 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
|
|
Post subject:
 Posted: Feb 26, 2004 - 08:01 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
| Why does he get -2? Because you're going down, and that scares him? No, because you're jumping right at him! You can do that with your tail too! |
_________________
They will slowly add bits of the vault in on each RR leading up to 2007, starting with LRB 4.0, so it will be a slow and agonising death for BB.
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 27, 2004 - 02:48 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2696
Location: Undisclosed
|
|
I always understood it as a last-ditch diving grasp, which was why you were going prone.
If I'm wrong, that's fine, I just had the timing all wrong. |
_________________
_____ and rankings - that is all
#27 of the "24 club" (due to some dodgy accounting)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
pfooti |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 27, 2004 - 10:25 AM
|
|
Joined: Oct 29, 2003
Posts: 81
Status: Offline
|
|
Darkson wrote: Ah, then maybe I was reading the skill describtion wrong, as it says place the player prone then the dodger takes the -2 from the dodge roll.
Actually, this was a Really Boring Argument I had on TBB with Galak about a year ago. There is a timing hole somewhere in the way DT is currently worded (especially when it interacts with the oppo using a reroll).
Here's a for-example. If a player is dodging through your TZ (from one to another), it is a straight AG roll (+1 for the dodge, -1 for the TZ). If you use diving tackle, it becomes -2, because the TZ penalty still applies. Furthermore, if the opponent fails the roll and uses dodge, he still has to roll at -2, even though you're prone now, not exerting a TZ, and not even really forcing him to dodge.
In a similar way, you should be able to use PT with DT for a cumulative -3.
At the end of our long (and boring) soapboxy argument, Galak agreed to add something to the Hotlist on the order of changing the wording of DT so the player goes prone after the dodge attempt is resolved. But he didn't.
In the old days, you couldn't have two modifiers stack, which is why Strong Arm and Accurate are different but similar. Nowadays, they could be the same, because the only restriction is stacking mods to armor and injury rolls (as has been pointed out). |
_________________
Pfooti, Bishop of the OCN
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Clan_Skaven |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 27, 2004 - 11:08 AM
|
|
Joined: Aug 19, 2003
Niagara Falls ON, Canada
Posts: 2604
Location: Niagara Falls ON, Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
pfooti wrote: Darkson wrote: Ah, then maybe I was reading the skill describtion wrong, as it says place the player prone then the dodger takes the -2 from the dodge roll.
Actually, this was a Really Boring Argument I had on TBB with Galak about a year ago. There is a timing hole somewhere in the way DT is currently worded (especially when it interacts with the oppo using a reroll).
Here's a for-example. If a player is dodging through your TZ (from one to another), it is a straight AG roll (+1 for the dodge, -1 for the TZ). If you use diving tackle, it becomes -2, because the TZ penalty still applies. Furthermore, if the opponent fails the roll and uses dodge, he still has to roll at -2, even though you're prone now, not exerting a TZ, and not even really forcing him to dodge.
In a similar way, you should be able to use PT with DT for a cumulative -3.
At the end of our long (and boring) soapboxy argument, Galak agreed to add something to the Hotlist on the order of changing the wording of DT so the player goes prone after the dodge attempt is resolved. But he didn't.
In the old days, you couldn't have two modifiers stack, which is why Strong Arm and Accurate are different but similar. Nowadays, they could be the same, because the only restriction is stacking mods to armor and injury rolls (as has been pointed out).
ok yours saying a total of -3, but you still get the +1 for making the dodge? So if Dodging to an empty square from an opponent who uses Prehensile Tail & DT, then it would be +1 + -3= -2. So it would be a minus 2 not a minus 3 right? |
_________________
"2006 SPIKE Champion!"
"Death-Bowl IV & V, Most Casualties!, Death-Bowl VI Best Team!"
