Discussions/RingingAnvilOnslaught

So, I've been fiddling around with additional and higher-power Extra Action Charms for Dragon-Blooded. Looking over Ringing, especially given its relatively high cost, has got me wondering about how it interacts with the Dragon-blooded/Specialty thing, and other Dragon Blooded Charms.

Two situations come to mind:

• First, let's say Sesus Fighter has Melee 5 (Swords +3). Does he get to roll 5 dice or 8 when using Ringing Anvil Onslaught?
• Second, let's say Sesus Fighter is in a group with Ragara Imageneral, who has Deadly Wildfire Legion, and Melee 5 (In Groups +3 or some other cross-relevant specialty). He spends 4 motes (in addition to the per-companion surcharge) to add 8 dice to his companions, including Sesus Fighter, who activates Ringing Anvil Onslaught. Does Sesus Fighter get 4 extra dice for the RAO roll? (If so, that might mean that Sesus Fighter is now rolling 16 dice on RAO!)>

(situation #3 removed because the final sentence of SBS seems to indicate that it is attack-only)

This could end up with a situation where a character is adding 8 attacks on average and as many as 32-- admittedly, that last one is 1 in 1x10^16 chance, but...-- or more, if Virtues can be Channeled or Willpower buys an autosuccess. Furthermore, while there is no canonical Melee Success buyer for DBs, it's not too far-fetched to imagine a Specialty Success Buyer or a bashing-damage one. I'm not sure if that's appropriate, even for an Exalted game.

Actually, no, it could end up with a situation where the character adds no more than his Melee attacks. "The Dynast cannot gain more extra attacks than his Melee" -- BillGarrett

Here's the arguments as I see them so far.

For:

(1) Dragon-blooded get along with specialties better than any other Exalt. They include them in dice-buys, use them for success buying, and so on.

(2) Dragon-blooded charms get along with one another. It's especially true of the "group" charms, since DBs are supposed to be deadly in groups.

(3) Other Dragon-blooded might have reflexive defenses (that they can use in addition to other charms; other Exalts might have good reflexive defenses and persistents, not to mention perfects.

(4) Any twinkery via Charms on the RAO roll is going to be limited by the low Essence Pools of Dragonblooded.

(5) Ringing Anvil Onslaught, and presumably any similar Charms developed for other Abilities, is limited to a single target only.

Against:

(1) It's 8 average, 32+ max attacks for 8 motes of essence spent by the individual, and either 5 spent by someone else or 4 more and a willpower by you. That's insane, even for Exalted. Especially so for Dragon-Blooded who are supposed to be somewhat weaker than the others.

(2) Nothing specifically says specialties are included in all iterations of Ability for Dragon-blooded.

(3) It brings me into conflict with my GM "Munchkinning is Bad!" side.

I'm currently leaning towards 'For', but only because it seems to fit the basic standard of, "Does it allow the character to do something Awesome". I'd really like to know what other people think. -- IsawaBrian

I'd let Specialties and boosts to Melee dice pools benefit the roll. Unless you have some sort of fancy artifact that actually increases your Melee ABILITY, you will still be capped at 5 or so extra attacks. I figure that's fair, and it gives Dragon-Blooded group tactics the oomph they deserve. -- BillGarrett

Well-- if I'm understanding you right, you'd allow the Deadly Wildfire Legion benny? Because in that case, on average, you'd see 8 attacks, if the DWL and the RAO guy were each maxed.

I'd allow DWL to add to the roll, as I would allow any other legal dice-pool adder. I would not let the successes exceed the character's Melee Ability. Not Melee + Specialty. Not Melee + bonus dice. Melee Ability. Number of dots on sheet. Specialties are bonus dice, not adders to the ability. In other words, without something like a hypothetical Legendary Ability (Melee) Merit, or some artifact that actually boosted the ability, you aren't getting more than 5 extra attacks. -- BillGarrett