Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
62 Posts
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 

Shadows of Brimstone: City of the Ancients» Forums » Rules

Subject: Orphan Dynamite rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Chris Pulis
United States
Greenfield
Indiana
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
SO this question just popped into my head:

If an Orphan has their ability ( Hardened to the World) that grants +1 Damage on Attack rolls of 6+, How does this apply to Dynamite?

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
William Lewis
United States
Tempe
Arizona
flag msg tools
My original thought was that throwing dynamite was an action, not an attack. However, checking the rulebook, page 25 says "A Hero may throw a Dynamite Token as a Ranged Attack."

So I'd allow it... IF the Ranged To-Hit roll was a 6.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jee Fu
United States
Maryland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
What is the exact wording?

- Jee
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Pulis
United States
Greenfield
Indiana
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Hardened to the world : "you are now +1 Damage on all to hit rolls of 6+)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Harman
United States
Ontario
CA
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Better yet, Marshals can add 3 damage to dynamite throws :-)
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Sandy Springs
Georgia
flag msg tools
darthjawa13 wrote:
Hardened to the world : "you are now +1 Damage on all to hit rolls of 6+)


Dynamite's to-hit roll is non-damaging. The damage is done by the subsequent explosion.

Hardened to the world, Marshall's "That does it", Orb of Ro'Kal, etc do not modify the damage done when dynamite explodes, because that damage is not dealt by "you".
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jee Fu
United States
Maryland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
darthjawa13 wrote:
Hardened to the world : "you are now +1 Damage on all to hit rolls of 6+)

Then yes Dynamite will benefit from this, but it's a special case.

Normally, things that do straight Wounds/Damage to the target - whether its an Attack or not - don't benefit from +Damage buffs because they aren't doing Hits, technically, and +Damage only works on things that do Hits. Dynamite gets around this because - despite it being worded as straight Wounds - there are numerous things about it at various places in the rules that heavily imply that it does indeed do "Hits" (see the Bandido Upgrade Dark Stone Dynamite - "+2 Damage to each model Hit" <--- note the capital H) and that those Hits simply ignore Defense.

Ergo, +Damage applies.

- Jee
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Sandy Springs
Georgia
flag msg tools
Dynamite does implied hits, but hardened to the world does not modify hits: It modifies the effects of the "to hit roll".

If you want to make the case that you hit somebody in the eye with the dynamite for 1 damage, and THEN it blew up, I probably wouldn't fight too hard (since he'd soak the 1 damage with defense anyway).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Pulis
United States
Greenfield
Indiana
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Guurzak wrote:
Dynamite does implied hits, but hardened to the world does not modify hits: It modifies the effects of the "to hit roll".

If you want to make the case that you hit somebody in the eye with the dynamite for 1 damage, and THEN it blew up, I probably wouldn't fight too hard (since he'd soak the 1 damage with defense anyway).


See I disagree because you still have a "to-hit" roll with Dynamite, or any explosive for that matter.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Sandy Springs
Georgia
flag msg tools
Yes, there's a to-hit roll to determine where the dynamite explodes. There is no damage done as a result of that to to-hit roll. The damage from the explosion is not in any way a function or result of the to-hit roll.

The fact that dynamite still does full damage on a miss should make it clear that it would not do more damage on a more accurate hit. Dynamite's damage is dealt by the dynamite, not by the hero.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jee Fu
United States
Maryland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Guurzak wrote:
Dynamite does implied hits, but hardened to the world does not modify hits: It modifies the effects of the "to hit roll".

The effects of a To-Hit roll of 6 when you're attacking with Dynamite is one Defense-less Hit on the Target and one Defense-less Hit on all adjacent Targets. That's what happens. The wording on the Bandido's upgrade all but confirms this. If the To-Hit roll is a success at all, there is nothing in the rules to suggest that between connection and detonation, the source of the damage magically changes to something other than the Hero. You roll, you Hit, you do damage - just like any other Attack. Any Hits done in the process benefit from +Damage.

Otherwise you would never get XP for using Dynamite since it wouldn't be "you" causing the damage.

