Stacking conditions from the conflict lines?

Taliesin
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2017 5:25 pm

Stacking conditions from the conflict lines?

Postby Taliesin » Thu Nov 08, 2018 12:36 pm

I apologize if it's been asked before, but I couldn't find an answer on the forums or the FAQ.
Here's the situation: the current Drama Card shows a Stymied condition for the enemies. One of my players plays a Seize Initiative card to keep that Drama Card for one more round.
Since the Stymied gets applied a second time, does that mean the conditions stack (i.e. the enemies are now Very Stymied) or are they reset (the enemies stay Stymied)?

User avatar
TorgHacker
Posts: 3425
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2016 6:40 pm

Re: Stacking conditions from the conflict lines?

Postby TorgHacker » Thu Nov 08, 2018 12:45 pm

Taliesin wrote:I apologize if it's been asked before, but I couldn't find an answer on the forums or the FAQ.
Here's the situation: the current Drama Card shows a Stymied condition for the enemies. One of my players plays a Seize Initiative card to keep that Drama Card for one more round.
Since the Stymied gets applied a second time, does that mean the conditions stack (i.e. the enemies are now Very Stymied) or are they reset (the enemies stay Stymied)?


No.

The reason is that the Stymied condition lasts until the end of that side's next turn. By the time that card would flip, they've had a turn, so they're no longer Stymied. Unless of course, they've gotten Stymied again from some other source.
Deanna Gilbert
Torg Eternity designer
Ulisses North America

Taliesin
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2017 5:25 pm

Re: Stacking conditions from the conflict lines?

Postby Taliesin » Thu Nov 08, 2018 3:20 pm

TorgHacker wrote:No.

Do you mean that they don't stack or they don't reset?

TorgHacker wrote:The reason is that the Stymied condition lasts until the end of that side's next turn.

That's precisely the problem. The Stymied condition was triggered by the Drama Card and, as you said, should apply this turn and the next one.
Now, because my player has played her Seize Initiative card at the beginning of round 1, the condition should extend over to the end of round 2. But since the card is kept for one more round, the Stymied is applied once again on round 2 and should last until the end of round 3.
To sum it up:
Round 1: S#1
Round 2: S#1 + S#2 => Very Stymied?
Round 3: S#2

I decided the conditions wouldn't stack, but my player insisted that the enemies should be Very Stymied during round 2. And her point was valid. Seizing the initiative could be interpreted as the PCs suddenly rushing forward, causing great confusion in the enemy ranks, which could explain the extra condition.
Or maybe I don't read the Seize Initiative card properly...

User avatar
Atama
Posts: 625
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 12:30 am
Location: Auburn, WA

Re: Stacking conditions from the conflict lines?

Postby Atama » Thu Nov 08, 2018 3:55 pm

Taliesin wrote:
TorgHacker wrote:The reason is that the Stymied condition lasts until the end of that side's next turn.

That's precisely the problem. The Stymied condition was triggered by the Drama Card and, as you said, should apply this turn and the next one.
Now, because my player has played her Seize Initiative card at the beginning of round 1, the condition should extend over to the end of round 2. But since the card is kept for one more round, the Stymied is applied once again on round 2 and should last until the end of round 3.
To sum it up:
Round 1: S#1
Round 2: S#1 + S#2 => Very Stymied?
Round 3: S#2

I decided the conditions wouldn't stack, but my player insisted that the enemies should be Very Stymied during round 2. And her point was valid. Seizing the initiative could be interpreted as the PCs suddenly rushing forward, causing great confusion in the enemy ranks, which could explain the extra condition.
Or maybe I don't read the Seize Initiative card properly...

No, the Stymie ends after Round 1. It doesn’t last for two rounds. It lasts for the duration of the enemy’s turn.

Let’s say the card has heroes with initiative, enemy is Stymied. Heroes go first, do their stuff for their turn. Enemies now go, they’re Stymied for this turn. Turn is over, Stymied goes away.

Before the next card is revealed you play Seize Initiative. Same process applies, heroes go first, then enemies, the enemies are Stymied till the end of that turn. There is no stacking involved.

I think you’re getting confused by what “end of next turn” means. As the card is revealed, the “next turn” is the turn the enemies get this round. The reason it is the “next” turn and not “this” turn is because as the card is revealed their turn this round hasn’t occurred yet. (Nobody’s turn has.)

utsukushi
Posts: 701
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Stacking conditions from the conflict lines?

Postby utsukushi » Thu Nov 08, 2018 3:59 pm

I think this is one of those things like, if I say "next Friday," do I mean Friday of next week, or the Friday that's coming up next even if that's tomorrow?

As I understand it, conditions from drama cards are applied basically as soon as the card is turned over, and last through the "next turn" - eg., the turn that happens under that drama card. So "this turn and the next one", as you're phrasing it, are talking about the same turn.

So:
Round 1: Drama card flips. Bad guys become Stymied. Heroes have a turn. Bad guys have a turn. Bad guys become un-Stymied.
Round 2: Hero plays Sieze Initiative, retaining Drama card. Bad guys become Stymied. Heroes have a turn. Bad guys have a turn. Bad guys become un-Stymied.

