Defensive Blast Problem / HELP!!

[Oly]

No, it can't, or it wouldn't have been called a DEFENSIVE blast. How hard is that to grasp? Why does everything have to be defined to an unarguable point anymore? Don't GMs know how to define it for his own game, or was that art lost with the introduction of 3E? It says Defence in the title, therefore it must be used for defence - not offence. It really does not seem that hard of a concept to grasp to me, nor is it particularly vague.

As said earlier I think that Vincent has a great take on this however I think he's being kind of hard here.

The RPG has a "defence value", does that mean that PCs can't use it if they started the fight by charging into a group of Picts? So it's a little fluffy and while I like Vincent's view on this I'd say that it's not obvious.

When the PCs are involved it also opens up a potential player debate that I've seen in the Star Wars RPG where you see people arguing that certain "dark side" powers can be used if the player is on the defence (the whole only for defence, never for attack thing) or if there's "no other choice" (e.g. a last resort). Now if you're a hard ar*ed GM and are willing just to lay down the law over it then that's fine. However with even a slightly open ended game then it can start all sorts of debates with the players.

For NPCs the "defence only" rule for the blast is fine, for PCs it may be a little too grey. The players ride to the temple to save the kidnapped maiden from being sacrificed and the scholar PC ends up in trouble. Can he defensive blast? On the one hand he could be hiding at the back avoiding all the fighting and only ready to counter things that the evil sorcerer may pull. On the other the group are deliberately going into hostile territory and are acting offensively by barging into the evil temple. Complicated.....

Personally I just don't allow PC scholars but if I did I might consider just giving out corruption points for doing a blast. Using Vincent's suggestion I'd veto tactics such as charging into a crowd and exploding. For when it does become a little greyer I'd let the PCs go for the boom but they know that there's a penalty to it. A real incentive for the scholar to stay out of trouble and only go kaboom when he really has to.

I've got to back up Vincent though and say I'd like to see him go through the book and tidy it up somewhat or just produce an official errata. He knows his stuff.....

 

[MadDog]

"Defensive" can be interpreted in many ways. No matter how I got into a situation, can I still "defend" myself from foes ?

Unfortunately, there are no examples of REH Conan stories where sorcerers use DB in any manner (IIRC), so its hard to adjudicate what DB should be.

Mad Dog

 

[MadDog]

Maybe one of these days Mongoose will let me errata this..

Why wont they let you issue errata ?

Mad Dog

 

[Kincaid]

I must say thank you Vincent for clearing up a few points on this and props go to a writer that responds to players questions :!:

That being said, there are still another question about DB that i am trying to figure out.

Does DB affect Non-living materials such as clothing, weapons, and items?

I envision it basically as a fireball that goes off centered on the Sorcerer and heading out in all directions 10 feet. The text says fire damage, which i would assume affects living and non-living material the same, but its not specified.

I would like to see some offical errata posted on this (perhaps in S&P?), because i believe alot of GM's and players alike are confused by this sorcerer ability. I do not believe it is obvious like in the name of the ability. I like the rules being spelled out for me, otherwise i seem like an "Evil GM" because i am nerfing a class ability. If this were more defined i could just point to the text and the game can move right along rather that having a game stopping discussion about the physics and "intent" of this ability.

I must agree with other posters, in saying being on the "defensive" is a matter of perspective and possesing many gray areas.

Anyways, Conan ROCKS and am just trying to figure this out. Game ON!

 

[VincentDarlage]

That being said, there are still another question about DB that i am trying to figure out.

Does DB affect Non-living materials such as clothing, weapons, and items?

GM's call. It is not something I would particularly worry about (perhaps a mere singeing?), but if a GM wants to go into that much detail, then sure. I doubt it would hurt weapons or metal at all - any more than shoving a sword through a campfire would (shove a person into the campfire, person is hurt - shove sword, so what?), but that is just an opinion.

If you want to be literal with the rules (sigh), then the book says clearly that creatures take damage. Since it says nothing about non-creatures, the implication is that non-creatures take no damage.

However, if you want the blast to shred plate armour, go for it (you may want to add shrapnel damage to anyone behind the person in the shredding plate armour, though). Personally, I would just apply the damage to the character and move on and not worry about it.

 

[Evil_Trevor]

Hello Everyone. My first Post. I am a new GM and my group has already had one meeting. I have to say that I am a long time CONAN fan and I love all the changes that it has made to traditional D&D, but i have a problem with a scholar class.

The Pc is a 1st level scholar threatening to use defensive blast for 7d6 damage and then "push it" for 14d6 damage :!: I believe that scholar's need a defensive capability but this just seems insane for a 1st level char to be able to do 14d6 damage! He is also talking about using is offensively. :shock:


My question is what are GM's doing about this and is there any common variant rule that is both fair to Gm's and the Sorcerer?

Help!!

Hi,
I've only started GMing conan recently, but I have been GMing for about 15 years in other systems so here's advice less concenerd with 'How the rules work' but 'How to GM a player like this' Teach him in game that twisting the rules in one way has sevre penelties, E.G. at his level he cannot recover pp at all quickly so a higher level sorcerer with with magical protection will laugh off his DB and <gulp> he has no pp left.

Let him do it when it seems very benificial (e.g. surounded by thugs) only to discover two minutes later that he could really use 2pp (say as the soilders come for him)


Let the DB debate continue.....

 

[slaughterj]

The problem with defensive blast is that, the actual way it´s written you can use it to attack...

Where is it written that it can be used for an offensive attack? I don't see anything that contradicts its obvious intended use as "defensive."

Its intent is defensive, but a purely textual reading doesn't appear to include such limitations, allowing it to be used as a free action, whenever the sorceror can act.

Further, even if the intent from the title is read into when it can be used, that makes for a fairly difficult to judge constraint on it - if you as the GM think the particular situation is just a bit over the line (maybe 51% offensive), does that mean you would restrict its use, thus resulting in the scholar's doom because he and you had a slightly different take on the situation? That seems to be a worse potential than just allowing it to be used, given the difficulties already inherent in its use.

Such difficulties include:
1. Getting into a good position: How does the sorceror get into the middle of a pack of only enemies in order to detonate? If he is exposed such that a bunch can run up on him, he likely would have already been dropped from those initial charges. If he is going to run into the midst of the pack, then he likely would get cut down from attacks of opportunity. And in each of these situations, those are further restricted by the presence of comrades, which affect the decision (usually preventing it).
2. Having no pp afterward: It is only 10' radius, and how often are all the foes bunched into that area, so that only they are affected, not friends, and you get them all? Pretty infrequently in my experience. So even if you blast, you have no pp afterward for the rest, and get a beatdown.
3. Social issues: Having been spotted slinging sorcery will draw all sorts of unwanted attention, e.g., sorcery-hating hunters, wizards seeking your power, etc. etc., so one would be advised to minimize the very blantant sorcerous action (compared with others, that are less evident).

Given the above, I don't mind allowing its use "freely" by the sorceror, because often the realities of the situation will restrict it to its intent, and consequently I won't inadvertently "screw" the sorceror by having a slightly different interpretation of whether their intent is defensive or not that could be fatal to them.

 

[MadDog]

Maybe the easiest way to fix this is to require a feat "Defensive Blast" to be able to use DB.

Mad Dog

 

[Foxworthy]

Maybe the easiest way to fix this is to require a feat "Defensive Blast" to be able to use DB.

Mad Dog

That's not a bad idea. But if players pay for the feat they are going to feel entitled to use the power when ever. Which is probably not the best solution.

What I may do is take it out of my games and give the starting scholar a bonus feat that follows the rules for when you trade a bonus spell for a feat. Of course I don't like DB anyway as I feel it doesn't fit a sorcerer very well in the Conan world.

Though if Mr. Darlage did a errate and posted it in this thread that might save the power for when I run a game.

And if you do that, thanks ahead of time. And if not thanks anyway cause i love the stuff you've written for the game.

 

[Bregales]

This ability can be argued to the end of time, as it seems it may (there have been something like 20 other threads just like this one). Most people are agreeing now that intent is an issue, though whether a GM feels he can decipher the player's intent is still questionable.

So there's a couple of things the GM can do (if he feels he has a problem-player doing the sorcerer (Most sorcerers I've encountered seem to be run by power gamers/problem gamers):

• Among the early responses were: don't let all of the bad guys get that close to the sorcerer. Let some be further back and pepper him with arrows if he blows up.
• Kill of the sorcerous power-gaming character (see above), over and over if necessary. If the player gets the idea he'll either amend his character or make up something else. (I was too lenient with my player by far, but he decided to drop the sorcerer for a fighter type instead).
• Treat the use of DB as similar to Runaway Magic. Maybe using DB for 14 dice of damage summons mighty Cthulhu on the spot, who picks up hapless sorcerer and swallows him whole. :twisted:
• How many sorcerers in your world use DB? Is it widely known amongst the world's soldiers, henchmen, those alchemists and sorcerers military brigades like in the Free Companies sourcebook? If they know about the feature they may be wary of the wierdo in the long robes.
• Along these lines, have the sorcerer develop a REPUTATION for blowing up and taking out his enemies, making him like a villain. It'll affect his negotiations with NPCs, gather information, as it possibly increase his Intimidate it'll lessen his ability to positively affect outcomes.