Dynamite
scales pretty poorly anyway; until Jason comes in here and tells us otherwise, there is no need to invent reasons to make it worse.

- Jee
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jee Fu
United States
Maryland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Guurzak wrote:
Yes, there's a to-hit roll to determine where the dynamite explodes. There is no damage done as a result of that to to-hit roll. The damage from the explosion is not in any way a function or result of the to-hit roll.

So then ... you would be ok with Runes in Clothing sockets adding +1 Damage to Dynamite, since those don't say anything about the To-Hit roll? It so, that seems like a pretty thin hair-split. If not, why not?

Guurzak wrote:
The fact that dynamite still does full damage on a miss should make it clear that it would not do more damage on a more accurate hit.

I'm not following this logic. You're saying that because it still does normal damage when it misses, it can't do extra damage on 6s? Why not?

This also sounds like a mechanical justification via theme. You can always make up a thematic reason for why something functions the way it does. The Orphan's skill says nothing about the her accuracy, only that she does more damage 1/3rd of the time she connects with her Hits. Even if it was about accuracy, a exceptionally-placed explosive will absolutely be able to edge out extra results. Think about it this way: on a 1-5, the throw is unexceptional (even if the aim is off on a 1-3) and so it explodes normally no matter what. On a 6 the aim is true, but the throw causes some kind of rotational optimization that makes the thing land precisely in 1x1 foot spot that - due to the physics of the toss - maximizes the effects of the explosive.

- Jee
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken H.
United States
Amherst
Ohio
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I can kind of see both sides of the debate. For me, it just comes down to keeping the rules simple: +1 damage means +1 damage.

This particular ability has the additional requirement that a to-hit roll of 6 is required. That's fine, but I don't see any reason to further complicate it by saying that some to-hit rolls count and others don't. (Although I do see Guurzak's point that a missed to-hit roll doesn't negate damage for dynamite -- there is definitely a wrinkle there.)


Inspector Jee wrote:
So then ... you would be ok with Runes in Clothing sockets adding +1 Damage to Dynamite, since those don't say anything about the To-Hit roll?


I don't understand this question though. Are you agreeing or disagreeing that Runes apply their damage bonus to dynamite? For me, it goes back to "+1 damage means +1 damage", so of course they apply.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Sandy Springs
Georgia
flag msg tools
Let me start by saying that there are multiple possible readings of the text, and while I think my reading is correct there's enough ambiguity in the wording to make any discussion inconclusive absent an explicit statement from the devs.

The effects of a To-Hit roll of 6 when you're attacking with Dynamite is one Defense-less Hit on the Target and one Defense-less Hit on all adjacent Targets. That's what happens.

No, the effect of the to-hit roll when you're attacking with dynamite is to determine the location where the dynamite will explode. The fact that the dynamite WILL explode has nothing to do with your to hit roll; it's going to explode and do the same damage no matter what you roll.

The wording on the Bandido's upgrade all but confirms this.

Do you have the complete text of this ability handy?

If the To-Hit roll is a success at all, there is nothing in the rules to suggest that between connection and detonation, the source of the damage magically changes to something other than the Hero. You roll, you Hit, you do damage - just like any other Attack. Any Hits done in the process benefit from +Damage.

"When the Dynamite explodes, it does D6 Wounds, ignoring Defense, to each model in the same and adjacent spaces to it. Roll the Damage for each model separately."

Otherwise you would never get XP for using Dynamite since it wouldn't be "you" causing the damage.

I agree, except that we have a dev statement that for XP purposes only the hero is credited with a hit for each enemy damaged.

Dynamite scales pretty poorly anyway; until Jason comes in here and tells us otherwise, there is no need to invent reasons to make it worse.

I agree that dynamite scales poorly, but by the time you outlevel it you should have other DPS options. It's a crutch to carry low level groups until the combat monsters can get their builds rolling.

What's the other option? Let a Marshal with That Does It and an Orb of Ro'kal hit 9 models for 6 + d6 wounds each? That just doesn't seem like a good idea.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jee Fu
United States
Maryland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Rubric wrote:

I don't understand this question though. Are you agreeing or disagreeing that Runes apply their damage bonus to dynamite? For me, it goes back to "+1 damage means +1 damage", so of course they apply.

