Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

[SWADE v4] Various small issues

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    I know there's been a lot of discussion already, but is there an argument against Initiate Grapple Opposed Athletics Only, Maintain/Break Free Opposed Athletics Or Strength -2?

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Locnar View Post
      Brainstorming here: It's always Athletics to start a grapple, resisted by Athletics. You can use strength to break out. The only problem with this is you can easily keep a foe locked down by continuing to grapple them even if you have very little chance of holding them. So....what if you got a free chance to break out using Str -2 right after the grapple is successful? That way if a house cat Grapples a Dragon the Dragon may immediately try to shrug it off for free? I haven't thought all of this through but I thought I'd throw it out there.
      A house cat can't grapple a dragon because of the size difference. The rules already cover that.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Oneiros View Post

        A house cat can't grapple a dragon because of the size difference. The rules already cover that.
        Well that was probably a bad example, I more meant something with a high athletics but much lower strength.

        Comment


        • #19
          I think the root problem is that the Grapple action combines a couple of different things into a single roll. There's the initial grabbing onto the target, then there's trying to apply the hold to Entangle or Bind them. The first is relatively easy for a skilled attacker regardless of the target's Strength, and only using opposed Athletics makes sense. The latter is where making it a single roll becomes problematic, and I think is what Locnar was trying to address with his suggestion.

          A 6-year old can "grapple" me in the common language usage of the word. But they aren't going to be able to "Bind" me. "Entangle" isn't even likely, as I could still move with a small child grabbing my leg or arm. I'd be Distracted at best.

          Perhaps the rule should just be that it's not possible to get a "Bound" result on a target that's more than, say, two steps above the attacker in Strength?

          This echoes the existing rule of an attacker not being able to grapple a target more than 2 Sizes larger than itself. And it handles Super Strength characters fighting each other. Some exceptions may apply, at the GM's discretion, as usual (A Giant Worm might be able to Bind a Dragon by the nature of it's body shape. Snake-like, multi-limb, tentacled creatures, etc. could have a Special Ability that allows Binding creatures 4 steps above them in Strength.)

          And if it wasn't clear, I still think just using opposed Athletics for the initial action, then Athletics or Strength -2 for maintaining/breaking free is the way to go.
          Last edited by Oneiros; 01-18-2019, 09:13 PM.

          Comment


          • #20
            First Strike needs a revisitation. The full wording on page 42 says whenever an enemy moves within reach, but the summary on page 60 uses the word "adjacent".

            Comment


            • #21
              First Strike: Fixed.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Locnar View Post
                Well that was probably a bad example, I more meant something with a high athletics but much lower strength.
                Think about Black Widow trying to wrestle with The Hulk.
                She'll use her skill and agility to wrap him up, keep him off balance, and generally grapple successfully. Then the Hulk will regain his mental balance, flex his absurd muscles, and take control of the grapple.
                Reverse that to The Hulk trying to wrestle Black Widow - until he gets a grip on her, his ridiculous strength is irrelevant. It's a question of how well she can dodge his attempts to grab her.

                This is why I think Brute Strength shouldn't be allowed before the initial grapple roll. Especially with the "two Size" rule already preventing half-folk from grappling ogres.
                I hope you find the above post useful. And not insulting, because I was trying to be helpful, not insulting; being a pedantic jerk, that isn't always clear.

                Comment


                • DoctorBoson
                  DoctorBoson commented
                  Editing a comment
                  I'd disagree with the first part of this. I think Black Widow can absolutely Test the Hulk with her Athletics—keeping him off-balance (Vulnerable), confusing him (Distracted), "twisting him up" (Shaken), and so forth—but there is no situation in which Widow could Entangle or Bind the green goliath. Hulk breaking free of such a "grapple" would absolutely not require enough effort to be considered an action; if she tried to use joint locks or pin him, she would need a miracle (or at least a very lucky roll) to overcome his raw 100+ tons of muscle strength to force him to spend an action to move again.

                  The second half is totally fine, though—Hulk shouldn't be able to "grapple" with Brute Strength, that's an Athletics vs Athletics roll for him to actually land a grab.

                • Oneiros
                  Oneiros commented
                  Editing a comment
                  You both pretty much re-iterated my points in my last post. Even leaving super strength aside, I don't think a d6 Str human would be able to Bind a d12 Str human. My suggestion is to disallow "Bound" as a result if the defender's Str is more than 2 steps above the attacker's Str, same as a Grapple can't be initiated by a creature 2 sizes smaller than the target.

              • #23
                Okay. While this may not be perfect (the Hulk will shrug off Widow, I agree), it does bug me that you actively grapple with Strength...I think it should be Athletics...you're trying to pin, hold someone, and keep them from moving...which requires more than just brute strength. Breaking free stays as-is, and is an action. The Hulk will get a raise and be rid of Distracted and Vulnerable right away, but will be out an action. That feels like a real edge case though and maybe in Supers we can address that kind of disparity as a free action.

                For now though, I want to go with removing the Brute Strength paragraph from Grappling for 4.1. Let's play with that a while and we'll see how it's going in a week or two. That lets us keep focused on producing everything else and gets us a little bit closer to what we're all looking for.

                Thanks!

                Comment


                • mattprice516
                  mattprice516 commented
                  Editing a comment
                  That's definitely closer, yeah. The new rules do mean that IF something big manages to grab something smaller, it is nigh-impossible for the small fella to break out since he's rolling his normal-range Str or Athletics vs d12+8 or whatever, so he's pretty much dead.

                  Not sure if that's a "bug" or a "feature" since it honestly does seem fairly realistic (and with "swat" Dragons are super lethal without grappling anyway), but figured I'd mention it.

              • #24
                I think this is a workable solution. Maybe The Supers companion might need some extra rule, but it usually does for a bunch of things anyway.

                Comment


                • #25
                  Burrowing: I have always thought that this thing was WAY overpowered for the requirements (Novice) and PP cost. Its a total sneak attack / cheap invis + invulnerability power. I do like in this version a little bit better since they nerfed how far you can move---last version you could like insta-teleport 20 inches or something, go invis/Invulnerable then sneak attack. Crazy, wicked powerful.

                  IMO, Still ultra powerful but better than deluxe. I will probably nerf it to 2 PP.

                  Comment


                  • #26
                    Originally posted by PEGShane View Post
                    Rerolls: Leaving that one too. If you succeed and want to try for a raise, you get one free "dedicated Benny", essentially.
                    Ah, so where an ability states 'one free reroll' that's a per-session thing? I think that's where I was getting confused, as if that is the case then it makes a lot more sense.

                    Comment


                    • DoctorBoson
                      DoctorBoson commented
                      Editing a comment
                      Oh, if that's the case that's very different. It should be explicit; that makes a lot more sense.
                  Working...
                  X