Lash and warrior skills

Post by **WayneO42** » Mon Aug 07, 2006 9:21 am

cole45 wrote: Parry should still not work on lash though.

Agreed

Corbyn · Post by **Corbyn** » Mon Aug 07, 2006 12:31 pm

I like it Wayne-o. I think that balances things well and still makes PCs have to use their skills thoughtfully.

Post by **GM_Chris** » Mon Aug 07, 2006 1:11 pm

I actually dissagree. Not everything needs a counter.

What is the counter to arcane spell?
What is the counter to someone posioning your drink?

I would almost like to see the parry skill block lash. The problem with with def matrix being used means that the empath lash, I feel, becomes unbalanced. ZIn Reid's own words there as no issue with PC lash and he thought ti was balanced, but now there is a counter which, would in turn, make it less powerful.

and even if we did make def matrix work you are talking about monsters, if I want to disease you I can call a gfame stop and say everyone is diseased. I can call a game stop and say everyone's right arm falls off. The point about encounter balance is we must balance the encounter based on currently available skill set not change core skills to match encounters.

cole45 · Post by **cole45** » Mon Aug 07, 2006 1:17 pm

What is the counter to arcane spell?

Resist Magic.

What is the counter to someone posioning your drink?
Resist Poison.

Post by **GM_Chris** » Mon Aug 07, 2006 1:37 pm

Actually no

The only way to resist an arcane spell UNLESS the spell says you can use resist magic. most arcane spells do NOT allow resist magic to be used.

But your example is good. The only way to resist posion is to be a dwarf, but hey resist disease is available as a first level discipline.

But you guys are arguing that there is not enough ways to resist if a monster swings 1 vorpal lash disease. Well what if after a fix like this we bring in a monster that swings 2 lash? Would we need a new fix at that point?

Post by **WayneO42** » Mon Aug 07, 2006 1:42 pm

The argument is for a counter for just plain "Lash" damage like "2 lash".

cole45 · Post by **cole45** » Mon Aug 07, 2006 1:46 pm

Of course Chris has a point in that lash is a fairly hard to come by ability, that most of it deals with monsters/npcs who have special game needs.

Post by **GM_Chris** » Mon Aug 07, 2006 2:41 pm

Oh another way to call "1 vorpal disease lash" would be to simply say "1 lash" with the description that it is a "gas" and then should you be able to use def/matrix

dier_cire · Post by **dier_cire** » Mon Aug 07, 2006 2:52 pm

If defensive matrix works, then as the more potent version, parry probably should work as well, or parry alone. And again this is basically for the general "2 lash", or "2 vorpal lash" type stuff, not the PC "2 Magic Lash". I figure if the call has magic in it, it's probably not melee.

Again, this just for a basic rule in the book as there is none. Lash is or isn't melee so we really didn't know this event. As for what brought all this up, the two caves we had lash, one was defendable and one wasn't. The one that wasn't made sense as the air wisps called 1 lash and if you touched the walls you took one lash. Maybe they blew you into them, maybe they sucked the wind out of you, etc. Again, this was a call made on the scene which, even if lash is by default defendable, I would still encourage if the situation arose again.

I think Lash by default should have a counter (denfensive matrix, hold ground, and/or parry or make it absorbable by the monk), but again I don't think this is a hard an fast rule, just a basic "unless otherwise stated by a GM on the scene, do this" type deal. That way, we don't sit around going "um... can we use a skill on lash? Hmm, is it melee or is it ranged? Dunno."

dier_cire · Post by **dier_cire** » Mon Aug 07, 2006 2:55 pm

GM_Chris wrote:Oh another way to call "1 vorpal disease lash" would be to simply say "1 lash" with the description that it is a "gas" and then should you be able to use def/matrix

"1 vorpal disease lash" is almost the same as "disease lash", which if the point is to force people to be diseased, then I'd think would be a better call and more representative of a gas.

cole45 · Post by **cole45** » Mon Aug 07, 2006 3:00 pm

Negative. Disease Lash would do the same as Poison lash. That is...Unless you had no armor, NOTHING.

It has to hit your life points just like poison. (according to page 14) So the 1 vorpal disease lash is more representive of a gas. I have a hard time seeing your shoes protecting you from toxic gas.

EDIT:
PAge 16 does indicate that all non-damage calls surge. SO my above statement is 100% correct.

Post by **GM_Chris** » Mon Aug 07, 2006 3:02 pm

I meant disease lash sorry

I have a radical idea...

Why not have GM's not use lash unless we attach magic or not put in a number for damage, then no one has to think it is ever melee and no one's brain will implode.

Problem solved and no rule changes

Doctor Erasmus · Post by **Doctor Erasmus** » Mon Aug 07, 2006 3:06 pm

I just coulda swore we had this discussion after the Frostfell event as people thought they could parry a lash attack and it was ruled they could not since it was not actually a melee attack...

Or did I just imagine all of that?

That does happen on occasion you know...

dier_cire · Post by **dier_cire** » Mon Aug 07, 2006 3:18 pm

cole45 wrote:Negative. Disease Lash would do the same as Poison lash. That is...Unless you had no armor, NOTHING.

Are the poison and disease calls without numbers gone from the game? They use to surge. Dunno if it changed.

My only issue with only using magic lash is not all lash is magic. If it's one or the other by default no one's brain will implode either.

Like I said, if it's melee by default, it's easy to deal with.

cole45 · Post by **cole45** » Mon Aug 07, 2006 3:29 pm

They do surge. But surge calls don't penitrate armor.

Just like crush does not hit life points

Calls Like Fear and sleep have mechanics that don't interact with life points.

Both poison and disease state on page 14 that they have to touch life points.You must have no armor, or be struck by vorpal.