He seemed to be saying that the reason Dynamite won't benefit from +Damage because the To-Hit roll doesn't result in damage - rather, it results in an explosion which does damage. So I was wondering if he would be OK with other sources of +Damage affecting Dynamite, sources that don't trigger from the To-Hit roll. It seems he thinks not.

Guurzak wrote:
No, the effect of the to-hit roll when you're attacking with dynamite is to determine the location where the dynamite will explode. The fact that the dynamite WILL explode has nothing to do with your to hit roll; it's going to explode and do the same damage no matter what you roll.

I could see this interpretation. Not sure why the Hero wouldn't still ultimately be the source of the damage tho.

Guurzak wrote:
Quote:
The wording on the Bandido's upgrade all but confirms this.


Do you have the complete text of this ability handy?

I do!

Dark Stone Dynamite
Once per turn, Use 1 Dark Stone when Throwing a Dynamite Token to add +2 Damage to each model Hit.

The capital H in Hit indicates that Dynamite does Hits (a defined mechanic), and the rest of the ability indicates that those Hits can benefit from +Damage (as normal). It's possible that this ability is meant to be special; it can buff Dynamite when normal things can't, but if that's the case then a) it's worded poorly (totally possible) and b) you have to rule out the Amulet of Kotak, Spice Tokens, and anything else that can add damage to "any one Hit."

Perhaps the rule is "Dynamite causes Hits, but those Hits are unaffected by Hero-based modification mechanics unless those mechanics say otherwise."

Guurzak wrote:
"When the Dynamite explodes, it does D6 Wounds, ignoring Defense, to each model in the same and adjacent spaces to it. Roll the Damage for each model separately."

But none of that says that damage source is no longer the Hero. It costs a Hero's Attack, there are abilities in the game that say Dynamite does Hits and that those Hits can benefit from +Damage, and you get XP for using it. This seems like a strong argument to me. Do you roll for the Bandido's Sinister Laugh ("Any time you kill an Enemy, roll of D6. On the roll of 5 or 6, Recover 1 Grit") when you kill stuff with Dynamite? Cause if not, that sucks for Bandido; that ability seems like it was tailor-made to stack with a grit-based explosives build.

Guurzak wrote:
Quote:
Otherwise you would never get XP for using Dynamite since it wouldn't be "you" causing the damage.


I agree, except that we have a dev statement that [i]for XP purposes only
the hero is credited with a hit for each enemy damaged.

Yes. I was the one who retrieved that information in person, at Gen Con, and posted it here for all to see (it's possible someone else did this as well and I just haven't seen it). Sadly, this was before I looked closely at the Bandido's Tree. I went back and asked them about it this year (raising all the above points), but they were pretty busy at the time and couldn't make a ruling without having all the material in front of them.


Guurzak wrote:
Quote:
Dynamite scales pretty poorly anyway; until Jason comes in here and tells us otherwise, there is no need to invent reasons to make it worse.


I agree that dynamite scales poorly, but by the time you outlevel it you should have other DPS options. It's a crutch to carry low level groups until the combat monsters can get their builds rolling.

What's the other option? Let a Marshal with That Does It and an Orb of Ro'kal hit 9 models for 6 + d6 wounds each? That just doesn't seem like a good idea.

Ya know, I'm strangely comfortable with it. All the hard stuff has Endurance, Immunity to Explosives, a frag-ton of HP, or some other save mechanic (Colonel Scafford has grit for God's sake). A Dynamite-build Mutation Marshal is a unique and creative style of gameplay; I would hate to punish it unless it really was OP. A lot of things have to come together to get a perfect Dynamite blast that doesn't blow up some of the posse too; its sorta auto-balancing. Most of the time, the Shotgun is going to be a better use of your Attack due to positioning + Double Shot. Grit scales better with the gun too because you can re-roll all the misses at once (unlike with Dynamite Damage). I dunno, I think this could be fine.

