[.11] Riposte is Weird and Probably Breaks Intentions

Draven

Count
Seattle Staff
Marshal
Perception: Riposting Strike is about 75% a Stealth skill that counts towards Martial XP.

Riposte (I’m gonna call it that) is a cool skill. I like it. But it’s a Stealth skill trying to masquerade as a Martial skill. It’s run away from home in Stealthsville and it has shunned its fellow Stealthians. Martialopolis has welcomed it, but it always knows it doesn’t truly belong.

Argument: Riposte is a single skill designed to work for two archetypes, the Rogue and the Fighter, because that’s what Riposte’s ancestors did. But New Riposte is a different person in a new era, and Stealth skills and Martial skills have been very nearly segregated except for this one weird exception.

It’s time for the Only Child to have a sibling.

Why? Let’s consider this.

1) The no-position advantage clearly makes it an incentive for Stealth characters.

2) It can be triggered off three skills, two of which are Stealth based.

3) Rogues gain a weird advantage to having two Recharge Prowess rituals, despite not being actual hybrids.

4) Rogues should have the ability to gain XP pre-requisites off of a skill that is clearly more designed for Stealth characters than Martial Characters.

Proposition:

The idea of Similar But Different skills is nothing new, not even in .11. To maintain consistency, we should follow in the vein of the Stun Limb change and give Riposte A(triggers off Evade and Dodge, no position required) to Rogues, and Riposte B (triggers off Parry and, IMO, Intercept) to Fighters.

Renaming them wouldn’t be hard (I actually propose Riposting Strike for Fighters and Cunning Feint for Rogue, but the name isn’t important).

Scouts wouldn’t care, they’d qualify for both. Fighters wouldn’t care outside of maybe wanting to get Intercept. Rogues would get the Stealth XP they deserve.

I don’t think this weirdness is something that was actually intended. I feel that splitting makes the rules and character development much cleaner.
 
Except, you can Intercept, call a defence, and then Riposte. For example, Intercept, Evade (Riposte), Eviscerate is probably gonna be some high level plays. Perhaps, making a General Combat section is the way to go, maybe lumping it in with weapons or something? I dunno. I've had 2 sessions in total, but I love absorbing rule books. Maybe my limited experience makes me not fully understand the practical uses of the skill. But I understand how you feel that it kinda fits both roles.

Anyways, just my two cents.
 

MaxIrons

Squire
Oregon Staff
Marshal
Hmmm... To do it the way you're proposing Evan, you'd need to write it as such (if I'm understanding the intent).

Riposting Strike [Riposte] - 4 XP (Fighter), 30 XP in Martial Skills, Daily - the character may, once per Logistics period per purchase after using any Parry, or Intercept skill, immediately use any offensive per-day Martial skill known and available without using a charge of that skill. This skill replaces Riposte, removing a common source of Holds on the field and giving some interesting flexibility where the character may (a) choose something more useful/applicable for the situation and (b) redirect towards an enemy who may be more susceptible to an attack. You may use a single Riposting Strike or a single Cunning Feint, but not both, in response to an attack where Parry or Intercept was used.

Cunning Feint [Riposte] - 4 XP (Rogue), 30 XP in Rogue Skills per purchase, Daily - the character may, once per Logistics period per purchase after using any Dodge, or Evade skill, immediately use any offensive per-day Stealth skill known and available without using a charge of that skill, ignoring any positioning requirement. This skill replaces Riposte, removing a common source of Holds on the field and giving some interesting flexibility where the character may (a) choose something more useful/applicable for the situation and (b) redirect towards an enemy who may be more susceptible to an attack. You may use a single Riposting Strike or a single Cunning Feint, but not both, in response to an attack where Dodge or Evade was used.
 
Last edited:

Draven

Count
Seattle Staff
Marshal

MaxIrons

Squire
Oregon Staff
Marshal
I like the two flavors of it as well - Fighters can protect, either by parrying a weapon attack, or taking the attack on the chin, and then they strike back. Rogues can't protect someone else, but are very difficult to hit, then they punish you for trying.
 

Alkalin3

Administrator
Chief Technology Officer
South Michigan Staff
Marshal
Hmmm... To do it the way you're proposing Evan, you'd need to write it as such (if I'm understanding the intent).

Riposting Strike [Riposte] - 4 XP (Fighter), 30 XP in Martial Skills, Daily - the character may, once per Logistics period per purchase after using any Parry, or Intercept skill, immediately use any offensive per-day Martial skill known and available without using a charge of that skill. This skill replaces Riposte, removing a common source of Holds on the field and giving some interesting flexibility where the character may (a) choose something more useful/applicable for the situation and (b) redirect towards an enemy who may be more susceptible to an attack. In the case where both Riposting Strike and Cunning Feint could both be used, dodging an intercepted attack for example, you may use one or the other, but not both.

