[.11] Riposting Strike

Gilwing

Baron
Alliance Logistics
One of my mantras for game design, is you have to assume people can do a thing even if you think it is hard. You will face the person who can do it, then you will face the team of them. This reality should be designed for as if everyone can do a thing, or else you write the rule so no one can do a thing. That way when people excel at playing with the toys you designed you do not have to cry because you never thought someone would be that good.

Joe Siegel
So, so well put...specially the "team" part.
 

Ruki

Artisan
I may have missed it but....does Riposting Strike work with Enchanting Strike? And if it does...does it still use the spell?
 

Manflesh

Artisan
I may have missed it but....does Riposting Strike work with Enchanting Strike? And if it does...does it still use the spell?
Enchanting Strike is a Stealth Skill, so it's valid per the wording of Riposting Strike.

Per the wording of Riposting Strike, the offensive skill is not used up, yet it says nothing about a spell slot used in conjunction with it. Now Enchanting Strike explicitly says you can Mediate back a blown spell. I'm curious if that applies to a Riposting Strike version too.
 

Polare

Count
Alliance Rules
Moderator
Seattle Staff
To clarify many of these questions, we would like to update the Riposting Strike skill as follows:

Current text:
Riposting Strike [Riposte] - 4 XP (Fighter, Rogue, or Scout), 30 XP in either Martial Skills or Rogue Skills (calculated separately) per purchase, Daily - the character may, once per Logistics period per purchase after using any Dodge, Parry, or Evade skill, immediately use any offensive per-day Martial or Stealth skill known and available without using a charge of that skill, ignoring any positioning requirement.

New text:
Riposting Strike [Riposte] - 4 XP (Fighter, Rogue, or Scout), 30 XP in either Martial Skills or Rogue Skills (calculated separately) per purchase, Daily - the character may, once per Logistics period per purchase after using any Dodge, Parry, or Evade skill, immediately make a single weapon swing. When using this swing, positioning requirements may be ignored. Any offensive skills or spells used from memory during this attack are not expended, but must have at least a single use available at the time of Riposting. Any Rituals used during this attack are expended.
 

Tantarus

Squire
@Polare I still cant tell if this means I can riposte after using a spell parry, as it uses a parry skill?
Also Does "skill" include racial such as hobling racial evade?
 

Polare

Count
Alliance Rules
Moderator
Seattle Staff
Spell Parry: No, it is not allowed to Riposte afterwards. Sorry.

"Evade" covers any source of "Evade", whether that's from a Skill Store, Racial Evade, or the "Evade" skill itself.
 

Spaz

Newbie
Chicago Staff
From a marshal perspective, why does the player not need to declare "riposte" ?
(attack)blah
<Parry><Riposte><Shattering/Disarm strike>

This would make it known that you are consuming a Riposte, and not consuming a shattering/disarm strike from your battlecard. Something I imagine that while on the honor system, marshals still keep track of the big ticket items such as Doom and Eviscerate. Also helping the player keep track as they remind themselves that they used Riposte, and not their actual unused skills.

Just after reading everything about riposte, there has been a lot of "you don't need to declare use of riposte, but no explanation of why, and was curious because to me it makes sense that a player should.
 

Draven

Count
Seattle Staff
Marshal
Mechanically speaking, why?
Mechanically speaking, Riposte triggers after you use a P/E/D to defend yourself. Spell Parry is not Parry, and consumes a Parry to activate. While there are obvious similarities, they are not the same.
 

mythic

Knight
Owner
Calgary Staff
From a marshal perspective, why does the player not need to declare "riposte" ?
(attack)blah
<Parry><Riposte><Shattering/Disarm strike
For our playtest we will be asking players to declare it. It just makes sense. I understand the concept is to eliminate "verbal soup" on the field, but I agree with you that for both a player and marshal perspective, it's good to know what has been thrown around the field.
 

Draven

Count
Seattle Staff
Marshal
I disagree with the necessity to declare Riposte; I hate to say it, but if a player has a genuine concern about how I tossed out four Eviscerates, they can ask me or a Marshal after the fight.

It’s the same reason people don’t need to declare Activate Dodge to represent a skill store, or declare Swarm when Swarmed by 4. The effect matters, the source less so.
 

Alkalin3

Administrator
Chief Technology Officer
South Michigan Staff
Marshal
There's a bunch of new skills that aren't declared by name. Instead you just see them happening and you respond. It's not really important to me how some guy is swinging a large damage number at you, rather just that you know how to handle the large number. So here a new player doesn't have to learn what the call "Riposte" does. Especially since it doesn't really do anything relative to the player dealing with the blow.

I actually think coming from 1.3 to 2.0 calling Riposte in between might confuse players because of what's ingrained in them with 1.3.
 

Gilwing

Baron
Alliance Logistics
There's a bunch of new skills that aren't declared by name. Instead you just see them happening and you respond. It's not really important to me how some guy is swinging a large damage number at you, rather just that you know how to handle the large number. So here a new player doesn't have to learn what the call "Riposte" does. Especially since it doesn't really do anything relative to the player dealing with the blow.