Let's be clear: I would love an official ruling that covers all these bases - +Damage interaction, Hits, XP, Bandido abilities, Hero crit for the kill, etc in a mechanically consistent way. I just hope it doesn't end up nerfing Dynamite builds into the ground. Non-melee Bandidos are already kinda meh.

- Jee
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Sandy Springs
Georgia
flag msg tools
The conclusion I've come to at this point is "Flying Frog sucks at writing rules with the precision required for a tactical combat game."

I suspect that the developer intent is that +damage does not add to dynamite hits except when specifically indicated, and that Dark Stone Dynamite should have been written as adding +2 wounds rather than +2 damage to make this clearer. But the wording of DSD really muddies the waters.

How do we submit questions for an official FAQ?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jee Fu
United States
Maryland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
But it would still count as you killing something, so things which trigger off that would still work?

I might be able to get on board with that.

- Jee
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
George
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
You can take my game… when you pry my cold, dead fingers off the board!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Read the paragraph on the bottom of pg. 25 in the rules about Throwing Dynamite. It uses terms like "Ranged Attack", roll "To Hit", and "Roll the Damage". It certainly sounds like +damage should apply to me!

Guurzak wrote:
"When the Dynamite explodes, it does D6 Wounds, ignoring Defense, to each model in the same and adjacent spaces to it. Roll the Damage for each model separately."

How else would you write that though if Hero bonuses are supposed to apply? "When the Dynamite explodes, the Hero through the Dynamite does D6 Wounds..." ? It's just natural language. I think we may be overthinking that bolded "it".

I would think if the Dynamite truly wouldn't benefit from +Damage effects, the manual would have explicitly called this out with a "Hey Dynamite doesn't benefit from usual character bonuses because it's not the Hero doing the damage, it's the Dynamite blowing up." But reading the rules as written, it sounds like a normal ranged attack to me.

Guurzak wrote:
The conclusion I've come to at this point is "Flying Frog sucks at writing rules with the precision required for a tactical combat game.

Or that. I could be totally wrong and it's just horribly worded!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Pulis
United States
Greenfield
Indiana
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I did just realize something more to this.
At Gen Con this year, a friend and myself worked with the Frogs and had a rare opportunity to ask questions to both Jason and Scott, and I noticed something from a question we asked.

In regards to the Marks, "If something that adds damage (Mark of the whatever), it adds to anything you do that damages, unless it specifies on attacks"
This was directly from Jason hill. I just did not think about applying the principal to the orphan.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jee Fu
United States
Maryland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Ok ok ok ok ok ok. So!

darthjawa13 wrote:
I did just realize something more to this.
At Gen Con this year, a friend and myself worked with the Frogs and had a rare opportunity to ask questions to both Jason and Scott, and I noticed something from a question we asked.

In regards to the Marks, "If something that adds damage (Mark of the whatever), it adds to anything you do that damages, unless it specifies on attacks"
This was directly from Jason hill. I just did not think about applying the principal to the orphan.

Yeeeeeeaaah, but Jason has also said - to me, directly - that mechanics that do just "wounds" like Sawed-off Shotgun Splash or Void Hammer burst don't benefit from +Damage. And you can see why - one Righteous Fury on a Void Hammer wielder would turn every Hit you had into pin-point Dynamite with no downside.

It seems to me that Damage and Wounds need to be discrete concepts. Stay with me.

Both can result from Hits. So let's say Damage modified by Defense = Wounds. Seems simple enough (and Armor becomes relevant once we're squarely in "Wound" territory). That means that if something does straight Wounds, then its past the "Damage" step and so therefore it doesn't benefit from +Damage mechanics. This eliminates the super-annoying "what even IS a Hit" problem because we can now safely say everything is a Hit, mechanically, without overpowering +Damage. There are simply some Hits that bypass Defense. This is supported in the text on various things too; notice that it almost always mentions "Wounds with no Defense". We've always thought this was redundant, but perhaps its not - perhaps Wounds actually DO imply Hits, but those Hits can't benefit from +Damage because they're past the "Damage" part of the interaction. This is also supported by mechanics that let you "always get Defense rolls, even when something would ignore your Defense." How would such a mechanic even exist if most things that did Wounds to you did so without Hits? There really aren't very many +Damage things that reference Hits anyway (if there are any at all). It's either "Attacks" or just "You are [+1 Damage] against [Beasts]".

