Combat issues

ProfessorK
Posts: 396
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 10:21 pm

Combat issues

Postby ProfessorK » Sun Oct 01, 2017 12:27 pm

We ran the sond acto f Aysle day one yesterday.

It was a sub sized team (3 players) and not the most effective so they let the main bad guy get up to about 7PP.

In doing so however they used up most of their PP and he took one away with a spell.

Between him being loaded up and him having a vampiric recovery ability, they were seriously outclassed and in the end the only thing they could find to do was Martyr a character.

This is someplace where, in the old TORG, they woudl have hustled up a Glory type result eventually and blew the enemy away.

They had no way however to get much in the way of extra BD so the cap on damage from rolls really hurt.

I gotta say Im still not liking this new combat system....

Im also REALLY unsure about the balance of Magic. Failing has really minor repercussions. There is no reason why the mage shouldnt just lob fireballs every round.

User avatar
TorgHacker
Posts: 3387
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2016 6:40 pm

Re: Combat issues

Postby TorgHacker » Sun Oct 01, 2017 2:41 pm

My first question is if/how much they made the final guy Vulnerable/Very Vulnerable or Stymied/Very Stymied?
Deanna Gilbert
Torg Eternity designer
Ulisses North America

User avatar
TorgHacker
Posts: 3387
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2016 6:40 pm

Re: Combat issues

Postby TorgHacker » Sun Oct 01, 2017 2:53 pm

After looking at the scenario in question, it's possible too that last encounter is just too much for 3 players.
Deanna Gilbert
Torg Eternity designer
Ulisses North America

User avatar
ShirtlessOBrien
Posts: 161
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:55 pm

Re: Combat issues

Postby ShirtlessOBrien » Sun Oct 01, 2017 8:30 pm

That Life Drain ability is pretty cruel, on top of a dude who could have a stack of Possibilities, who will make most of their Soak rolls and who could easily buff all their defences by +3 with a Possibility-boosted Shield spell.

My guess is the designer intended you to toss them into the bottomless pit, because that is what happens to any villain who fights heroes by a bottomless pit, but he has good defences against interaction attacks so I think it would take a two or three card combo or an amazing roll for the pregens to do it, if you even had the right pregens in the first place.

ProfessorK
Posts: 396
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 10:21 pm

Re: Combat issues

Postby ProfessorK » Sun Oct 01, 2017 8:33 pm

Sure, but... thats exactly my problem with the new system.

The old TORG system basically meant tbhat as a GM I NEVER had to wory about balance. Given enough tiem ANY group of players could accumulate the resources and luck to accomplish just about anything.

All these caps and limits in the new system really prevent that effect. The only unlimited thing is bonus die chains and I dont think Ive evr seen on go more then 3 or so rolls.

IME

User avatar
ShirtlessOBrien
Posts: 161
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:55 pm

Re: Combat issues

Postby ShirtlessOBrien » Sun Oct 01, 2017 8:46 pm

I think there are two different questions here.

One is whether you prefer games where players can always win because the core mechanics make them effectively unbeatable, or you prefer games where losing is a real possibility. My own view, which is not everyone's, is that I very strongly dislike any system with high mechanical overheads where players cannot lose. If I'm going to roll for where every bullet goes I want the bullets to actually matter. If the players will always win I'd rather run a lightweight system and make up the flavour text myself.

Torg is well into the high-mechanics zone for me, with each action requiring a d20 roll and a table lookup and then some arithmetic to figure out how successful you were, plus all sorts of possible modifiers from action types. I enjoy that stuff, but only if it's meaningful and not just a really complicated way of generating fluff to describe an inevitable victory.

The second question is whether that final encounter in Day One Aysle is too much, or is too much for a three player team as written. I don't think we can really know the answer to that one without reports from more groups that attempted it, but the fact that it did prove challenging makes me want to run it to see what happens.

Edited to add: But a Villain running around in his frustrating magical shield Taunting players about how his life-drain attack makes him invincible before getting chucked down a hole is a pretty awesome villain.

ProfessorK
Posts: 396
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 10:21 pm

Re: Combat issues

Postby ProfessorK » Sun Oct 01, 2017 9:02 pm

Actually I think you hit ona core issue which is that I am not sure TE knows what it wants to be. TORG was a no-apologies crunchy system. A fast playing one but crunchy none the less. TE feel to me like a crunchy system that has loose system envy.

But that aside I would slightly diosagree with you. I don't mind if the heroes always have a good chance to win, which is different from no chance of loosing. But in a crunchy system those chances to win aught to come out of the intelligence use of the crunch.

User avatar
ShirtlessOBrien
Posts: 161
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:55 pm

Re: Combat issues

Postby ShirtlessOBrien » Sun Oct 01, 2017 9:20 pm

ProfessorK wrote:Actually I think you hit ona core issue which is that I am not sure TE knows what it wants to be. TORG was a no-apologies crunchy system. A fast playing one but crunchy none the less. TE feel to me like a crunchy system that has loose system envy.


I don't see these as dichotomous, more as a continuum. TorgE is less crunchy than OTorg by design but OTorg was very crunchy indeed. Which I like, personally, I think a different table for every kind of interaction attack is a bridge too far.

But that aside I would slightly diosagree with you. I don't mind if the heroes always have a good chance to win, which is different from no chance of loosing. But in a crunchy system those chances to win aught to come out of the intelligence use of the crunch.


Agreed. Even a one in ten chance of the PC team losing due to sheer back luck is much too high for most players' tastes. Most people want a win rate of close to 100% with best play and well over 90% with reasonably decent play.

I only get irritable when people run games where the win rate is 100% (or 0%) no matter what but they insist on making me roll a million dice "to see what happens".

User avatar
Kuildeous
Posts: 1121
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2016 1:41 pm

Re: Combat issues

Postby Kuildeous » Sun Oct 01, 2017 9:51 pm

Interaction attacks are a great way to nail the boss, but I imagine with three players, it'll be a little harder to get those off. Multi-action will help, but that -2 can be a little painful. Hmm, fun fact, if you aren't sure you can hit an Outstanding result, I suppose that Taunting and Maneuvering would allow you to stack up two Vulnerable results to a Very. I hadn't considered that before.

It seems that GMs of small groups will need to modify the materials. I concur that mowing down seven priests while the boss is accumulating Possibilities is quite heavy for three Storm Knights. I think I'd be tempted to have no lurks. Just keep sucking Possibilities until the Storm Knights knock out all seven priests or break the chains. Then let all hell break loose.
The Boneyard – Friends and foes within Tharkold's Blasted Land

Infiniverse Exchange Word template – Infiniverse Exchange template for MS Word users

User avatar
ShirtlessOBrien
Posts: 161
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:55 pm

Re: Combat issues

Postby ShirtlessOBrien » Sun Oct 01, 2017 11:12 pm

Kuildeous wrote:I concur that mowing down seven priests while the boss is accumulating Possibilities is quite heavy for three Storm Knights.


Possibly there should just be one more priest than PCs, rather than a flat seven. The encounter doesn't really scale apart from the number of Lurks, so it's almost inevitable that it is either too easy for six or too hard for three.


Return to “Tangents and Miscellany (TORG)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests