slays in a fight...people could come to that conclusion, or think the card is being played wrong, etc. Just something to really watch out for, and why I think having a verbal for the skill is essential to keeping this tool as versatile as possible for plot teams without having to limit themselves to what they can/should use.

I think this is particularly a concern when you start getting into the higher-level game - PC's that are level 35 or higher - who can stand in there and take whatever you're dishing out, and who throw take-out effect after take-out effect at you - you eventually have to stop calling your effect and call defenses (unless monster marshal) or the NPC will go splat very quickly.

As some further information/personal opinion:
I'm not really a fan of calling a hold just before (or during) combat just so that I can explain how something works, I feel it ruins the flow of the game.

I also generally don't like being told how a monster works, I like to figure it out most of the time. I feel it adds a level of mystery to a game/fight where things aren't straightforward. I feel that lack of knowledge leads to a more natural reaction from characters, and it also lends itself to a more cautious fight where people aren't all-in and ganging on the Unknown. If the players know ahead of time that monsters for a module or for an event aren't going to work as they expect - I think that's all they really need to know beforehand.

Anyway, pretty cool ideas with using this ability. I think it would be REALLY REALLY REALLY helpful if plot teams shared how they use the ability to give other plot teams ideas; especially if they run into things that don't particularly work or things you have to watch out for (as I've tried to do here).

 

[Draven]

I also generally don't like being told how a monster works, I like to figure it out most of the time. I feel it adds a level of mystery to a game/fight where things aren't straightforward. I feel that lack of knowledge leads to a more natural reaction from characters, and it also lends itself to a more cautious fight where people aren't all-in and ganging on the Unknown. If the players know ahead of time that monsters for a module or for an event aren't going to work as they expect - I think that's all they really need to know beforehand.

I understand your point here.

I think, for this very specific thing, I'd want to have an NPC make an OOG call of "Swarmed!" before starting to use "Swarmed by X" abilities. That's because I feel the intent of Swarmed abilities is because of the OOG reality that NPCs will always be significantly outnumbered by PCs. In a perfect world, Swarmed abilities wouldn't be all that necessary, because we'd all have a sweet 1-to-1 ratio. Also, some NPC players are more conservative with abilities than others, I can see it being exceptionally difficult for PCs to discover that some NPCs are activating Swarmed abilities, without some sort of indicator. Heck, even "roleplay indicators" can vary in quality between different NPCs.

I don't think it would need to be used prior to using every Swarmed ability; just an indicator that the NPC is Swarmed, and....stuff may happen!

 

[Avaran]

I don't think it would need to be used prior to using every Swarmed ability; just an indicator that the NPC is Swarmed, and....stuff may happen!

I kinda think that you may need to use it with every call simply to avoid confusion when trying to figure out how many people trigger a swarm, especially because whether or not the ability is triggered is subject to the person being swarmed; how do you communicate the subjective decision to others consistently? It might be obvious to the person holding the card, but it isn't always readily or easily readable by PC's who are under duress (although I readily acknowledge the usefulness of stress, uncertainty, and chaos).

For example:

8 vs 1 NPC with a Swarmed Threshold of 5

NPC calls "Swarmed" (or whatever the call is) and starts using their extra per-day abilities (say is Dodge or +2 Damage).

This proves to be too much for 8 and they are pushed back.
2 people drop out, and still no new Swarmed call
And then two more people drop back very quickly (say the NPC doesn't see)
And the per-day abilities are still being used.
PC's drop back even more, so now only 2 are fighting. Say the NPC has Crit Attacks he/she hasn't used. It's supposed to be a tough fight, so they active 2 of their Crit Attacks.
How are the PC's supposed to figure out Swarmed by isn't used any more?

This is actually a very simplified description of how combat goes (especially out here in the West with our heavier usage of skirmish fighting).

---

The next issue with Swarmed:
How do you keep the Higher levels from just handling the NPCs with Swarmed by on them?
1) It's the most efficient way of dealing with them, meaning there is a higher chance of highbie rolls...
2) It also creates a situation where no low-levels are going to get a shot at loot, depending on the specifics of the circumstances.

In a large, chaotic town fight, plot can't really control where loot goes without being excessively cheesy about (I am not a fan of cheese, the plot kind or otherwise).

I feel like you can get the same general effect by using "Voice Shun all non-<thing you want to fight>" or similar with less chance for confusion.

 

[Sage of Legaia]

EDIT: I'm going to add this preface: Yes, there should be a verbal when "Swarmed by" is activated, but after the first use I don't think it should have to be said again unless enough PCs back off until below threshold and then enough join again to go above.

