Rogue's Dirty Fighting

[donsensey]

Hi,

I have a problem with the Rogue's Class Ability': Dirty Fighting

You can daze opponents with sharp
blows to vulnerable areas. To use dirty fighting, you
must first hit with a melee attack. If successful, you
inflict no damage but your opponent must make
a successful TN 15 Constitution (Stamina) test or
become stunned. A stunned character can attempt
the test again at the start of his turn, and if successful
can act normally. Otherwise, the only thing a stunned
character can do on his turn is take a single move
action.

The problem is that It doesn't state the number of turns you remain stunned.
I find it ambiguos, and at first sight, one turn seems to be too little benefit [in 1 vs 1 is almost useless, being that the only thing that the ability grants is a potential backstab (potentiality that you already have with bluff in Level 4)].

On the other hand, an infinite stunning seems to be so overpowered. A character with CON 0 [or even less] will sign a death sentence.

What do you guys find about it?
How do you use it?

[Jekias]

Similar issue to the problem with the Horror Spell (if you dont have enough WIllpower you will remain in a 'horrored' state forever).

Suggestion? House rule it. Make it something like rounds equal to the Rogues Dragon Dice attack or similar.

[donsensey]

Thanks Jekias,

But I find that the wording in Horror is not ambiguous. It clearly states that the spell is active "...until the target succeeds on a Willpower (Courage) test..." and "A target failing the initial test may try again at the start of each turn"

It might be overpowered, but it's not ambiguous. Horror clearly states that the character will remain frightened forever if he can't succeed the dice roll, which is not, as I understand it, the case with Dirty Fighting.

[Loswaith]

Its the ability to shake it off, and even a 15 roll isnt that far out of reach for a character. Even without modifiers to the roll its still a 9.26% chance of breaking the effect (even with just the focus that increase to 25.93% success, and with just a 1 constitution and focus that is a 37.5% chance of success). While mathematically the chances of breaking out of it increase with every additional roll made (assuming no modifiers to the roll its, 0.9074 (chance of failure) cumulatively multiplied by 0.9074 each round is the chance you will fail the resistance roll, subtracting that value from 1 will give the success chance).

Also keep in mind it is an attack that implies things like a solid hit in the face, a kick to the groin, shins or knees, throwing dirt (or whatever else) into someones eyes, so something your not likely to recover from all that quickly.

Horror is much worse because the Spellpower of the mage can easily push the TNs into the 17+ range.

[Zapp]

The problem is that It doesn't state the number of turns you remain stunned.

That is because the number of turns is variable.

You simply remain stunned until you succeed on your test to no longer be stunned.

Like Jekias said: Overpowered perhaps, but not ambigious.

[donsensey]

The problem is that It doesn't state the number of turns you remain stunned.

That is because the number of turns is variable.

You simply remain stunned until you succeed on your test to no longer be stunned.

"...the number of turns you remain stunned while you don't succeed the dice-roll"
In other words, as I've said before, it doesn't explicity says "you should roll every turn until you succeed" [like Horror does], and doesn't says "one turn and then the stunning ends" either.

Like Jekias said: Overpowered perhaps, but not ambigious.

Haha
I said that, and I was talking about Horror =)

[si1vergecko]

A TN 15 Con Stamina save? Hard for some sure but I would not call it impossible. However one time where I got hit with walking bomb in a game where I am a mage with a con of 0 with a spell power of 19 was a complete pain and a huge motivation for me to start thinking about the fast ways of getting Dispel Magic.

Personally I wonder why more then anything else it is locked in at 15, perhaps for balancing issues since there are some creatures and enemies where that number is not a problem but a different story for others.

[Jekias]

Somewhat off topic, but I had a player cast Mass Paralysis and he managed to get a spellpower of 24. Ouch.

But for a lot of the similar based 'takeout' spells/abilities I'm leaning towards a max number of rounds that it lasts based on DD or abilities. Also, if a spell caster dies I'm also ruling all their active spell effects are cancelled.

[Zapp]

Somewhat off topic, but I had a player cast Mass Paralysis and he managed to get a spellpower of 24. Ouch.

You need to describe specifics more.

Did that mage need several rounds to set up a combo leading to this Spellpower. If so, perhaps it isn't so overpowered? Or can he do that with little preparation?

The next question is: did the designers intend for Spellpower to go this high? Or is it simply symptomatic of poor game testing - that the game simply doesn't meet modern expectations of gameplay balance?

[Zapp]

In other words, as I've said before, it doesn't explicity says "you should roll every turn until you succeed" [like Horror does], and doesn't says "one turn and then the stunning ends" either.

It does not have to.

It says "A stunned character can attempt the test again at the start of his turn, and if successful can act normally." What more do you need?

