Recommend
4 
 Thumb up
 Hide
7 Posts

Magic Realm» Forums » Variants

Subject: Unassigned Hirelings as Additional Attacks rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Quantum Jack
United States
Kentucky
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
there are some situations that some people find frustrating in Magic Realm.

If the Captain and the Berserker want to kill the T Troll, the Captain lures, and the Berserker matches directions with the Captain's maneuver, and a kill is (all but) guaranteed. They can take turns fatiguing every other round to keep combat going, and this ensures the ability to kimonster which is otherwise a death sentence to either hero individually.

If there is no Captain character, however, the Berserker can hire a Rogue swordsman, and as long as the hireling can move at a 4, the same tactic ll a will still work, however, without the sharing fatigue. Still a pretty useful combination.

The Captain character, seeing his berserker friend run off with some rogues gets a little lightbulb. The Soldier HQ can deal T* damage. He can lure, let the Soldier line up and do the same exact thing! No silly old berserker needed!

But no. Doesn't work. you cannot lure a monster but deploy a hireling to hit him. you can have your hireling lure while you swing, but not the other way around. This can feel arbitrary and frustrating. I understand the reason for many rules, but this one has always felt off to me.

In addition, the inability for hirelings to attack from hiding and not risk death, as any character can do, often confuses players.

I have a possible solution* for this situation.

When the character plays fight/move chits to attack something, any unassigned hirelings can be placed as additional attacks against the same target the character is attacking. The controlling character gets to choose which side and which direction. Any unassigned hireling cannot be being attacked, so their maneuver is irrelevant, and since they can only attack the same target as the player there is never any "surprise" distribution, or ability to use this to spread out.

I have not decided if the additional attackers should roll for reposition and/or change tactics. If i make them roll, it feels like it negates the advantage the Captain was seeking in the above circumstance. If i make them steady it breaks the cardinal rule of hirelings "only hirelings defending on their own sheets dont roll for tactics/position" but perhaps modifies it to "only hirelings defending on their own sheets or attacking on their controller's sheet don't roll for tactics/position" in addition to making it fairly powerful, being able to cover multiple directions and guarantee hits is potent.

This changes the game in significant ways, making certain combinations possible. Normally when I try to tweak the combat rules, I see some obscure place the game breaks when moving step-by-step through the process, and loopholes that can be exploited or ruin PVP interaction.

This one, however, i am not seeing anything groundbreakingly bad. I have been toying with this idea for a while. I have NOT playtested it. I have not tried it out in a trial battle, let alone a full game. But so far I have not seen how this would break something.

Please pick this proposed rule apart. I feel like I must be missing something. First thing i am interested in is if this breaks the combat protocols. Not worried about whether it is "too strong" or "unthematic" or "complete crap", just does it tear up the combat rules and run them through a shredder?

Then let me know those other things. Where are some broken possibilities with this? Maybe the Pilgrim with a Knight of the Order becomes even more sillily** broken?




Previous times when i have considered something similar the problem i had was determining the target of each one. Making it the same target as the controlling character seems simple enough and clarifies everything. I feel like it is the first time i have considered a significant alteration to the combat rules that might actually work without disrupting everything.

Please help break this delusion***!





*assuming you think these things are problems (i am not sure) and that this doesn't create other unintended consequences

**is sillily really a word? spell-check is not flagging it so i am thinking it must be, but i actually made it up to be.... silly

***my belief that this is a delusion is the fact that even minor changes have crazy unforeseen consequences, especially in combat
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Hoare
United Kingdom
Chippenham
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I may have a proper ponder over the weekend... [hirelings in combat is always something I need to revise from time to time].

Are you assuming that the now-attacking hirelings all share a target with the character?

The current deploy system is arranged so that there will be only possible target for any denizen/hireling combat. A character can be the target for any number of denizens. A character's target need not even be on his sheet. EDIT ie. you cannot assume that there will be a single denizen on the character's sheet that will be the hirelings' target.



S'pose it's a simpler rule than re-wording the deployment rule to allow a character to remain as a denizen's target when an attacker is deployed against it?

[They should reposition].



1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Doug Buel
United States
Hollywood
Florida
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quantum_Jack wrote:
But no. Doesn't work. you cannot lure a monster but deploy a hireling to hit him.
Huh, why can't you?

Example from 3rd Edition rules:

Quote:
Random assignments: The Goblin was assigned to the Elf.

Deployment turns: The Elf assigned his hired Archer to attack
the Goblin, which was immediately put on its own sheet.
Or is the problem that you want the monster to still be swinging at the player character? If that's the problem then I think I see what you mean
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Quantum Jack
United States
Kentucky
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yeah. In your example, the goblin would be attacking your hired archer. The question is why can't you be the meat shield and let your hirelings get free swings?

This would give berserker or white knight with hirelings a better shot against wolves or goblins, acting as a tank and almost guaranteed a kill per turn if you have 2 hirelings. Just tank the wounds and heal up later.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Serious Gamer
United States
Apple Valley
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm pretty sure it's a decision based purely on gameplay; could be exploited easily by players. Though I think the issue would disappear if you use Advanced Combat, which would further dissuade a player from even considering such a strategy.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Quantum Jack
United States
Kentucky
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
gexthegecko wrote:
I'm pretty sure it's a decision based purely on gameplay; could be exploited easily by players. Though I think the issue would disappear if you use Advanced Combat, which would further dissuade a player from even considering such a strategy.
i agree that the math would change in advanced combat rules, but i really wonder what exactly you mean in that it could be easily exploited by players.

First, you are saying that you don't see any way in which it messes up the combat order?

Then, you see ways it could be abused by players?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Serious Gamer
United States
Apple Valley
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quantum_Jack wrote:
gexthegecko wrote:
I'm pretty sure it's a decision based purely on gameplay; could be exploited easily by players. Though I think the issue would disappear if you use Advanced Combat, which would further dissuade a player from even considering such a strategy.
i agree that the math would change in advanced combat rules, but i really wonder what exactly you mean in that it could be easily exploited by players.

First, you are saying that you don't see any way in which it messes up the combat order?

Then, you see ways it could be abused by players?
What I mean is, the character who has a higher vulnerability than their hireling (maybe even armor) lures a monster that is medium or heavy, but fast (too fast for the character to undercut), and then has his hireling who is L or M vulnerability attack the monster. If using your proposal, that native is safe from being killed, and so is the character, but the monster is in danger. With the base rules, there is always a danger to the native.

On a different note, you could just look at it as one way for the monster to give preference to a target. If you wanted true realism, the denizen targeted by both natives and the character would randomly decide who to attack. But that could further complicate combat.

And, of course, for consistency, there's the rule that denizens tend to target the last individual to be deployed against them. Your proposal breaks that consistency. It is by design that denizens give priority to targeting other denizens first in the case of having characters and hirelings attacking them.

Normally, a character would want monsters to target the hirelings first, otherwise they risk game over. I think it's more about keeping things simple.

But try it out. See how the game changes.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls