-
Hi All,
First off, I apologize if this has been covered in a previous post. I looked but couldn't find anything for this situation.
This is how the situation went down:
We were playing the "Defend the Manor" scenario, I was in the same space as 6 zombies (inside the house), it was my turn so I rolled to move, I moved in a way that I was outside of the house but still adjacent to the zombies. Now, Zombies being zombies, have to move into the same square as a Hero (not sure if walls affect this) because of their unquenchable hunger for humans, so, on the next zombie turn, I successfully drug ALLLL of the zombies previously on my square in the house, to my square outside of the house (yay me), I do my dice rolling, fend off all the zombies and everything remains the same. On the following hero turn, a hero moves within range of my hero (with the 6 zombies) having a shotgun in his position. Now, I'm doing this on memory but The shotgun card says the hero gets to roll 1 D6 for each zombie in the square (6 zombies, Hero rolls 6 D6's), a roll of 3+ hits/wounds a zombie, well my buddy (hero with a shotgun), rolls 6, D6's and all of them have 3+, so that's 6 potential hits. Now, here is where the weird-ness happens. Because the hero rolled 6 hits, are all the zombies dead? Or is that 6 shots, with 6 potential hits and after each shot, does the hero have to roll a 1 D6 to see if he is out of ammo (rolls 1-2 gun is out of ammo, discard)? Or did 1 Shotgun shot, just take out 6 zombies with 1 lucky roll?
Just to be clear, I was on the hero's side (obviously), so this roll was in my favor but this lucky roll, changed the WHOLE game. And if 1 lucky roll can take out 6 zombies...That's a little overpowered...
And I'm not here to discuss probability or looking for people to say "He could have easily rolled
-
-
You played it correctly. As described you roll 6 times (once for each zombie). In your case all zombies die, because of 6 successes. Then you roll once to see if your gun is out of ammo.
-
-
You shoot each zombie one at a time. You throw one D6 to shoot the first zombie and one D6 after the shot to check if your shotgun is empty.
If score a hit, the first zombie dies, otherwise that zombie remains alive. Now you check if you shotgun is empty( you thematically reload shotgun), if you pass, you may continue shooting the second zombie, otherwise your shotgun is empty and shooting party is over.
-
Nunya Business
United States
Pennsylvania
-
Roll each zombie affected separately; that is one-by-one. After each roll you would then roll a D6 to see if it is out of ammo.
Its not overpowered you just did it wrong.
-
Nunya Business
United States
Pennsylvania
-
RoadHouse wrote: You shoot each zombie one at a time. You throw one D6 to shoot the first zombie and one D6 after the shot to check if your shotgun is empty.
If score a hit, the first zombie dies, otherwise that zombie remains alive. Now you check if you shotgun is empty( you thematically reload shotgun), if you pass, you may continue shooting the second zombie, otherwise your shotgun is empty and shooting party is over.
Thumbs up to you.
-
-
Awesome. Thanks all! I really appreciate the quick response and help.
-
George
United States
Pennsylvania
You can take my game… when you pry my cold, dead fingers off the board!
-
EinGlasWurstWasser wrote: You played it correctly. As described you roll 6 times (once for each zombie). In your case all zombies die, because of 6 successes. Then you roll once to see if your gun is out of ammo.
This is correct, you roll only ONCE, not after each zombie.
http://flyingfrogwiki.com/ffpwiki/index.php?title=Card:Pump_...
Quote: Q17: Pump Shotgun and Revolver – Is running out of ammo different for these two guns?
A17: Yes. With a Revolver, it is a single roll to hit. If that roll is a 1, the gun not only misses but is also out of ammo (discarded). The Pump Shotgun works a little bit differently. You choose a target space and roll separately to hit each Zombie in that space. Once you have finished rolling to hit the Zombies, then you make a single additional roll to see if the gun runs out of ammo on the roll of 1 or 2. This extra ‘ammo roll’ is to prevent the Pump Shotgun from running out of ammo too quickly.