Ok. This exegesis is going well. Let's apply this to the current situation. Dynamite does straight wounds according to its definition. Under the above interpretation, that means it does Hits (so, you get XP and its YOU killing it) that by-pass Defense. Since we jump directly past Defense, that means there was no "Damage" step. Ergo, Dynamite does not benefit from +Damage. The Bandido Upgrade - Dark Stone Dynamite - makes this a bit murky because it clearly says that it adds +2 Damage to each Model Hit. The last part ("... Model Hit") is no longer a mystery; Dynamite does Hits. But the first part implies that Dynamite does indeed get a "damage" step. However this is an outlier; for the sake of consistency I'm going to say that it should probably read "+2 Wounds to each Model Hit" (as suggested by my worthy opponent). Or you can chalk it up as a special case that specifically mentions the rules it's violating so its all fine.

Let's get back to the topic at hand. Does a Hard-Boiled Orphan's To-Hit roll of 6 make Dynamite better? Under the above interpretation, NO - but not because of ambiguous semantics regarding the "ownership" of the Dynamite blast. It doesn't benefit simply because - as we said above - things that do straight wounds don't benefit from +Damage. IF there was extra mechanic going on ... say, when Dynamite landed it did "X Damage to the Target before exploding" from like smacking him in the face or whatever - then, and only then, could we rekindle this argument over who/what is actually doing the damage. In that alternate universe version of Dynamite, you would have something for +Damage to glom onto (even if it wasn't the explosion).

There.

- Jee
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Pulis
United States
Greenfield
Indiana
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Another situation that applies Damage to Dynamite is Dark stone blasting caps.

"Discard to make all of your Dynamite do +2 Damage until the end of the adventure"
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken H.
United States
Amherst
Ohio
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Inspector Jee wrote:
There.


Wait... did you change your mind?

I'm more confused now than before this thread started.

I think you are saying (paraphrased/summarized/condensed) that any damage that ignores defense doesn't get +damage?

Have I misread?

I don't like it, because... critical hits.


darthjawa13 wrote:
Another situation that applies Damage to Dynamite is Dark stone blasting caps.

"Discard to make all of your Dynamite do +2 Damage until the end of the adventure"


Similar to the Bandido exception, I guess. It's basically the same ability.

However, in general, I feel like I'm not going to follow any of these interpretations, official or not.

Hits vs. Wounds
Defense vs. No Defense
Attacks vs. arbitrary damage

...?

Why can't +1 damage just be +1 damage? Like George said, if they want to create an ability that applies +damage in a limited circumstance, then explain the limitation on the card. Otherwise, I will assume that +1 damage means when my character does something that results in damage, I add one.

Hmmm... having said that, I realize there are situations where it's ambiguous if my character is the one "doing" the damage. I don't think dynamite is ambiguous (I threw it, so I caused it), but what about mutations that do damage. There is one that does damage to adjacent heroes (Void Plague, I think). One that gives you a tail that bites adjacent figures (I forget the trigger, but it seems like the hero is not controlling it). One that causes damage to yourself when you go through a portal....


 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jee Fu
United States
Maryland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Rubric wrote:
Inspector Jee wrote:
There.
Wait... did you change your mind?

Yes. Kind of. I still think your Hero gets the credit for using Dynamite to wound/kill stuff (so, you get XP and abilities that would trigger in those situations do indeed function). But I think for consistency's sake Dynamite shouldn't benefit from +Damage. I know that Void Hammer splash and Shotgun splash doesn't - for a fact. Jason made it a point to say that part of the purpose of the special Inferno Shot (that you can buy at the Smuggler' Den) is to let the Sawed-Off Splash benefit from +Damage, because it normally can't.

Rubric wrote:
I'm more confused now than before this thread started.

I think you are saying (paraphrased/summarized/condensed) that any damage that ignores defense doesn't get +damage?

Have I misread?

I don't like it, because... critical hits.