Round three... depends entirely on what turns over for Round 3.

Note that if, during the Heroes turn on either Round 1 or 2, they do an Interaction Attack and further Stymie the bad guys, then they are, indeed, Very Stymied. But their "next turn" just means their very next turn, not their turn next round. Does that make more sense?

...Atama already got to this, but we put it a little bit differently so maybe one way will sound better. <grin>

User avatar
TorgHacker
Posts: 3425
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2016 6:40 pm

Re: Stacking conditions from the conflict lines?

Postby TorgHacker » Thu Nov 08, 2018 4:07 pm

Points upwards.

Yup. That.
Deanna Gilbert
Torg Eternity designer
Ulisses North America

Taliesin
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2017 5:25 pm

Re: Stacking conditions from the conflict lines?

Postby Taliesin » Thu Nov 08, 2018 4:48 pm

Atama wrote:The reason it is the “next” turn and not “this” turn is because as the card is revealed their turn this round hasn’t occurred yet. (Nobody’s turn has.)

Got it, thanks! :roll: . It also means we haven't been doing this properly from the very beginning :lol:. Being Stymied for two rounds did seem a little bit harsh. I miss the old Stymied from oTorg.
But the wording could have been clearer. It could have been "until the end of their coming turn" or even a plain "until the end of their turn". But I get it though, "next" meaning "immediately adjacent"...
If the side that gets the condition doesn't go first, they are Stymied right now until the end of their turn this round (you'll note that I do understand the definition of a "turn" as per p. 111 of Core Rules ;) ). If they go first, they are Stymied until the end of their turn. Yeah... The "next" was definitely not needed...
Whatever, you made my day! :mrgreen:

utsukushi wrote:I think this is one of those things like, if I say "next Friday," do I mean Friday of next week, or the Friday that's coming up next even if that's tomorrow?

It's funny, because to me "next Friday" always means "the Friday that's coming up next even if that's tomorrow", and people often get confused when I say it. And I never understand why.
I do now.
It's never too late be humble...

Taliesin
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2017 5:25 pm

Re: Stacking conditions from the conflict lines?

Postby Taliesin » Thu Nov 08, 2018 4:48 pm

TorgHacker wrote:Points upwards.

Yup. That.


Got it now. Sorry. :D

ZorValachan
Posts: 498
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2017 9:02 pm

Re: Stacking conditions from the conflict lines?

Postby ZorValachan » Thu Nov 08, 2018 6:10 pm

Taliesin wrote:
Atama wrote:The reason it is the “next” turn and not “this” turn is because as the card is revealed their turn this round hasn’t occurred yet. (Nobody’s turn has.)

Got it, thanks! :roll: . It also means we haven't been doing this properly from the very beginning :lol:. Being Stymied for two rounds did seem a little bit harsh. I miss the old Stymied from oTorg.
But the wording could have been clearer. It could have been "until the end of their coming turn" or even a plain "until the end of their turn". But I get it though, "next" meaning "immediately adjacent"...
If the side that gets the condition doesn't go first, they are Stymied right now until the end of their turn this round (you'll note that I do understand the definition of a "turn" as per p. 111 of Core Rules ;) ). If they go first, they are Stymied until the end of their turn. Yeah... The "next" was definitely not needed...
Whatever, you made my day! :mrgreen:

utsukushi wrote:I think this is one of those things like, if I say "next Friday," do I mean Friday of next week, or the Friday that's coming up next even if that's tomorrow?

It's funny, because to me "next Friday" always means "the Friday that's coming up next even if that's tomorrow", and people often get confused when I say it. And I never understand why.
I do now.
It's never too late be humble...

Funny, because for me, "next Friday" is always next week's Friday. If it's tomorrow, i say "this friday" but in TE, it's the next turn they take, even if it is in the same round...
- Leamon Crafton Jr.
Infiniverse Exchange author:

The Paraverse: An entire alternate Cosmverse
http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/237607/

The Knights of the Road: Archtypes designed as a Storm Knight group
http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/228365/

User avatar
Kuildeous
Posts: 1127
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2016 1:41 pm

Re: Stacking conditions from the conflict lines?

Postby Kuildeous » Fri Nov 09, 2018 8:41 am

Taliesin wrote:It's funny, because to me "next Friday" always means "the Friday that's coming up next even if that's tomorrow", and people often get confused when I say it. And I never understand why.


I'm one of those that uses "next Friday" to mean the Friday of next week. It is semantically not true, but it's how I grew up. I need to avoid that confusion by simply saying "Friday of next week."

But if that bothers you, then it'll surely bother you to know that there is a group of people who refers to bimonthly as "every 2 months" and another group who refers to it as "twice a month." In most cases, the groups are unaware the other one exists. I have a very strong opinion on that, but that doesn't stop the people who are using it wrong. But now I can't unambiguously use "bi-" in a calendar sense. "Semi-" is still valid.
The Boneyard – Friends and foes within Tharkold's Blasted Land

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


Return to “Rules Questions (TORG)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 3 guests