Any time you are stunned by this effect, you "can" attempt the test again, and if successful, you can act normally.

It doesn't say for how long you can act normally, so we have to assume "forever", that the effect is permanently negated.

Look at each spell or effect individually. This effect should not suffer just because the wording is different for some other spell (such as Horror).

I grant you that it is better if identical game effects are described using identical language, though. However, few game companies other than WotC make more than a token attempt at achieving this. Green Ronin, for example, designed the bestiary for WFRP. It was rife with minor inconsistencies like this. To take just a single example, IIRC, it featured no less than three separate invisibility effects (with similar but not identical game rules).

If one comes from D&D, one needs to adjust ones expectations. This game has nowhere near the stringency of that other game - it puts its strengths elsewhere!

[She]

Look at each spell or effect individually. This effect should not suffer just because the wording is different for some other spell (such as Horror).

When I read the class ability, I understand that it lasts forever. But the fact that the wording is different for other spells is what makes me wonder if they really mean the same.

[Loswaith]

Look at each spell or effect individually. This effect should not suffer just because the wording is different for some other spell (such as Horror).

When I read the class ability, I understand that it lasts forever. But the fact that the wording is different for other spells is what makes me wonder if they really mean the same.

The way I see it is the stunned character will recover given some time to do, but they dont have that time in battle, however the test is to overcome the effect, given a breather after combat the character will recover without the continual tests. Horror on the other hand, will never be recovered from unless you break the hold of the spell.
Whether the GM just has the recovery from horror automatically happen after the combat, is likely dependant on different groups.

...
Personally I wonder why more then anything else it is locked in at 15, perhaps for balancing issues since there are some creatures and enemies where that number is not a problem but a different story for others.

Possibly because when it comes to magic the more powerful the mage the harder it is to break the spell, where as dirty fighting is an attack that doesnt so much have an inherrant power to it and simply has a base effect that is independant of the rogues skill.

[Admiral Yacob]

In my book, the forever part of any spell or effect that is a "try again until you pass" type of effect is until the end of that encounter. Mostly it happens in combat and the idea in my group is shortly after combat the effect passes as if you had passed. Think of it as similar to a 3.5 edition "take 20" effect when not in a stressful situation. Now, of course, if combat ends and the ruins you are in are collapsing...well, maybe the effect doesn't end in time, keep rolling

[She]

The way I see it is the stunned character will recover given some time to do, but they dont have that time in battle, however the test is to overcome the effect, given a breather after combat the character will recover without the continual tests. Horror on the other hand, will never be recovered from unless you break the hold of the spell.
Whether the GM just has the recovery from horror automatically happen after the combat, is likely dependant on different groups.

Thinking in what would happen "in real life" might be clarifing.

I guess that in the case of horror the PC could become functional again after de combat, but remain tense or afraid. But it would be more related to "playing the character" than aplying an spell effect.

[donsensey]

In my book, the forever part of any spell or effect that is a "try again until you pass" type of effect is until the end of that encounter. Mostly it happens in combat and the idea in my group is shortly after combat the effect passes as if you had passed. Think of it as similar to a 3.5 edition "take 20" effect when not in a stressful situation. Now, of course, if combat ends and the ruins you are in are collapsing...well, maybe the effect doesn't end in time, keep rolling

But if you are Stunned or Horrorified in a "death match" and you can't succeed the dice-roll, at the end of the encounter you will be dead, so overwhelming the effect by diying is not a good deal at all.

-Ohh, you should've seen me! I was stunned until the end of the encounter!
-And I'm glad that you are here now, telling me

And that was you, talking to the Maker

[Lynata]

How many opponents are actually using this stunt against the player characters, though?

According to this nifty tool, the chance to roll 15+ is 9.26%, so it's not impossible even for characters with Con 0. The problem I'd see with making the test easier would be that higher enemies have no problem breaking out of stun.

That being said, given how deadly this effect can be on lower level characters and enemies, perhaps a houserule that adds a +1 bonus after each failed test would help? This way, in the 1st round of stun the test would be 9.26%, in the 2nd round 16.2%, in the 3rd 25.92% and so on...

Keep in mind that this would allow enemies to break out of stun quickly, especially if they have an above-0-Constitution. Given how hard it is to trigger the Stun(t) in the first place, this might make it a considerably less valuable tactical option.

Maybe Jekias idea about using the rogues' dragon die would be best - even though this one comes with the downside of not taking the target's Constitution into account.