On that note, I think just "Swarmed, [Ability]" is enough of a verbal to know it's activated, and afterwards the NPC can just call whatever the normal call for the ability is.

8 vs 1 NPC with a Swarmed Threshold of 5

NPC calls "Swarmed" (or whatever the call is) and starts using their extra per-day abilities (say is Dodge or +2 Damage).

This proves to be too much for 8 and they are pushed back.
2 people drop out, and still no new Swarmed call
And then two more people drop back very quickly (say the NPC doesn't see)
And the per-day abilities are still being used.
PC's drop back even more, so now only 2 are fighting. Say the NPC has Crit Attacks he/she hasn't used. It's supposed to be a tough fight, so they active 2 of their Crit Attacks.
How are the PC's supposed to figure out Swarmed by isn't used any more?

This sounds more like an issue with your PCs than the "Swarmed by" ability; if the NPC can't make it clear when the "Swarmed by" ability is over, it's because you're not giving them time to assess the situation and respond. There's no reason 8 people need to be attacking 1 NPC unless you're all so bloodthirsty or glory-hungry that "Maybe I should let them handle this and tag in when I'm needed" doesn't cross your mind. Either slow down so the NPC has time to respond to PCs properly, or back off and go find something else to fight.

On a side note, if your PLOT team is sending out NPCs designed for 8 people to be fighting them at once, that sounds like the entire culture of your game has forced them into that corner; either you don't have enough NPCs for less one-sided combats (and if this is the case it's my opinion that some PCs should bite the bullet for a season or two so it's more balanced for everyone), or you regularly gang up on NPCs to the point where NOT sending out such an NPC has ceased to be an option for them. :/

How do you keep the Higher levels from just handling the NPCs with Swarmed by on them?

The unwillingness of your PCs to back out of a fight and let someone else handle it is not a problem with "Swarmed by", it's a problem with PC mentality. There's no reason you can't back away and let some low-level players handle an NPC using "Swarmed by" if the NPC isn't a threat to them outside of that one power. If the NPC is only swinging "4 Normal" until there's 5 people fighting it and then they call "Swarmed, Spellstrike Death", that's a pretty good indication that it's meant to be fighting a few low- to mid-level PCs, not 8 high-level ones. Just walk away and let them have it, and step in again if they're having trouble.

It also creates a situation where no low-levels are going to get a shot at loot, depending on the specifics of the circumstances.

Again, this sounds like a problem with PC mentality. There's no reason outside of greed you can't make a communal loot pot of some size and divvy it out at the end. We do it basically every single event at least once, and yeah, some people keep some loot for themselves, but it ensures that everyone gets something, even if it's only a couple of potions or some silver.

Honestly, reading your post again, I can't see a single problem you noted with "Swarmed by" that couldn't be better solved by a little altruism and camaraderie on the part of the PCs. :/ Don't gang up on people 5+-on-1, let the low-levels have their shot at the limelight, and share some treasure after a big fight.

 

[Avaran]

I'm not saying that these things happen 100% of the time. But these things happen because nobody can plan for everything; sometimes just the way a fight shakes out, these things happen. Sometimes if the event is scaled to be more difficult, and there's something on the line that the characters care about, these things will happen. It doesn't happen all of the time, in every situation at every event.

The point is, it is the responsibility of the rules writers to consider the ever-present Lowest Common Denominator™ (this is in part why the ARB is over 100 pages long, and is in part why the rules are even being re-worked - because there is this weird thought that they are too hard to learn and too complicated for new players). They've streamlined effect groups, made all of the calls for effect group spell incants the same, taken away the PTD flavor of the game - I could go on, but this isn't the point.

The point is, no matter how much you hope for the best, you have to plan for the worst, intentional or not.

Honestly, reading your post again, I can't see a single problem you noted with "Swarmed by" that couldn't be better solved by a little altruism and camaraderie on the part of the PCs. :/ Don't gang up on people 5+-on-1, let the low-levels have their shot at the limelight, and share some treasure after a big fight.

I know this may come as a shock to you, but not every character gets along with their fellow characters (just like not every person gets along with one another). Lots of people are fine with this, some are not. As a plot person, I never stepped in and told players that their characters need to be nice to each other. I think that's a means of limiting not only character grow and development, but also game world creativity.

Did you know, we have some characters out here that are openly racist? They are rude in-character to other characters, and sometimes say and do some pretty terrible things - like walking away from someone who is dead on the field of battle even though they could have saved them; or just being rude to their face - 'We don't like your kind here, HUMAN...get lost!'

Where do you draw the line?

Sure, we can expect players to be kind to each other on an OOG level, but we cannot and should not dictate in-game character behaviors through rules.