Cunning Feint [Riposte] - 4 XP (Rogue), 30 XP in Rogue Skills per purchase, Daily - the character may, once per Logistics period per purchase after using any Dodge, or Evade skill, immediately use any offensive per-day Stealth skill known and available without using a charge of that skill, ignoring any positioning requirement. This skill replaces Riposte, removing a common source of Holds on the field and giving some interesting flexibility where the character may (a) choose something more useful/applicable for the situation and (b) redirect towards an enemy who may be more susceptible to an attack. In the case where both Riposting Strike and Cunning Feint could both be used, dodging an intercepted attack for example, you may use one or the other, but not both.
I think if we were to go this route, I'd expect to see the Stealth Skill version of this cost more. Since you get the added benefit of ignoring position requirements. Fighters don't get a benefit there (their benefit was that this was a martial skill)

Maybe 6 per? Or leave the cost and adjust it to 1 every 45.
 

Draven

Count
Seattle Staff
Marshal
I’d be okay with it costing 6 XP. I don’t think very highly of Doom Blow (since it’s a carrier that needs to go through armor), but smacking back with a high-strength Assassinate, or a CC skill would be pretty potent.
 

MaxIrons

Squire
Oregon Staff
Marshal
I think if we were to go this route, I'd expect to see the Stealth Skill version of this cost more. Since you get the added benefit of ignoring position requirements. Fighters don't get a benefit there (their benefit was that this was a martial skill)

Maybe 6 per? Or leave the cost and adjust it to 1 every 45.
Maybe, but I think that the fighter benefit of being able to Reposting Strike when someone near them is attacked balances out against the self only but no positioning of Cunning Feint. Scouts can pay more here to pick and choose how to respond. (Higher flexibility, but higher cost to be flexible. )
 

Alkalin3

Administrator
Chief Technology Officer
South Michigan Staff
Marshal
I disagree. I think benefit to using Evade as a trigger is equal or better to being able to use intercept (or call a second defense). So Rouge's version of the skill still strikes me as better for everyone but an archer.

The more I think through it, I'd probably really not want intercept as a trigger. (I love the idea) But, I find the scenario where you'd call a parry after the intercept confusing? Do you trigger 2 Riposting Strikes from one hit? I guess you could spell that out. But, that's potentionally a lot to say and do after you use a single intercept.
 
Last edited:

Draven

Count
Seattle Staff
Marshal
I disagree. I think benefit to using Evade as a trigger is equal or better to being able to use intercept (or call a second defense). So Rouge's version of the skill still strikes me as better for everyone but an archer.

The more I think through it, I'd probably really not want intercept as a trigger. (I love the idea) But, I find the scenario where you'd call a parry after the intercept confusing? Do you trigger 2 Riposting Strikes from one hit? I guess you could spell that out. But, that's potentionally a lot to say and do after you use a single intercept.
Regarding the scenario you find confusing, it’s already legal to call Parry/Dodge to intercept and then avoid an attack like a Spellstrike or a Massive attack.
 

Alkalin3

Administrator
Chief Technology Officer
South Michigan Staff
Marshal
Regarding the scenario you find confusing, it’s already legal to call Parry/Dodge to intercept and then avoid an attack like a Spellstrike or a Massive attack.
To be clear. I think I could handle doing it. But, 2.0 has made a lot of strides to make it easier for everyone to play. And I think calling parry dodge is manageable for most. Versus calling intercept, Parry, 500 Normal, 500 Normal doubles the length of that chain. Which I think would be harder.

It's not about just saying stuff. To me it's about saying stuff and trying to swing twice quickly.
 
Last edited:

Draven

Count
Seattle Staff
Marshal
To be clear. I think I could handle doing it. But, 2.0 has made a lot of strides to make it easier for everyone to play. And I think calling parry dodge is manageable for most. Versus calling intercept, Parry, 500 Normal, 500 Normal doubles the length of that chain. Which I think would be harder.

It's not about just saying stuff. To me it's about saying stuff and trying to swing twice quickly.
Nothing in my proposition requires that Fighters would need to use Intercept and Parry, only Intercept OR Parry. I’m not even sure why that’s part of the conversation, tbh.
 

MaxIrons

Squire
Oregon Staff
Marshal
Edited the above to use this verbiage at the end.

"You may use a single Riposting Strike or a single Cunning Feint, but not both, in response to an attack where Parry or Intercept (Dodge or Evade) was used."