[Loswaith]

Keep in mind that mathematically every time the character rolls again they have an increased chane of breaking out of the stun. It doesnt actually seem like it because the rolls feel independant to each other but they realy arent.
For the first roll you have 9.26% chance to have recovered on the second roll you actually have a 17.66% chance to have recovered (because you have made 2 rolls), while on the third round you have 25.29% chance of having recovered (because you have made 3 rolls). This is because each subsequesnt roll you get is determined by the chances of failing all of the previous rolls (because once successful you stop rolling).

If you wanted it to be viable on tougher creatures you could modify the initial roll based on the rogues (strength or cunning, as I can see either work), while keeping the recovery at the 15 (17 in the case of assassins) so it has better chances of lasting just the one round. Though its likely not needed if the GM gives some modifiers to the TN for role-playing the style of the rogues dirty action.

[Zapp]

Keep in mind that mathematically every time the character rolls again they have an increased chane of breaking out of the stun. It doesnt actually seem like it because the rolls feel independant to each other but they realy arent.

Just to clarify: It is if a roll is independent the probability remains constant. It is for a series of dependant rolls the probability changes.

Let me rephrase the below to illustrate:

For the first roll you have 9.26% chance to have recovered on the second roll you actually have a 17.66% chance to have recovered (because you have made 2 rolls), while on the third round you have 25.29% chance of having recovered (because you have made 3 rolls). This is because each subsequesnt roll you get is determined by the chances of failing all of the previous rolls (because once successful you stop rolling).

When you are in the specific situation of having failed your first roll and is about to make your second one, your chance to recover is the same 9.26% as the first time 'round. And if you fail again, the probability of you succeeding in the third round is again 9.26%.

The 17.66% number refers to the situation before you start to roll (i.e. when the rolls are still unknown) - then you have that percentage of a chance to recover no later than round #2. Look at it this way - as soon as the result becomes known, the probability either goes up to 100% (if you succeed) or goes down to 9.26% (if you fail).

In other words, the actual percentages of succeeding doesn't change as indeed each individual roll is independent. It is the series of rolls that make for an increasing chance of success.

I'm sure that was what you said too Loswaith!

[Zapp]

That being said, given how deadly this effect can be on lower level characters and enemies, perhaps a houserule that adds a +1 bonus after each failed test would help? This way, in the 1st round of stun the test would be 9.26%, in the 2nd round 16.2%, in the 3rd 25.92% and so on...

The cumulative probability of making a TN 15 test, then a TN 14 test, then a TN 13 test is (given a +0 modifier) actually 43.7% (9.26 + 14.7 + 19.71 = 43.68)

You sure you didn't accidentally use the numbers from the series without any +1 bonuses? (I.e. the 9.26, 8.40, 7.62 series making up 25.29 - I note that your 25.92 could be the same number only with two figures jumbled)

Anyway, you all might jump at the rather larger chance - 44% instead of 25%, a difference of 19 percentage units or an seventy-five percent increase - but this is because of the specific shape of the 3d6 bell curve. A +1 bonus is very valuable when the slope is steep, as it is in this case. Contrast with either the case when Constitution is not 0 but -2 or +2 instead...

Con -2 without the cumulative +1 bonus (three TN 17 tests): 1.85+1.82+1.78=5.45
Con -2 with the cumulative +1 bonus (a TN 17, a TN 16 and a TN 15 test): 1.85+4.54+8.67=15.1
The difference is 9.65 percentage units; the probability might be tripled but goes from a very low number to a slightly larger but still low number.

Con +2 without the cumulative +1 bonus (three TN 13 tests):25.93+19.20+14.23=59.36
Con +2 with the cumulative +1 bonus (a TN 13, a TN 12 and a TN 11 test):25.93+27.78+23.15=76.85
The difference is 17.5 percentage units; this is an increase by only thirty percent.

By this I only mean to say that the bonus makes a big impact on the example discussed but not necessarily as big an impact when the numbers are different. (AGE is decidedly different than D&D here - even though both games operate on roughly the same 3-18 scale a +1 bonus is always equally valuable in all D&D cases, where the utility differs greatly in AGE)


Zapp

PS. For unparallelled probability calculating power, do use Troll. This tool really stands head and shoulders above anything else in the way of dice calculators.

[Loswaith]

...
PS. For unparallelled probability calculating power, do use Troll. This tool really stands head and shoulders above anything else in the way of dice calculators.

Cant say I agree with you on that.
Sure it is useful but its documentation realy reduces the useability of it, for anyone that is new to it. I find I use anydice over troll as well as I like the ability to switch around how the dice results play out and use the graphical representations.

That said both are quite good to use, they will both do much the same things, but each one has its own spin on things as well.

Sorry for the tangent.

[Arimmus]

A stunned Character to me is someone that cant act. One turn seems plenty for me. Horror on the other hand, I made it if you are horrored you give up the fight and run. You say screw fighting and run, as if they failed a Morale Check.