-
-
soosy wrote: EinGlasWurstWasser wrote: You played it correctly. As described you roll 6 times (once for each zombie). In your case all zombies die, because of 6 successes. Then you roll once to see if your gun is out of ammo. This is correct, you roll only ONCE, not after each zombie. [url] http://flyingfrogwiki.com/ffpwiki/index.php?title=Card ump_Shotgun[/url] Quote: Q17: Pump Shotgun and Revolver – Is running out of ammo different for these two guns?
A17: Yes. With a Revolver, it is a single roll to hit. If that roll is a 1, the gun not only misses but is also out of ammo (discarded). The Pump Shotgun works a little bit differently. You choose a target space and roll separately to hit each Zombie in that space. Once you have finished rolling to hit the Zombies, then you make a single additional roll to see if the gun runs out of ammo on the roll of 1 or 2. This extra ‘ammo roll’ is to prevent the Pump Shotgun from running out of ammo too quickly.
Ok. Good to know. It was quite weak the way I played it...
-
Nunya Business
United States
Pennsylvania
-
RoadHouse wrote: soosy wrote: EinGlasWurstWasser wrote: You played it correctly. As described you roll 6 times (once for each zombie). In your case all zombies die, because of 6 successes. Then you roll once to see if your gun is out of ammo. This is correct, you roll only ONCE, not after each zombie. [url] http://flyingfrogwiki.com/ffpwiki/index.php?title=Cardump_Shotgun[/url] Quote: Q17: Pump Shotgun and Revolver – Is running out of ammo different for these two guns?
A17: Yes. With a Revolver, it is a single roll to hit. If that roll is a 1, the gun not only misses but is also out of ammo (discarded). The Pump Shotgun works a little bit differently. You choose a target space and roll separately to hit each Zombie in that space. Once you have finished rolling to hit the Zombies, then you make a single additional roll to see if the gun runs out of ammo on the roll of 1 or 2. This extra ‘ammo roll’ is to prevent the Pump Shotgun from running out of ammo too quickly. Ok. Good to know. It was quite weak the way I played it...
So the rolling for each success part was correct. The only thing that was wrong was there is only "one roll" to see if it is out of ammo at the end of the shotgun-wielding player's ranged turn.
I've been playing it pretty weak as well. I was only attacking ONE zombie within the space with the shotgun.
-
-
soosy wrote: EinGlasWurstWasser wrote: You played it correctly. As described you roll 6 times (once for each zombie). In your case all zombies die, because of 6 successes. Then you roll once to see if your gun is out of ammo. This is correct, you roll only ONCE, not after each zombie. [url] http://flyingfrogwiki.com/ffpwiki/index.php?title=Cardump_Shotgun[/url] Quote: Q17: Pump Shotgun and Revolver – Is running out of ammo different for these two guns?
A17: Yes. With a Revolver, it is a single roll to hit. If that roll is a 1, the gun not only misses but is also out of ammo (discarded). The Pump Shotgun works a little bit differently. You choose a target space and roll separately to hit each Zombie in that space. Once you have finished rolling to hit the Zombies, then you make a single additional roll to see if the gun runs out of ammo on the roll of 1 or 2. This extra ‘ammo roll’ is to prevent the Pump Shotgun from running out of ammo too quickly.
Alright. So basically the player who rolled the 6 successful hits just got lucky enough to clear the space and, was poorly planned on behalf of the zombie player to have that many zombies in one spot. I guess it just seems a little too "beastly" that 1 shot could take out multiple targets (not trying to get into logistics of Shotguns or Dice Probability).
-
Nunya Business
United States
Pennsylvania
-
WildeyeWillie wrote: soosy wrote: EinGlasWurstWasser wrote: You played it correctly. As described you roll 6 times (once for each zombie). In your case all zombies die, because of 6 successes. Then you roll once to see if your gun is out of ammo. This is correct, you roll only ONCE, not after each zombie. [url] http://flyingfrogwiki.com/ffpwiki/index.php?title=Cardump_Shotgun[/url] Quote: Q17: Pump Shotgun and Revolver – Is running out of ammo different for these two guns?