It's true, there isn't much of a difference between Critical Hits and straight wounds.

I think we can safely say that Critical Hits don't bypass the Damage step:

RAW wrote:
As noted above, any Hero To Hit rolls of 6 count as
Critical Hits! These special Hits allow you to ignore an
Enemy’s Defense and apply all of the Damage that Hit does
directly to the Enemy’s Health.


So, a mechanic can ignore Defense without by-passing the "assign damage" part of Hit resolution. But the ones that do straight Wounds always do. So perhaps we should say this that the mention of "Wounds ignore Defense" is what indicates the by-pass? I dunno, you're right - it's confusing.

And right below that it says:

RAW wrote:
When the Dynamite explodes, it does D6 Wounds,
ignoring Defense, to each model in the same and adjacent
spaces to it. Roll the Damage for each model separately.


So obviously the Rule Book doesn't differentiate between Damage and Wounds with any kind of clear consistency. But I'm saying it probably should. We know that certain things can't benefit from +Damage because FFP told us so. However, they also told us that as a general rule most things can. So there must be some kind of formula that governs what can and what can't and I'm trying to deduce it from the data available. It may just be that Jason has a giant list of Yes/No somewhere and there IS no function that models the differentiation exactly. This would be sad, but having that list would be nice ^^.

In the meantime I have to err on the side of less-zomg-power (as long as a reasonable interpretation of the RAW supports it), because a Saloon Girl with 4-5 Combat swinging a Void Hammer with +4-5 Damage on splash Wounds is going to be an Unstoppable Killing Machine (UKM - you heard it here first!). Dynamite not being able to benefit from +Damage is an unfortunate side-effect, which is why my original answer was that it's a special case. But Guurzak is right - there isn't really a mechanical difference between Void Hammer splash and Dynamite. They're both secondary effects of Hits. I'm still in favor of the idea that it's the Hero causing those Wounds, but if one of those isn't supposed to get +Damage, then the other shouldn't either.

Side Bar: It also establishes that Hits can do things other than Damage (which is an important precedent for making other things easy, like deducing how the Plasma Arc interacts with Gunslinger Special Shot).

Rubric wrote:

darthjawa13 wrote:
Another situation that applies Damage to Dynamite is Dark stone blasting caps.

"Discard to make all of your Dynamite do +2 Damage until the end of the adventure"


Similar to the Bandido exception, I guess. It's basically the same ability.

Blasting Caps seems like they were made as way to help Dynamite in an established system that doesn't currently offer it a way to scale. I believe that abilities/gear like this follow the same pattern as the Inferno Shot - they're in the game because under normal circumstances the thing they modify doesn't benefit from scaling options.

Rubric wrote:

Hmmm... having said that, I realize there are situations where it's ambiguous if my character is the one "doing" the damage. I don't think dynamite is ambiguous (I threw it, so I caused it), but what about mutations that do damage. There is one that does damage to adjacent heroes (Void Plague, I think). One that gives you a tail that bites adjacent figures (I forget the trigger, but it seems like the hero is not controlling it). One that causes damage to yourself when you go through a portal....

Yeah, so this is fun part. Anytime it says "Damage" you add damage. When it says Wounds you don't. And this totally includes all the times you would end up dealing "Damage" to yourself or others.

Maybe the FoFo rules will elaborate on this some.

- Jee
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Neil Edmonds
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
Do you need more card ideas for the D&D Adventure System games?
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It's entirely possible the inconsistencies arose from design changes while working on Shadows of Brimstone. Maybe Defense, Wounds, and Hits only got clarified in the middle of the project, making it hard to find every instance where inconsistent terminology was used with all the cards, rulebook pages, and town sheets in the game.

It's also possible - given the amount of contracted help used on the project - that different team members understood the rules differently and that uncertainty creeped into the project.

I think there's a very good chance Flying Frog will host another Puget Sound pickup event. If someone would like to compile a list of all the outlying cases for Damage/Hits/Wounds, I'd be happy to pass it along to Jason; although he's a pretty busy guy, so I might have to give it to Scott. Things to look at would include cards (Gear, Personal Items, Artifacts), character upgrade abilities, and Town or Travel events.

