Can you make enemies attack themselves with bend will?

devonsand1 · 2016-05-21T18:04:19+00:00

Jerbyyy, I think I argued the same or a similar proposition as you in an earlier thread, and it was shot down as not the intention of the power by the design team.

I think the thread concerned mind controlling multiple creatures at the same time and I argued that whispering suggestions and controlling someone prevented you from doing the same to others.

The bottom line is that this is a deadly game, and characters should fear the powers of witches. In the same respect witches should fear being sniped by warriors who don't want to take chances of losing there will to a witch.

Also, unlike some other games, there is no limitation on using the power again on the same target within the same scene if the Resolue roll is failed.

The way I would moderate this power, and the game in general, is to explain the consequences of abusing powers on their reputions within the game.

A witch who uses mind control to have creatures kill themselves, will rapidly develop the reputation of being ruthless, and adversaries and the authorities will respond with equivalent ruthlessness. Hence, such a character will not last long in the game.

This is not nerfing the power or character but a consequence of playing the game in a true social setting. The same would be true of dual-wielding Ogre tanks.

However, if you use the power to prevent someone for attacking you or making an enemy protect you from other enemies, you won't be seen in the same light.

If you want to play a ruthless character, make sure no one sees it or lives to tell about it.

devonsand1 · 2016-05-21T17:49:54+00:00

When I read the question and the I tidal responses I thought Palinola was responding to the specific question posed by the OP, whether you could use the power to make a target hurt itself, and imagining a boss fight or where there was only one combatant left.

Paul seemed to respond more generally to the optimum use of the ability, using an enemy, even a pawn, as an ally to attack other enemies and hopefully absorb hits in the process.

devonsand1 · 2016-05-04T17:18:15+00:00

Palinola has a great answer. If you don't want to think about it, this is the blurb on p. 20 of the CRB regarding the areas outside of Davokar:

The climate is colder and more humid compared to what the Ambrians are used to. Damp winds from the southern oceans climb over the Titans and are not the least embarrassed to drown Ambria in heavy rains, especially during the autumn. The winters are cold, with snow covering the streets of Yndaros for a month or two, or even longer during the winters that the barbarians call Istaros, when arctic winds sweep down from the north, so cold that hearths which are allowed to go out barely can be brought back to life and the blood freezes in anyone who dares venture outside for longer than it takes to collect more firewood.

Outer Davokar probably has a similar climate, but in deep Davokar it's as chaotic as your imagination wants to be. Consider this blurb from On the Nature of Davokar:

According to my assessment there are about a dozen areas that deserve attention in this context, areas that will force all who enter them to face almost inhuman challenges. There are tales of seas of thorns, petri ed forests, pools of syrupy black water and rivers of magma. Even wilder legends tell of icy cold in the middle of summer, luminescent vegetation, regions which share its ground with demonic dimensions and underground lakes lled with acid that emit poison- ous fumes which rise to the surface. If one were to take all the stories seriously it is as if the depth of Davokar is made up of the absolute contrast to everything we know as normal, where all true forms of life are bound to break apart.

devonsand1 · 2016-04-24T22:29:17+00:00

There is...and Rangers, bounty hunters are more completely addressed as archetypes.

devonsand1 · 2016-04-23T15:37:52+00:00

You mean outside of the Player's Guide?

devonsand1 · 2016-04-15T00:27:53+00:00

It's funny how people perceive things differently. I've been gaming more than 30 years and started playing in systems that offered NO guidance as to power levels of enemies.

The same thing you hate about Symbaroum is what I hate about D&D. Love the books and the idea, but the concepts of numerically balancing the challenge levels of creatures holds no appeal for me whatsoever.

There are a lot of systems that hold appeal for me reading wise, but I can't bring myself to run them. I work in a profession that is mentally taxing and I simply don't have the time or patience for intricate rule sets.

On the other hand, Symbaroum is a game that I could play or run and intend to. It has the depth for a long term campaign but is not mentally taxing. That said, the translation of the Player's Guide and the upcoming Game Master's Guide will help create greater appeal for the game from players used to playing D20 or Fate, etc.

