|
Post by veritas on Apr 9, 2010 21:08:49 GMT -5
On the other side of things, what would a player character use to decide whether or not they are affected by fear and confusion?
|
|
|
Post by Sir Not Appearing on Forum on Apr 10, 2010 13:04:14 GMT -5
The same rules apply for player characters as NPCs and enemies. It's assumed that even though the characters are player controlled that they are still people just like other beings in Gaia.
I am of course pondering there to be different changes when it comes to non-sentient creatures such as Feral Dragons and the like, but that would require a bit of play testing. When it comes down to the rules mentioned above though, I tested them out on NPC enemies when we play tested and it works fairly well.
|
|
|
Post by veritas on Apr 10, 2010 17:46:39 GMT -5
So, how would a character save against something like this?
|
|
|
Post by Sir Not Appearing on Forum on Apr 10, 2010 18:50:38 GMT -5
In case of Fear: 50% successful Charisma roll In case of Confusion: 50% successful Intelligence roll
This of course will only take into effect under certain circumstances: Terrifying creatures, characters with ten points in Intelligence or lower.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Not Appearing on Forum on Apr 10, 2010 20:13:14 GMT -5
I was planning on making a skill called Willpower that gives a 25% bonus to rolls that effect Intimidation, Fear and the like.
The new stuff is still of course new, and I'm sure with more play testing we'll figure out how to make them more convenient and flexible.
But yeah, so far Fear and Confusion are based on pass/fail, and only affect characters that are not over a certain statistic point level.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Not Appearing on Forum on Apr 10, 2010 21:03:11 GMT -5
Fear will be dependent on certain enemy units and characters. A character with the Intimidate skill will be able to cause fear in anyone that has 50% less Charisma then they do. If the character does not have the skill, they do not cause Fear. Some monsters (IE: Shades, Ghosts, Demons, etc.) will be able to cause fear without the skill, but the same check for Charisma will be used as if they did have the skill.
|
|
|
Post by veritas on Apr 10, 2010 21:22:37 GMT -5
So, there's no save? You either have the Charisma deficit (which I would have a concern with, and I'll explain separately) and are susceptible to the fear effect or you don't?
Not to mention, Charisma (among other things, old news) should have nothing to do with Saving against fear. I get that intimidate is currently based on the Charisma stat, but something who is not even slightly charismatic can intimidate someone. And saving against fear seems more of a mental stamina, or resolve, something which there probably isn't even basic stat to actually support.
The above mentioned issue about Intimidate and Charisma was the reason I suggested long ago that Intimidate trigger off of Strength, instead of Charisma. (which in itself isn't even perfect), as you're generally intimidating someone based on threat of harm. A mongoloid with absolutely no charm or faith could intimidate someone. Just my two cents.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Not Appearing on Forum on Apr 11, 2010 5:19:14 GMT -5
But then if we were to get into detail on this, you can mentally intimidate someone just as well as you can physically, and even emotionally too. Soooo, if I thought about it that way then three stats could be used for Intimidate (Charisma, Intelligence, Strength) rather than one stat, and I was trying to not be too complicated in its use.
You do get a save, a 50% save actually. The check to see if you need to make the roll was dependant on the defining character having 50% higher charisma then trhe target character(s) as long as they possess the Intimidate skill. If the above is met then enemy characters that can see the intimidator need to pass a 50% success roll to not be scared. The check is made once, if passed and not rolled again. If the check fails then each turn the character affected by fear rolls the check again until they either pass and ignore the fear for the rest of the combat from that particular character, or they run off the battle map.
We could try multple statistic uses for fear depending on statistic and also what sort of intimidation is being used. I wouldnt mind testing it out and seeing how it works.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Not Appearing on Forum on Apr 11, 2010 13:35:13 GMT -5
New Ability Idea: Rally - Allows a character to use their own statistic to roll against the effects of Fear for another, just in case they fail their roll against it. Can be used as long as the character being targeted is within six squares of the user. Its of course passive, just like all the other special abilities now. What do you guys think? Just an idea I had while at work.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Not Appearing on Forum on Apr 11, 2010 14:17:55 GMT -5
lol
Alrighty then
|
|
|
Post by Sir Not Appearing on Forum on Apr 12, 2010 20:26:41 GMT -5
UPDATES
- Removed vehicle area and put it instead into the "Artisans Handbook" since it makes more sense there.
