 Re role failures., Multiple targets |
  |
 Apr 15 2005, 02:31 AM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Neophyte Runner  Group: Members Posts: 2,073 Joined: 23-August 04 Member No.: 6,587  |
Re role failures.
Multiple targets I was just thinking about using karmic rerolls in concert with ball spells. Hear is the scenario I cast stun ball at 4 targets there wills are 2, 3, 4, 7 My casting test returns 1,1,2,3,4,5,5,7,8 I spend a point of karma pool to reroll failures. Witch dice to I re roll. Edward |
 |
 
|
|
Apr 15 2005, 02:54 AM
Post
#2
|
|||
|
Chrome to the Core Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,152 Joined: 14-October 03 From: ::1 Member No.: 5,715 |
I guess the answer would be "any and all failures," which means if there was a person with Wil 9, you'd have to re-roll everything. But, as it stands... Uh... The 1s, it looks like. Edit: Just talked with one of my many GMs. He says...
Silly area effect spells. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 15 2005, 02:59 AM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 101 Joined: 1-April 05 From: New York City Member No.: 7,275 |
I would do four separate rerolls, one for each target.
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 15 2005, 03:40 AM
Post
#4
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,598 Joined: 15-March 03 From: Hong Kong Member No.: 4,253 |
Another alternative to is reroll all the total failures (the ones) and give the player the choice on what 'partial success' dice to reroll, with the re-rolled result standing.
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 15 2005, 05:32 AM
Post
#5
|
|
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,073 Joined: 23-August 04 Member No.: 6,587 |
So beaten you we have all the possibilities I could think of.
Only ones All but the 7 and 8 Whichever ones the player wants but the reroles stand Rerole separately for each target I should have known better than to expect a strait answer, I will be going with 3 when I start running games. Edward |
|
|
|
|
Apr 15 2005, 06:19 AM
Post
#6
|
|
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
I'd go with #3 also. I would definitely not allow a reroll for each target, as that goes against the basics of how area effect spellcasing works.
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 15 2005, 07:48 PM
Post
#7
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 101 Joined: 1-April 05 From: New York City Member No.: 7,275 |
How so? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 15 2005, 08:17 PM
Post
#8
|
|
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
For any Area Effect spell, the caster rolls once, and then either compares the results to the TN (in the case of Combat spells), or records the results of the roll (in the case of Detection and Illusion spells) for comparison to the opposed roll of a valid target.
He can choose to reroll any dice from his spellcasting test by using Karma, but can't just reroll for each different target. Especially not by expending only one Karma Pool point. |
|
|
|
|
Apr 15 2005, 08:35 PM
Post
#9
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 3,066 Joined: 5-February 03 Member No.: 4,017 |
If you make a subtle change to the text for "rerolling failures," this problem is evaded entirely and provides certain other options. Simply change it from a reroll of all "failures" in any test with a TN to a reroll of whatever dice the player wants in any test with a reroll.
There are times when PCs would want to get less successes than they actually rolled (like punching someone too hard who they needed alive) and this change would provide that option as well. |
|
|
|
|
Apr 15 2005, 08:42 PM
Post
#10
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 101 Joined: 1-April 05 From: New York City Member No.: 7,275 |
Fortune: Theoretically, one could also argue that any alternatives to rerolling for each different target would go against how karma pool works. The book says explicitly that you reroll any dice that come up a failure, and what constitutes a failure varies with each individual target. Not to mention that the use of karma pool should never actually hurt your results in an opposed test unless you took the Cursed Karma flaw, which is something that could easily happen if the player is allowed to select the dice he wants to reroll.
Then again, you could just use Herald's house rule and do away with this entire mess, since it's pretty obvious that neither of these rules takes the other into account. |
|
|
|
|
Apr 15 2005, 09:00 PM
Post
#11
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,754 Joined: 9-July 04 From: Modesto, CA Member No.: 6,465 |
Good question. I'd let the player re-roll per regular rules, but let them choose which "taget" they wanted to count successes/failures against. More than likely, they are aiming for the higher TN target anyways. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 15 2005, 09:07 PM
Post
#12
|
|||
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
Herald's rule is pretty much the same as option #3 that was listed above. As I said earlier, that is the route I would go, and let the player choose just how many dice to reroll. :) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 15 2005, 09:15 PM
Post
#13
|
|||
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 3,066 Joined: 5-February 03 Member No.: 4,017 |
Yes, but with a little more versatility than just being a situational response. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 15 2005, 09:23 PM
Post
#14
|
|
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
True. I was merely refering to this situation. :)
Overall it isn't a bad idea at all, but in my opinion it'll come up rather rarely outside of situations like this. |
|
|
|
|
Apr 15 2005, 10:28 PM
Post
#15
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 101 Joined: 1-April 05 From: New York City Member No.: 7,275 |
The difference being that Herald's allows the player to reroll all dice, without fooling around with what's considered a success and what isn't. I like it because it lets players use their karma pools to stage their attacks down as well as up. In fact, I like it so much that I think I'm going to steal it. :) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 16 2005, 02:07 AM
Post
#16
|
|||
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
Edward's option #3 did that as well ...
It just wasn't as detailed as Herald's and didn't take into consideration other situations (but could certainly apply to them), as was said above. Incidently, this is slightly different than what Crusher Bob said in the post prior to Edward's, but the rewording is important. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 16 2005, 02:27 AM
Post
#17
|
|
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,073 Joined: 23-August 04 Member No.: 6,587 |
The advantage of herald’s is that it extends to tests with only a single target. EG when I am casting stun bolt against a target I want alive selecting base serious and accidentally roll 12 successes I could spend a point of karma and reroll 10 of those successeshopfuly not getting enough to kill the target again.
Edward |
|
|
|
|
Apr 16 2005, 02:54 AM
Post
#18
|
|
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
Yes, as I freely admitted almost 5 hours ago. ;)
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 16 2005, 03:08 AM
Post
#19
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 101 Joined: 1-April 05 From: New York City Member No.: 7,275 |
Considering that Ed was putting all the suggestions posted into a list, I naturally assumed that his was just a less specific version of Crusher Bob's. My mistake if that wasn't his intent. :) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 16 2005, 04:32 AM
Post
#20
|
|
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
I thought that might have been the problem. ;)
I just figured Ed had reworded it on purpose, and I liked his idea better. Of course, as I said, Herald's is even better as it covers more situations. |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 1st May 2024 - 10:38 PM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.