Thus Spake Zaraborgstrom/FiveFoldBulwarkStance - Revision history

98.228.34.226 at 19:59, 12 June 2010

2010-06-12T19:59:54Z

Conversion script: link fix

2010-04-06T01:18:12Z

link fix

Conversion script: link fix

2010-04-05T08:08:28Z

link fix

Conversion script: link fix

2010-04-03T09:05:55Z

link fix

TonyC: example of FFBS mechanic

2006-08-07T04:20:13Z

example of FFBS mechanic

New page

From RPG.net, 8/6/06
Q: How does Fivefold Bulwark Stance handle flurries?

A: Reduce the DV penalty for every action in the flurry independently.

This is the author's intention.

Note that many of the DV penalties in the book dropped by a point after playtesting. (That is, most of them were about one point higher when I wrote the Charms.)

If you can make a strong case that this will break something, or to the contrary, please make it here (and without back-and-forth argument if possible) for reference of any Storytellers who later refer to this.

Rebecca
== Comments ==
Yeah, so glad to have THAT argument over. Many thanks to Rebecca! -FlowsLikeBits

:Would someone be so kind as to elaborate on how else this could be interpreted? I'm confused as to what argument there could be... -- GreenLantern
::Whether you add the penalties first then substract one or if you substract one from each DV penalties caused by each action in a flurry first and then add them up. - TonyC
:::So... can you give an example? -- GL, ''surprisingly stupid lately''
::::Yurgen Kaneko has been challenged into personal combat by the Dragons of Califax. He has Five-Fold Bulwark Stance up already. During his action, he flurries a Dash and three attacks with his Grand Daiklave, Resolution. What is his DV penalty at the end of his action? A Dash is -2. Three attacks are -1, -1, and -1. One way of reading FFBS is to add everything first, then reduce penalty by one. So Yurgen ends up with a DV penalty of -4. The other way of reading FFBS is to reduce every penalty by one first, then add them up, so you get -1 for Dash, and 0 for the attacks, for a total of -1. Rebecca is clarifying that the second interpretation is what she intended. - TonyC

GreenLantern: GL is the stupid. Perhaps you can explain.

2006-08-07T03:54:28Z

GL is the stupid. Perhaps you can explain.

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:59, 12 June 2010
Line 18:		Line 18:
	:::So... can you give an example? -- GL, ''surprisingly stupid lately''		:::So... can you give an example? -- GL, ''surprisingly stupid lately''
	::::Yurgen Kaneko has been challenged into personal combat by the Dragons of Califax. He has Five-Fold Bulwark Stance up already. During his action, he flurries a Dash and three attacks with his Grand Daiklave, Resolution. What is his DV penalty at the end of his action? A Dash is -2. Three attacks are -1, -1, and -1. One way of reading FFBS is to add everything first, then reduce penalty by one. So Yurgen ends up with a DV penalty of -4. The other way of reading FFBS is to reduce every penalty by one first, then add them up, so you get -1 for Dash, and 0 for the attacks, for a total of -1. Rebecca is clarifying that the second interpretation is what she intended. - [[TonyC]]		::::Yurgen Kaneko has been challenged into personal combat by the Dragons of Califax. He has Five-Fold Bulwark Stance up already. During his action, he flurries a Dash and three attacks with his Grand Daiklave, Resolution. What is his DV penalty at the end of his action? A Dash is -2. Three attacks are -1, -1, and -1. One way of reading FFBS is to add everything first, then reduce penalty by one. So Yurgen ends up with a DV penalty of -4. The other way of reading FFBS is to reduce every penalty by one first, then add them up, so you get -1 for Dash, and 0 for the attacks, for a total of -1. Rebecca is clarifying that the second interpretation is what she intended. - [[TonyC]]
		+
		+	== See Also ==
		+	[[Thus_Spake_Zaraborgstrom]]

← Older revision	Revision as of 01:18, 6 April 2010
(No difference)

@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 Rebecca
 == Comments ==
-Yeah, so glad to have THAT argument over. Many thanks to Rebecca!  -FlowsLikeBits
+Yeah, so glad to have THAT argument over. Many thanks to Rebecca!  -[[FlowsLikeBits]]
-:Would someone be so kind as to elaborate on how else this could be interpreted? I'm confused as to what argument there could be... -- GreenLantern
+:Would someone be so kind as to elaborate on how else this could be interpreted? I'm confused as to what argument there could be... -- [[GreenLantern]]
-::Whether you add the penalties first then substract one or if you substract one from each DV penalties caused by each action in a flurry first and then add them up. - TonyC
+::Whether you add the penalties first then substract one or if you substract one from each DV penalties caused by each action in a flurry first and then add them up. - [[TonyC]]
 :::So... can you give an example? -- GL, ''surprisingly stupid lately''