A17: Yes. With a Revolver, it is a single roll to hit. If that roll is a 1, the gun not only misses but is also out of ammo (discarded). The Pump Shotgun works a little bit differently. You choose a target space and roll separately to hit each Zombie in that space. Once you have finished rolling to hit the Zombies, then you make a single additional roll to see if the gun runs out of ammo on the roll of 1 or 2. This extra ‘ammo roll’ is to prevent the Pump Shotgun from running out of ammo too quickly. Alright. So basically the player who rolled the 6 successful hits just got lucky enough to clear the space and, was poorly planned on behalf of the zombie player to have that many zombies in one spot. I guess it just seems a little too "beastly" that 1 shot could take out multiple targets (not trying to get into logistics of Shotguns or Dice Probability).
That was the zombie player's fault for trying to crowd six zombies into one space when facing down someone with a pump shotgun. Bad strategies get bad results.
There's nothing overpowered about it. He made the wrong move, and got destroyed. That's just the way the cookie crumbles in LNoE.
-
Brian Peirce
United States
Massachusetts
-
RoadHouse wrote: You shoot each zombie one at a time. You throw one D6 to shoot the first zombie and one D6 after the shot to check if your shotgun is empty.
If score a hit, the first zombie dies, otherwise that zombie remains alive. Now you check if you shotgun is empty( you thematically reload shotgun), if you pass, you may continue shooting the second zombie, otherwise your shotgun is empty and shooting party is over.
I'm pretty sure this is not correct. You only shoot once per turn, right? You can't shoot more than once. The shot gun allows you to hit multiple targets at once (the spread of a shell shot). You only roll ONCE because you only shot ONCE. Not six different times. Thereforce you only roll to break once, even if you hit six zombies.
If you had a revolver, you only could shoot one zombie in that space, not 6 shots.
-
-
[/q]That was the zombie player's fault for trying to crowd six zombies into one space when facing down someone with a pump shotgun. Bad strategies get bad results.
There's nothing overpowered about it. He made the wrong move, and got destroyed. That's just the way the cookie crumbles in LNoE.[/q]
Actually the zombie player didn't seem to make a bad move, you want to overpower heroes with multiple zombies to kill them, and these 6 zombies were attacking a hero without a shotgun then got moved again using hunger. From what was described, these 6 zombies got to fight this hero twice and the hero still lived after 12 fights! Then another hero runs up and blasts them all with one shot when statistically only 4 would get hit. All I can say is that Lady Luck was not on the zombie side!
I do believe though, that a hero in the same space of a shotgun blast (who isn't firing the shotgun) should roll to get hit on a 3+ as well to be fair. This would make for a dilema whether to chance a friendly fire hit when another hero is fending off zombies.
-
-
I know how it goes after somebody posted the FAQ ruling but thematically the rule doesn't make any sense. Zombies usually only die with a headshot. Even to to dismember a leg or a hand you need a concentrated amount of force, which isn't done with a few pellets. If you only shoot once in a zombie horde, you will kill one zombie or none. Killing a couple zombies could be somehow reasoned but killing anything above 4 with a one shot is totally ridiculous.
-
-
RoadHouse wrote: I know how it goes after somebody posted the FAQ ruling but thematically the rule doesn't make any sense. Zombies usually only die with a headshot. Even to to dismember a leg or a hand you need a concentrated amount of force, which isn't done with a few pellets. If you only shoot once in a zombie horde, you will kill one zombie or none. Killing a couple zombies could be somehow reasoned but killing anything above 4 with a one shot is totally ridiculous.
I agree with you in theory. The zombies in reality would get shredded up to be sure (along with the hero), but with only 1 or 2 maybe getting a pellet to the head. But to be honest though, this situation won't usually happen in the game itself. When it does happen you just have to joke about it and laugh it off.
Smart zombie players will spread their zombies out in a net-like fasion. In my play group it's rare to see more than 2 z's in the same space except when mobbing a hero, and if a shotgun or dynamite is out, you can count on seeing only 1 z per space with a hero getting mobbed by only a few z's at a time.
In the above situation, it looks like the zombie player tried to mob a hero with 6 z's inside a building with the shotgun hero being outside and several spaces away, thus not being in line of sight. I don't think that was a bad move really if the z's could have killed that hero, but the hero survived that round, moved the z's out using hunger (was the hero able to run out the door outside and get behind the wall space with the z's?), and survived yet another round with the 6 z's outside, before the shotgun hero ran up and blasted them all away with 1 shot!
I think the best question would be how did the hero survive 12 fights in a row?
-
Nunya Business
United States
Pennsylvania
-
RoadHouse wrote: I know how it goes after somebody posted the FAQ ruling but thematically the rule doesn't make any sense. Zombies usually only die with a headshot. Even to to dismember a leg or a hand you need a concentrated amount of force, which isn't done with a few pellets. If you only shoot once in a zombie horde, you will kill one zombie or none. Killing a couple zombies could be somehow reasoned but killing anything above 4 with a one shot is totally ridiculous.
How is this anymore ridiculous than the idea of "fighting zombies" itself? Zombies don't really exist; so even playing the game is stretching reality.
When I play a board game I don't feel I should have to pick-up a textbook on shotguns, pistols, etc. as well.
If one shot killed six zombies who cares? Spawn new ones, and get on with the game. I don't like "Taken Over" since it allows zombies to "take over" a building even if no zombies are present in said building. However, its part of the game. So I don't complain about it.
I say if its part of the rules, its part of the rules.
-
-
PrimordialOne wrote: RoadHouse wrote: I know how it goes after somebody posted the FAQ ruling but thematically the rule doesn't make any sense. Zombies usually only die with a headshot. Even to to dismember a leg or a hand you need a concentrated amount of force, which isn't done with a few pellets. If you only shoot once in a zombie horde, you will kill one zombie or none. Killing a couple zombies could be somehow reasoned but killing anything above 4 with a one shot is totally ridiculous. How is this anymore ridiculous than the idea of "fighting zombies" itself? Zombies don't really exist; so even playing the game is stretching reality. When I play a board game I don't feel I should have to pick-up a textbook on shotguns, pistols, etc. as well. If one shot killed six zombies who cares? Spawn new ones, and get on with the game. I don't like "Taken Over" since it allows zombies to "take over" a building even if no zombies are present in said building. However, its part of the game. So I don't complain about it. I say if its part of the rules, its part of the rules.
Even fantasy world can have certain elements that people find irrational. In this situation it really doesn't matter if they are zombies, humans , sheep, dogs or whatever living beings, shooting one shot and killing a dozen doesn't sound very reasonable, unless the whole game is a set and they are filming a C-movie here...
-
Ax Bits
Canada
Ottawa
Ontario
-
RoadHouse wrote: Even fantasy world can have certain elements that people find irrational. In this situation it really doesn't matter if they are zombies, humans , sheep, dogs or whatever living beings, shooting one shot and killing a dozen doesn't sound very reasonable, unless the whole game is a set and they are filming a C-movie here...
A single Ranged Attack action doesn't need to be considered a single firing of a weapon. It's an abstraction that lets the game move along.
Take the zombie card Resilient for example: it takes a kill and turns it around to narrate that the Hero emptied all of xir available ammo to kill the zed, implying multiple rounds fired. Similar logic can be drawn out to account for the lethality of all weapons. It's all abstractions.
-
United States
Norwood
Massachusetts
-
RoadHouse wrote: PrimordialOne wrote: RoadHouse wrote: I know how it goes after somebody posted the FAQ ruling but thematically the rule doesn't make any sense. Zombies usually only die with a headshot. Even to to dismember a leg or a hand you need a concentrated amount of force, which isn't done with a few pellets. If you only shoot once in a zombie horde, you will kill one zombie or none. Killing a couple zombies could be somehow reasoned but killing anything above 4 with a one shot is totally ridiculous. How is this anymore ridiculous than the idea of "fighting zombies" itself? Zombies don't really exist; so even playing the game is stretching reality. When I play a board game I don't feel I should have to pick-up a textbook on shotguns, pistols, etc. as well. If one shot killed six zombies who cares? Spawn new ones, and get on with the game. I don't like "Taken Over" since it allows zombies to "take over" a building even if no zombies are present in said building. However, its part of the game. So I don't complain about it. I say if its part of the rules, its part of the rules. Even fantasy world can have certain elements that people find irrational. In this situation it really doesn't matter if they are zombies, humans , sheep, dogs or whatever living beings, shooting one shot and killing a dozen doesn't sound very reasonable, unless the whole game is a set and they are filming a C-movie here...