I actually think coming from 1.3 to 2.0 calling Riposte in between might confuse players because of what's ingrained in them with 1.3.
The issue is correcting incorrect actions. Not saying, catching cheaters but correcting some one that might think they are doing something allowed. If I'm never told that I'm playing it incorrectly, I won't know.
It's also a great way to help out new players.
Wouldn't the "verbal soup" also slow down combat as it will take time to say it and won't be doing other actions
 

Draven

Count
Seattle Staff
Marshal
The issue is correcting incorrect actions. Not saying, catching cheaters but correcting some one that might think they are doing something allowed. If I'm never told that I'm playing it incorrectly, I won't know.
It's also a great way to help out new players.
Wouldn't the "verbal soup" also slow down combat as it will take time to say it and won't be doing other actions
I can’t imagine a situation where someone can accidentally use Riposte illegally that would be immediately apparent, outside of using an expended attack instead of an available one, and unless you were tracking someone else’s card, I don’t think they’d be called on it (we’re still an honor system game, after all).

As for verbal soup slowing down combat, it doesn’t do so in an effective manner. It muddles combat, it doesn’t improve it.

I’m not sure how it would help new players, either.
 

Spaz

Newbie
Chicago Staff
However, because Riposte allows you to [a] use a skill for free & {b} ignore position requirements. Declaring riposte also allows the NPC/player that you can in-fact hit with an assassinate head on, where normally you couldn't. Riposte has specific advantages in this regard as it lets you ignore other rules. If players don't know you are using Riposte, then they may slow or stop combat to debate the call being valid. Which while quickly explained as riposte, is completely unnecessary if Riposte is called during the attack.

As a new player, explaining any skill will take time and riposte is no different. But these are maneuvers that have certain rules, and riposte lets you not follow some of those maneuver's rules - but you/marshall don't actually know when another player is using it correctly or not will be much more of a detriment than the advantage of not having "verbal soup"

Combat is fast, more often than not; and it should be clearly understood by all (new players, veteran players, and staff) what exactly is happening; the difficulty is keeping up with it and not the guessing or assuming what is going on.

Riposte, as a combat maneuver is considered an uncontested counter attack because the offender has let them self be opened up by a failed attack against you. it is very obvious and takes training to do well (hence why we would need to spend XP on it) Keeping in mind that we still call out activates for a number of things as well as verbally declare/role play. So while yes, we call a lot of things, Riposte is just another thing to add to that list. However it has battle card effecting, and mechanic ignoring properties which should be announced - just like everything else that does those things. So i am not understanding why this specific action doesn't need to be when other stuff is.
 

Draven

Count
Seattle Staff
Marshal
However, because Riposte allows you to [a] use a skill for free & {b} ignore position requirements. Declaring riposte also allows the NPC/player that you can in-fact hit with an assassinate head on, where normally you couldn't. Riposte has specific advantages in this regard as it lets you ignore other rules. If players don't know you are using Riposte, then they may slow or stop combat to debate the call being valid. Which while quickly explained as riposte, is completely unnecessary if Riposte is called during the attack.
I can also do this with Opportunistic Attack and Surprise Attack, neither of which require a verbal.

Everyone knows that Rogues cannot deliver their primary forms of offense from the front; this is standard gameplay Day One. Do we really want to imply that the guy who's dropping special abilities suddenly forgot that they have back requirements, normally? Because here's what's going to happen.

Player 1: 500 Body!
Player 2: Evade! 50 Assassinate!
Player 1: Hold up, you know you can't do that normally right?
Player 2: Yeah, I know how to play my card, man. Why are we stopping?
Player 1: Sorry, just had to check.

That only happened because we're talking about assuming that someone is playing their card wrong. Why are we making that assumption with -basic character skills-? That's insulting when you're the Rogue player. Sure, mistakes happen, but not with such frequency that we need this verbal.
 

Draven

Count
Seattle Staff
Marshal
To add to this, because man does this matter to me as a marshal and as someone invested in the enjoyment of others, is it typical for players who are suspected of errant play to be effectively called out on the field in other chapters? Because in Seattle, we try real hard to do those checks discreetly off to the side after the battle is over. Most of the time, I get an answer like, "I got this weird Empowerment" or "Oh crap, I'm sorry, I didn't know and it won't happen again." And nobody feels publicly called out.

If we're really going to call Holds over people who are suspected of errant play despite there being multiple ways of legally doing the effect in question, I'm more concerned about the culture, and not the rule.
 

Tantarus

Squire
If I am getting dropped by an assassinate to the front. I am very likely to make sure the person doing it is playing correct. New people come and NPC a lot and struggle with skills there first few games after all. As well as everyone re learning the system after 2.0. I think checking is fine if not encouraged when you think a skill was used wrong.
 

Spaz

Newbie
Chicago Staff
I can also do this with Opportunistic Attack and Surprise Attack, neither of which require a verbal.
I also think those things should be called, not surprising that i haven't read them yet as they are likely stealth skills.

That only happened because we're talking about assuming that someone is playing their card wrong. Why are we making that assumption with -basic character skills-? That's insulting when you're the Rogue player. Sure, mistakes happen, but not with such frequency that we need this verbal.
Actually my perspective has been the game is fairly involved and intense and has specific rules and then other rules that allows you to not follow those rules. Rules which you don't need to declare that you are using. This is the entire premise of the "Strike" verbal. to inform when you are following one set of rules, or another set of rules. So you are either doing it right, or your doing it wrong - new players should be able to tell the difference without making assumptions about people or the game.

The rules should be easily understood by _new_ players. I have no doubts of veteran players whom are already marshals and owners (which seem to be the bulk of people posting to these forums) grasping them and using them as written without slowing for a beat. Having a lot of rules, which sometimes have to be followed and sometimes dont, and then all number of things which can be augmented by various forms of magic. Needless to say it is involved, but verbals help keep it flowing smoothly and easily understood by everyone regardless of experience or position.
 
Top