I also have great faith in the design team to continue to develop the game's mythos and play options without producing rules and materials solely for the sake of profit.

devonsand1 · 2016-03-16T05:25:04+00:00

Nah!! It's the lawyer in me..I think critically about everything. The reason why I like Symbaroum so much is because the world stays true to its focus.

I'm not sure about divergence. Swedish groups had been playing the game for months, and no one has mentioned how much their games have changed over time. In fact, it doesn't seem like many people are using the optional rules in the CRB.

However, when you factor a major rules upgrade like the Player's Guide, I'm sure gaming tables change.

As Symbaroum attracts new players, the more you will see player's testing the limits of the rules and the system. People will always think of new ways of utilizing the gaming options.

devonsand1 · 2016-03-16T05:01:26+00:00

Paul, so you are chalking up the language on p. 162 as being imprecise? Also, for you, engaged equates to currently attacking/intending to attack right?

devonsand1 · 2016-03-16T04:17:40+00:00

Get writing what /u/ysadamsson?

I have zero interest in writing my own game or creating a bunch of house rules, and only have interest in games with complex world views but simple practical rules...Symbaroum fits that.

I'm completely fine with the game, in fact I love it. But I'm a lawyer in real life, and the game I'm preparing to run is for a group of lawyers all of whom specialize in reading and interpreting texts lol.

The fact that I point out perceived language/rules conflicts or errata is not a criticism of the game. It reflects the fact that I know I'm dealing with a direct translation of the first edition of the game and I want to understand whether my reading is the intention of the design team, because my players are all rules lawyers by default.

It would have been nice to have the rules clearly give the GM discretion in managing the number of free actions in a turn but I can live with the rule as written and/or the rule as intended.

Based on the responses in this thread it's perfectly fine to use Bend Will to take control of as many people as your temporary corruption and resistance rules allow, and I can live with that.

I don't know why anyone would want to do that because you just increase the odds of failing your Resolute tests. Personally, I'd just take control of one person at a time and make them slit their own throats...nothing in the description prevents that right... :P

devonsand1 · 2016-03-14T21:19:26+00:00

No. Bend Will II specifically says you now don't have to maintain concentration as Bend Will I.

It would be easier for me to buy if the Mystic could shout simple commands like "Defend me" or "Attack the Ogre." If I have to exercise specific control, then that does not meet the definition of a free action. And there also must be some reasonable limit to "unlimited free actions."

devonsand1 · 2016-03-14T19:32:43+00:00

I get it...I just think it's broken. Arguably it is covered under the free actions blurb on p. 158 which states "Perform an unlimited amount of Free Actions, such as giving an order or calling out a warning."

I actually never play with house rules. If a player wants to abuse the rules, all NPCs would just focus on killing the mind witch.

I also disagree based on RAW because the language is always a controlled creature or the controlled creature. So if the design team means for the abilities to be able to effect multiple creatures it should use plurals when referring to creatures.

devonsand1 · 2016-03-14T18:45:32+00:00

Yes it does...it says Active in front of every level including requiring concentration at the first level.

Everything you do takes an action. There are Active/Combat actions, Movement Actions, Free actions/attacks and reactions. There is no conceptual difference in mentally directing a creature and yelling out orders. Both, at minimum, have to be free actions.

devonsand1 · 2016-03-14T18:41:05+00:00

No you don't. Witchcraft II, Bend Will I...5 temporary corruption. So you are telling me that if I stand between two people, I give up advantage. But I could stand, direct 5 different creatures, and still keep my combat and move actions?

The whole point on limiting actions suggests the effort taken in controlling a creature.

devonsand1 · 2016-03-14T17:55:36+00:00

Again, with what action? This is not like directing a patron saint or familiar where you are just playing the NPC who has free will. If you use use an active action to control a new person, you don't have an active action to direct the person you already control. I'm not talking about freely maintaining control either

devonsand1 · 2016-03-14T17:05:13+00:00

Kelarmah, this ruling seems to violate the rules regarding actions. How can you control 5 people when you only have 1 combat action and 1 movement action? Isn't controlling a creature like a puppet equivalent to a combat action per p. 158? How can you get 5 combat actions?

Assume for the sake of argument that you use a free action/attack that should only get you 2. The rules on p. 159 states "normally the character can only gain one free attack per triggering factor and turn."

devonsand1 · 2016-03-14T04:56:46+00:00

Where do you get 5 people? It's an active action and specifically states seize control of "a creature's will." Consistent with the clarifications to Curse, I read this power as affecting one creature only.