Sounds reasonable to me. I call it the "Kennedy Bullet"...
-
Nunya Business
United States
Pennsylvania
-
Maxx_Pointy wrote: RoadHouse wrote: Even fantasy world can have certain elements that people find irrational. In this situation it really doesn't matter if they are zombies, humans , sheep, dogs or whatever living beings, shooting one shot and killing a dozen doesn't sound very reasonable, unless the whole game is a set and they are filming a C-movie here... A single Ranged Attack action doesn't need to be considered a single firing of a weapon. It's an abstraction that lets the game move along. Take the zombie card Resilient for example: it takes a kill and turns it around to narrate that the Hero emptied all of xir available ammo to kill the zed, implying multiple rounds fired. Similar logic can be drawn out to account for the lethality of all weapons. It's all abstractions.
I just think its a matter of people that can't stand to lose a game. If they win, the game is good. If they lose; the game is "broken" or something of that nature.
There will always be complaints that this or that is wrong with a game. I usually just stop playing with those kinds of people.
-
-
PrimordialOne wrote: Maxx_Pointy wrote: RoadHouse wrote: Even fantasy world can have certain elements that people find irrational. In this situation it really doesn't matter if they are zombies, humans , sheep, dogs or whatever living beings, shooting one shot and killing a dozen doesn't sound very reasonable, unless the whole game is a set and they are filming a C-movie here... A single Ranged Attack action doesn't need to be considered a single firing of a weapon. It's an abstraction that lets the game move along. Take the zombie card Resilient for example: it takes a kill and turns it around to narrate that the Hero emptied all of xir available ammo to kill the zed, implying multiple rounds fired. Similar logic can be drawn out to account for the lethality of all weapons. It's all abstractions. I just think its a matter of people that can't stand to lose a game. If they win, the game is good. If they lose; the game is "broken" or something of that nature. There will always be complaints that this or that is wrong with a game. I usually just stop playing with those kinds of people.
Criticizing some gameplay element has nothing to do with if I lose or win the game. The common deduction seems to be that if one critizizes something then he hates the game. I actually really like the game and it's one of my favourite lighter thematic games. Gameplaywise the rule is just fine and the shotgun is much better than with my misplayed rule but I would think the thematic interpretation as multiple shots rather than one huge shot with the biggest shotgun ever made.
-
Nunya Business
United States
Pennsylvania
-
If a player is going to sit around and complain about how a "real-life shotgun" can't kill "six zombies" then I'm going to stop playing with that person. Especially since in "real-life" there are no "zombies." Also, who is going to sit around and "house rule" that only "headshots" kill zombies? If the die roll succeeds then it is assumed the Hero did what was necessary to kill the zombie(s). No need to make an entire hit chart for what should be a quick ranged round. I mean come on are you serious? This is a "board game" not Dungeons and Dragons.
That's unnecessary drama and basically complicating a simple (and workable) mechanic. The point of a game is to "have fun." Not to try to break out schematics of real-life weapons and make sure "board game" weapons match up. What kind of fun is there in that? Who would want to play with someone that nitpicks at games like that? Its annoying and most people play games to "have fun."
Like I said before "if its in the rules, its in the rules."
-
-
PrimordialOne wrote: If a player is going to sit around and complain about how a "real-life shotgun" can't kill "six zombies" then I'm going to stop playing with that person. Especially since in "real-life" there are no "zombies."
That's unnecessary drama and basically complaining about nothing. The point of a game is to "have fun." Not to try to break out schematics of real-life weapons and make sure "board game" weapons match up. What kind of fun is there in that? Who would want to play with someone that nitpicks at games like that? Its annoying and most people play games to "have fun."
Like I said before "if its in the rules, its in the rules."