- Working on adding a list for ally and enemy units, which is a lot like the old bestiary in the 2nd Edition book but extended and includes sentient enemies and allies based on kingdoms of Dalros and Levasia.
|
|
|
Post by veritas on Apr 13, 2010 12:36:52 GMT -5
I don't know if pass/fail saving against fear is going to be accurate for every character, especially Mr. Smashy McKillington the seasoned war veteran who survived for 10 years without food and water under the eye of the Vietkong army, living in a shelter constructed from the bones and intestinal flesh of his fallen comrades.
I only see flaw there. Honestly.
And in regards to mentally and emotionally intimidating someone.
Legal Dictionary
Main Entry: in·tim·i·date Pronunciation: in-'ti-m&-"dAt Function: transitive verb Inflected Forms: -dat·ed; -dat·ing 1 : to make timid or fearful; especially : to compel or deter by or as if by threats —see also COERCION 2 : to engage in the crime of intimidating (as a witness, juror, public officer in the performance of his or her duty, or victim of a robbery or other crime) —in·tim·i·dat·ing·ly adverb —in·tim·i·da·tion /in-"ti-m&-'dA-sh&n/ noun —in·tim·i·da·tor /in-'ti-m&-"dA-t&r/ noun Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.
It seems that an application of threat to ones own being is implied. I don't see how one could be emotionally or mentally intimidated. Successful intimidation requires someone to be cowed or made full of fear, and if there is no threat of harm to oneself, how does one accomplish it?
How does a person who has no way to harm me go about intimidating me?
EPIPHANY: I realized that in the process of trying to understand a system like this and how it would play out, that in reality, a threat is simply a bluff. Even if you intend to carry out the acts you are threatening one with, you are still taking a gambit, you are wanting the person to be threatened rather than do whatever it is you were threatening them with, otherwise you'd just smash them in the face. So, in regards to intimidate, it seems like it should go under a skill called Bluff, with any other instance of Bluffing, and bonuses should be applied based on the type of bluffing or intimidation being attempted.
Por exemplo (For Example), an intimidation based on threats of violence: Charisma + bonus based on Strength (1 die for each mastery, +25% for Grand Master level). This doesn't deviate far from your current system as to how most of these are handled anyway.
An intimidation based on a trap, or setting a bomb in ones home, or kidnapping. Something requires a plan or strategy = Charisma + bonus based on Intelligence.
Threatening to run away, abandon someone, leave them behind, maybe Dexterity?
Of course, weird situations will arise, and the group does a good job of collectively deciding what stat is influencing the task.
But yes, I agree on Charisma to an extent, IF the action is technically a bluff. Because we intimidate on the hopes that our bluff won't be called, because if we wanted to just beat the guy's face in instead of having him divulge the secret location of the clandestine moonlight meeting of assassins, we'd just beat his face in. We want the info, right?
Same should go for Interrogate and Intimidate. Out of the book, into a skill called Bluff, they're really the same thing honestly. The first is intimidating one into giving up information, and the second could be for anything, material or immaterial.
|
|
|
Post by veritas on Apr 13, 2010 12:37:17 GMT -5
If you wanted to be original you could even call is Coerce instead of Bluff.
|
|
|
Post by veritas on Apr 13, 2010 12:39:00 GMT -5
After typing that, I still see one major flaw with it. The mongoloid barbarian, who has no faith in a god and no people skills whatsoever (hence no Charisma), should still be able to intimidate someone. However, perhaps we are suggesting that without these people skills, he simply cannot restrain himself from smashing face long enough to try to get what he wants, and merely beats skull in a rage? I could see that.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Not Appearing on Forum on Apr 13, 2010 13:10:08 GMT -5
I like the Bluff idea; the 50% rules are indeed flawed, but I also considered them easy and not cpmplex. Adding in a different skill that acts as a bonus is a good idea as it would allow me to get rid of the 50% deal, making it more difficult to save against fear, therefore getting back to the whole "increase of challenge" I was looking for for 3rd Edition combat in the first place.
It does not seem too massively complicated, and this I like. Question though for when you mention two different stats; when you said "Charisma + bonus based on Strength" were you meaning the success dice bonus of the mastery leveled skill based on that stat or some combination of Charisma and Strength? If you meant mastery bonus I can definitely go with that and it would be as easy and writing a short explanation in the skill description.
And as for emotional and Mental Intimidation: - Someone using a passion of yours as a catalyst to scare you into doing something (IE: forbidding you from doing it ever again) - Torturing someone you love or care for deeply to get you to do what they say (also emotional if I may say so) - Complicated acts of torture (IE: waterboarding which can considered both mental since it wears upon the mind and physical since it harms the body over time but not as bad as the mind makes it think it is)
|
|