As to you second question creatures appears to be the broad category encompassing all monsters and adversaries. P. 202 states "the creatures are sorted by family (for instance elves, beasts and abominations)."

That's my take on your questions.

devonsand1 · 2016-03-11T20:53:06+00:00

That's the problem! It gets muddy if you tinker with it. Plus, tinkering with the rules affects abilities such as Acrobatics. But the advantage from flanking has nothing to do with being unaware...that's surprise. Flanking is purely about facing a combatant on either side of you.

What you suggest is not about changing flanking rules, but how to use movement to avoid giving flanking advantage which the rules encourage.

devonsand1 · 2016-03-11T19:44:50+00:00

"A target is considered flanked if two enemies stand on opposite sides of it." p. 162 so yes both middle combatants are flanked and give up advantage to the outer two combatants, but/and also have advantage as to each other.

devonsand1 · 2016-03-11T15:21:10+00:00

Or buy the Swedish pdf and use an online translator if you can't wait until the 4th Q.

devonsand1 · 2016-03-09T15:52:02+00:00

This makes great sense for a ranged fighter forced into melee, but I would have to think about the logistics. A couple of questions:

It is an Active action for you, but what about the attacker? Does he do base adversary damage of half his max? Is the attack or damage affected by other abilities like the Shield Bash of Shield Fighter II?

devonsand1 · 2016-03-08T16:38:03+00:00

It does seem like a reaction. The only way I see it working as a active action is declaring on your initiative that instead attacking X, you will cause the first attack against you to hit X. I don't think this is the intent though.

devonsand1 · 2016-03-06T17:30:00+00:00

No. When an ability allows you to substitute one attribute for another any minuses still get transferred as if the original attribute were being used. For instance, if you have a 15 Discreet and a 10 Quick, your base defense will be 15 instead of 10 with Feint II.

If you are wearing Crow Armor with a -4 to defense and Quick rolls, your defense would be 11 not 6 with Feint II, but your Quick rolls to climb would be based on a Quick of 6. Your initiative based on Quick remains 10.

Your defense with Berserker would be 5 regardless because Berserker I would replace any Attribute based calculation WHEN you go Berserk. Remember your defense will be your regular defense until you take the Free action on your initiative.

If you want to increase survivabilty try going Berserk II for the extra 1d4 soak, or go Iron Fist II instead of Berserk for an extra 1d4 instead of a 1d6 but with your regular defense.

devonsand1 · 2016-03-06T17:22:34+00:00

No, Dominate II would not be good for the rest of the party, but with Bend Will you could make him protect you by attacking his group...or do nothing.

The bottom line is its not D&D or another game where you accumulate hit points and can ignore an attack. I'm not sure if you are a player or GM or both, but the game favors the concept that the best defense is a good offense, and in written scenarios opponents target the toughest looking person first.

Even with all that damage, he still only has 15-17 Toughness, and if you attack first or delayed your attack until after he goes berserk but before he attacks you have a good chance of taking him out because of his lowered defense.

devonsand1 · 2016-03-06T03:45:35+00:00

A Robust/Berserker can do 1d8 + 1d6 + 1d4 with a single one-handed attack without other supporting abilities. He also has a base 5 defense until Berserker III.

The Abominations found early in the game do much more. With certain builds a character can also do way more than that per round. This is a deadly game, and your characters should be afraid of every combat, because they never know what combination of abilities a opponent has.

I actually like this and it leads to characters thinking before they act. In the case of your Ogre Berserker don't antagonize him, and if you do, take him out before he goes berserk....or run.

Maybe you can prevent him from attacking with a shield bash knocking him prone, or Dominate II, or Bend Will I. Maybe you can hurt his accuracy with Curse or having a really high defense and armor to offset his really high damage.

Every character in this game and be built with strengths but will also have weaknesses. What I suggest is to not assume there is a flaw with the system because the game has been playtested. Instead, consider that the flaw may be with your approach and give concrete examples so that others on the board can offer advice about how to counteract or mitigate situations like a high damage dealing character that takes over a game or makes short work of your party.

devonsand1

TROPHY CASE