I never implied at any point that I would start to complain about the rule and make a big fuss about it on the table, unlike how you interpreted the situation. People can talk on these forums, right? I guess that's the point of these.
If some person has a different opinion then he has a different opinion. If somebody complains about something I don't make a big deal about. I move on and so do most the people I have played with. Usually people respond to these kind of situations with a joke and some funny explanation and it's no big deal. Jumping down one's throat after some minor disagreement doesn't really make long lasting friendship.
-
Nunya Business
United States
Pennsylvania
-
RoadHouse wrote: PrimordialOne wrote: If a player is going to sit around and complain about how a "real-life shotgun" can't kill "six zombies" then I'm going to stop playing with that person. Especially since in "real-life" there are no "zombies."
That's unnecessary drama and basically complaining about nothing. The point of a game is to "have fun." Not to try to break out schematics of real-life weapons and make sure "board game" weapons match up. What kind of fun is there in that? Who would want to play with someone that nitpicks at games like that? Its annoying and most people play games to "have fun."
Like I said before "if its in the rules, its in the rules." I never implied at any point that I would start to complain about the rule and make a big fuss about it on the table, unlike how you interpreted the situation. People can talk on these forums, right? I guess that's the point of these. If some person has a different opinion then he has a different opinion. If somebody complains about something I don't make a big deal about. I move on and so do most the people I have played with. Usually people respond to these kind of situations with a joke and some funny explanation and it's no big deal. Jumping down one's throat after some minor disagreement doesn't really make long lasting friendship.
I like how you spun people not liking those who ruin the fun of board games by constantly complaining about realism as "jumping down their throat."
Anyone that constantly ruins the fun of a game by saying "Oh this isn't like real life" or "that isn't like real life" will get on anyone's nerves.
Especially since in many thematic games the suspension of in-depth reality is often necessary. That's part of the fun. Like I said how many "zombies" have you seen walking around in the real world? Its a game, its for fun. Complaining about how "real guns" work (everytime you lose zombies due to a shotgun blast) during a board game is nitpicking. It also makes the player doing it seem like a sore loser.
Its not fair to the other players who are trying to "have fun" playing the game. No one wants to play with someone like that. And there is no rule against discussing it; there is also no rule against me stating that nitpicky players (who complain that board game mechanics aren't "just like real life") aren't fun to play with.
Also, who said "you personally" were complaining at games?
-
-
PrimordialOne wrote: RoadHouse wrote: PrimordialOne wrote: If a player is going to sit around and complain about how a "real-life shotgun" can't kill "six zombies" then I'm going to stop playing with that person. Especially since in "real-life" there are no "zombies."
That's unnecessary drama and basically complaining about nothing. The point of a game is to "have fun." Not to try to break out schematics of real-life weapons and make sure "board game" weapons match up. What kind of fun is there in that? Who would want to play with someone that nitpicks at games like that? Its annoying and most people play games to "have fun."
Like I said before "if its in the rules, its in the rules." I never implied at any point that I would start to complain about the rule and make a big fuss about it on the table, unlike how you interpreted the situation. People can talk on these forums, right? I guess that's the point of these. If some person has a different opinion then he has a different opinion. If somebody complains about something I don't make a big deal about. I move on and so do most the people I have played with. Usually people respond to these kind of situations with a joke and some funny explanation and it's no big deal. Jumping down one's throat after some minor disagreement doesn't really make long lasting friendship. I like how you spun people not liking those who ruin the fun of board games by constantly complaining about realism as "jumping down their throat." Anyone that constantly ruins the fun of a game by saying "Oh this isn't like real life" or "that isn't like real life" will get on anyone's nerves. Especially since in many thematic games the suspension of in-depth reality is often necessary. That's part of the fun. Like I said how many "zombies" have you seen walking around in the real world? Its a game, its for fun. Complaining about how "real guns" work (everytime you lose zombies due to a shotgun blast) during a board game is nitpicking. Its not fair to the other players who are trying to "have fun" playing the game. No one wants to play with someone like that. And there is no rule against discussing it; there is also no rule against me stating that those kinds of people aren't fun to play with.
-
|
|