Cataloguing questions would probably be a very good thing for the community to do. I'm sure there will be an Official FAQ at some point, and the coverage would likely be improved if Jason Hill was aware of a one-stop source with questions.

Jee's recent posts trend in the direction my friends and I used. If something does a Wound (or Wound ignoring Defense), there's no hits occurring; the trade off here is that you didn't have to make a Defense Roll (which is used for Hits) or reduce damage by a monster's Defense value, but you also don't get to use abilities that modify damage done by hits. It'd probably be okay to ignore this setup if an ability or card specifically modifies dynamite damage, so I'd give the bandito his ability bonus for dynamite - it's an ability tree for dynamite after all - and something like blasting caps; but I hesitate using generic abilities to do so, like the Law Man's ability to spend a Grit to add +3 Damage to a hit.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jee Fu
United States
Maryland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Autoduelist wrote:
Cataloguing questions would probably be a very good thing for the community to do. I'm sure there will be an Official FAQ at some point, and the coverage would likely be improve if Jason Hill was aware of a one-stop source with questions.

I actually did this on my first week of playing the Core Sets post-GenCon. I sent an email to FFP with like ... 10 sections, each with 1-3 questions about the mechanics. Jason replied to me personally within 2 days so that was pretty awesome. But since then they've gotten a lot busier, as you said. I think I managed to send it during the "calm before the storm".

Autoduelist wrote:
If something does a Wound (or Wound ignoring Defense), there's no hits occurring; the trade off here is that you didn't have to make a Defense Roll (which is used for Hits) or reduce damage by a monster's Defense value, but you also don't get to use abilities that modify damage done by hits.

Commonly accepted wisdom says that the +Damage mechanic modifies Hits only, but there actually isn't anything in the rules to support this. Certain items specifically mention Hits, but others mention Attacks (which makes no literal sense) and others mention nothing at all.

After scouring the rules, I think I'm starting to come around to the idea that Wounds and Damage are actually the same thing. They are basically used interchangeably in the rules. Check out the paragraph on Armor:

RAW wrote:
If a Hero has Armor/Spirit Armor,
whenever they are about to take a number
of Wounds/Sanity Damage, roll a D6 for each point of
Damage they are about to take. For each die roll that is equal
to or better than their Armor/Spirit Armor save, that point of
damage is prevented. For example, if a Hero has Armor 5+
and takes two Hits past their Defense that do 3 Wounds each,
the Hero rolls 6 dice. For every 5 or 6 rolled, a single one of
the Wounds is prevented.

It is the same. So lets go as literal as possible and see what shakes out.

If Damage and Wounds are the same then +Damage should effect Wounds-done, but only in the cases specific to the source of the +Damage. For instance:

If the Item/Ability says "Your Combat Hits are +1 Damage" then it only affects Hits generated by rolling Combat (or generated by other abilities that specifically create Combat Hits) whether or not they ignore Defense.

If the Item/Ability says "Your Attacks are +1 Damage" then it affects anything that comes directly (but not indirectly) from an Attack. So yes to Dark Stone Shivs but No to Void Hammer splash and Dynamite.

If it says "Your Hits are +1 Damage" than anything that doesn't mention Hits won't benefit (this gets pretty murky, pretty fast if you have the ability to roll Defense against things which normally ignore it - what are you defending against if there are no Hits? What are they? FEELINGS?). So this means No to Shivs. No to Splash. No to Dynamite Explosions. We know that implied Hits for the purposes of XP are a thing - even on stuff that doesn't do Hits - but lets just ignore that for now because it's a clear exception straight from the Frogs.

If it says "You are +1 Damage against Beasts" then my friend, add +1 to all the things. Wounds, Damage, Splash, Tails biting you in the face if you happen to also be a Werewolf. I kinda like this, cause those Runes are really situational (even more so once you have the expansions and your Threat decks are full of non-beast, non-demon, non-void, non-undead Robots.

Go, Forums! Go and find me situations where ^THIS too is thwarted, that I may continue my quest.

- Jee
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.