Also, you should never need to Intercept then Parry, as if it is able to be Parried, you can just use the Parry instead of the intercept. The above verbiage removes the ability to "blow" two fighter skills to call double Riposting Strikes off a single attack to close that particular loophole. The possibility of Intercept then Dodge or Evade would remain, with the player able to choose any one offensive skill use, whether Martial or Stealth, that is still available to the player to use.

I understand we disagree with the idea that evade as a trigger for the returning strike is better than intercept. I think it's fine (for these proposed skills), and that the complaint is more fundamentally about evade just being better than intercept generally speaking. It's also 50% more expensive for its base class to get, which is why I say it evens out in the end. An alternative thought about it is that Mettle could be added/replace Intercept for Riposting Strike.
 

Draven

Count
Seattle Staff
Marshal
Edited the above to use this verbiage at the end.

"You may use a single Riposting Strike or a single Cunning Feint, but not both, in response to an attack where Parry or Intercept (Dodge or Evade) was used."

Also, you should never need to Intercept then Parry, as if it is able to be Parried, you can just use the Parry instead of the intercept. The above verbiage removes the ability to "blow" two fighter skills to call double Riposting Strikes off a single attack to close that particular loophole. The possibility of Intercept then Dodge or Evade would remain, with the player able to choose any one offensive skill use, whether Martial or Stealth, that is still available to the player to use.

I understand we disagree with the idea that evade as a trigger for the returning strike is better than intercept. I think it's fine (for these proposed skills), and that the complaint is more fundamentally about evade just being better than intercept generally speaking. It's also 50% more expensive for its base class to get, which is why I say it evens out in the end. An alternative thought about it is that Mettle could be added/replace Intercept for Riposting Strike.
I feel Intercept is better, purely for the theme of rewarding fighters for being protectors. Additionally, there are times you can’t activate Mettle (less than 20 Body), so it doesn’t feel fair for it to be one of the necessary conditions. If it was added as a third trigger for Fighters? That’s cool.
 

Tantarus

Knight
This change is harmful to hoblings and scavengers, cant say I am a fan. Also makes scouts more to manage where as now they can use riposte a lot simpler with any of there defends from either side of the class.
 

Draven

Count
Seattle Staff
Marshal
This change is harmful to hoblings and scavengers, cant say I am a fan. Also makes scouts more to manage where as now they can use riposte a lot simpler with any of there defends from either side of the class.
I suspect that Hobling/Kyn Fighters with their Racial Evade will somehow find an advantage in the ability not tied to its unique synergy with a class skill. :p

Somehow.

People who want to play the Hybrid game are already signing up for some extra skill management. And, frankly, it probably won’t be that hard. People who want to use the proposed version probably won’t be confused using it.
 

MondayMcGee

Scholar
San Francisco Staff
I get where you are going with this, but I’m not certain personally that the added complexity is worth the benefit. I agree that it makes a lot of sense as a stealth skill — I’d rather just see it count for both stealth or martial.
 

Draven

Count
Seattle Staff
Marshal
I get where you are going with this, but I’m not certain personally that the added complexity is worth the benefit. I agree that it makes a lot of sense as a stealth skill — I’d rather just see it count for both stealth or martial.
Can you explain how the complexity it would add is somehow greater than the other changes that have already been done?

Actually, I’m going to posit that in actual application, it’s simpler. Removing skills that “crossover” will allow players to more neatly plan their character development. It will remove unexpected errors and weirdness, such as

1) A newer rogue player who picks up Riposte and factors the XP into his build planning, only to find out it doesn’t qualify

2) A newer Scout player who buys 20 XP in stealth and 10 XP in martial and assumes he qualifies

3) A Rogue player who pseudohybridizes by buying multiple Ripostes for Stealth skills and picks up Eviscerate because why not pick up top end fighter skills that you shouldn’t actually qualify for, because you’re actually a Rogue.

#3 doesn’t sound like a big deal, but consider the implication from a thematic perspective: Riposte, in a sense, gives Rogues a discount on Fighter skills by counting as Martial XP while remaining relatively cheap. That’s a weird shortcut that simply shouldn’t exist. It encourages pseudohybridization without actually having to pay a real versatility tax that is paid by hybrid classes.

Splitting it into two similar yet different skills wouldn’t be complicated at all.
 

Draven

Count
Seattle Staff
Marshal
The fighter one should work off Mettle and Parry, not Intercept. Also makes it much more hybrid friendly.
How is Mettle better for hybrids than Intercept? Not a criticism, just inquiring.
 
Top