"2008 Dagger Bowl Champion"
Host of the Warpstone Cup, Q'ermitt Bowl & the Hope Bowl
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
pfooti |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 27, 2004 - 11:51 AM
|
|
Joined: Oct 29, 2003
Posts: 81
Status: Offline
|
|
| right, my mistake. |
_________________
Pfooti, Bishop of the OCN
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 27, 2004 - 04:22 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
Darkson wrote: I always understood it as a last-ditch diving grasp, which was why you were going prone.
If I'm wrong, that's fine, I just had the timing all wrong.
The fact that you can declare the skill after seeing the result of the dodge (which is stupid and something i'll always fight against) is probably what got you confused. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 27, 2004 - 04:25 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
pfooti wrote: Here's a for-example. If a player is dodging through your TZ (from one to another), it is a straight AG roll (+1 for the dodge, -1 for the TZ). If you use diving tackle, it becomes -2, because the TZ penalty still applies. Furthermore, if the opponent fails the roll and uses dodge, he still has to roll at -2, even though you're prone now, not exerting a TZ, and not even really forcing him to dodge.
Don't look at skill rerolls as something that gives you a second chance when you fail the first time. They will never make sense that way. Look at them as an increased chance of succeeding in your first attempt. Then you won't see the reroll as a timing issue anymore. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Clan_Skaven |
|
|
Post subject: Zombie is right
Posted: Feb 27, 2004 - 11:07 PM
|
|
Joined: Aug 19, 2003
Niagara Falls ON, Canada
Posts: 2604
Location: Niagara Falls ON, Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
Zombie is right! A reroll is almost like going back in time. Thats why its called a RERoll. If it were a second chane that took place after the initial roll, I guess they woulda called it a SECONDRoll.
Did that make any if at all any sense?
Maybe someone can explain it better than I.
Rod |
_________________
"2006 SPIKE Champion!"
"Death-Bowl IV & V, Most Casualties!, Death-Bowl VI Best Team!"
"2008 Dagger Bowl Champion"
Host of the Warpstone Cup, Q'ermitt Bowl & the Hope Bowl
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Mordredd |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 02, 2004 - 09:25 AM
|
|
Joined: Mar 03, 2003
England
Posts: 728
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
Quote: No, because you're jumping right at him! You can do that with your tail too!
This one made me laugh. A Rat Ogre's hands and tail are almost at opposite ends of his body. They are certainly a long way apart when he dives with his arms stretched out to tackle a player. There is no way they could be used together. Better to think of it as the tail putting the dodger off balance, and the dive finishing him off. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
pfooti |
|
|
Post subject: Re: Zombie is right
Posted: Mar 02, 2004 - 11:19 AM
|
|
Joined: Oct 29, 2003
Posts: 81
Status: Offline
|
|
Clan-Skaven wrote: Zombie is right! A reroll is almost like going back in time. Thats why its called a RERoll. If it were a second chane that took place after the initial roll, I guess they woulda called it a SECONDRoll.
Actually, that's what I always thought, but that doesn't make sense in light of everyhing else. Here's the big deal:
If rerolls were really RErolls, your opponent shouldn't be allowed to change his/her skill selections for the second roll. Example:
I dodge, roll 1. Reroll, get a 3. You decide to use DT after seeing the second roll. If the reroll were truly a REroll, you shouldn't be able to DT after the second roll, just the first. But because you can add a skill to the second roll that isn't in the first, the reroll is actually a SECOND roll, and SOME (but not ALL) of the modifiers to the roll get retotaled. Bleh. |
_________________
Pfooti, Bishop of the OCN
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 02, 2004 - 02:38 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
| This problem is only present because players are allowed to decide whether to use diving tackle after seeing the dice roll. The rule should never have been made this way, and i still hope they're eventually see the light and make it declare before. |
_________________
They will slowly add bits of the vault in on each RR leading up to 2007, starting with LRB 4.0, so it will be a slow and agonising death for BB.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
pfooti |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 02, 2004 - 04:15 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 29, 2003
Posts: 81
Status: Offline
|
|
| I agree. |
_________________
Pfooti, Bishop of the OCN
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