Having recently read the adventure Conan and the Lurking Terror of Nahab, there are sevearal points in that adventure where the PCs interactions with, and reputation with, the commoners or the nobles & their guards, affects what they may learn, or how they may progress. If the sorcerer already has a bad Diplomacy or Gather Information mod from having a rep for blowing up and taking out humans, that'll affect the course of this adventure, if not most adventures.

Just a couple of thoughts.

 

[Tim]

As the GM you can work-out house rules for defensive blast making it managable. I for one am running a campaign where sorcery is a NPC only thing. This allows me to keep it dark, mysterious and sinister. The players don't mind and the only PC who didn't like not being a Sorcerer adapted and is now fine with it.

Its up to the GM and the style of Game. Just be fair about it.

The problem I have with sorcerer PCs is that it makes Sorcery common place and mundane. It should be dark and fantastic. Also I see Conan as Sword Against Sorcery, not Sword and sorcery. If you want Gandolfs running around doing nice wizard things, then play D&D.

One last thing about Sorcerers. Most cultures despise/fear sorcery. Even in lands that are ruled by sorcery, the common man fears and often hates it. If the heroes travel with a sorcerer, they should gain a bad reputation for it.

final note if a rule seems broken feel free to fix it to suit the style of your campaign. Just be fair, and don't let PCs bully you with the argument that the rules say I can so I can. RPGs are not with out flaws and the rules can often be easily abused. Don't let rules abuse ruin the game.

 

[Bregales]

I agree, wat Tim sed!

 

[Mark Dunder]

Skip this post if you are affended by critique of d20 system, and you are not interested in the TSR Conan RPG.

Any Magic Talent acquired in my game requires players to take a Magical Weakness. After that an Obsession Talent level is gained for magic use.

From reading this thread, it seems to me way to easy to use magic in d20 Conan, and your scholars are strangely like weak magic users or perhaps alchemists?

From reading Conan, most magic casters are evil priests of Set. There was a scholar, but his magic seemed more in line with items already created by ancient civilizations or other magic casters. The scholar was not really a magic user, although some may have great knowledge of magic. The priest of Asura, had some magic use, but it wasn't their main calling. I'm just saying that magic users are very rare (even in Stygia) and I just don't see a bunch of players doing this in Conan. I think the Scholar is a sneaky attempt to introduce a weak magic user, for players who just can't give up D&D.

But, my opinions are extremely biased towards my own game.

 

[Bregales]

Skip this post if you are affended by critique of d20 system, and you are not interested in the TSR Conan RPG.

Since I own every product in both lines, I hope I can reply here. :shock:

Any Magic Talent acquired in my game requires players to take a Magical Weakness. After that an Obsession Talent level is gained for magic use.

This game's closest approximations are for runaway magic and the rules of Corruption, which together work excellently.

From reading this thread, it seems to me way to easy to use magic in d20 Conan, and your scholars are strangely like weak magic users or perhaps alchemists?

Well, compared to all the work a character has to do in the TSR game to gain the first magical Insight talent, yes. But while Mongoose's game suggests that magic IS rare in the world, it is the nature of players to want to be powergamers and, seeing the power curve through levels in a d20 based system, realize that sorcerers at or above 10th level are way more powerful than other classes, unless they chose their schools of magic poorly. Also, most of us gravitated to the Conan game from D&D, which simply doesn't work unless you have a balanced party, and while the Conan game goes out of it's way to dispel that urge, most groups still try to make a wide variety of character classes in their party.

However, the spell schools in the Mongoose system are similar to most of the Insight magical talents in the TSR Conan game, it's just that most don't get as powerful as a red success range in the TSR allows (for example, Transmutation).

From reading Conan, most magic casters are evil priests of Set. There was a scholar, but his magic seemed more in line with items already created by ancient civilizations or other magic casters. The scholar was not really a magic user, although some may have great knowledge of magic. The priest of Asura, had some magic use, but it wasn't their main calling. I'm just saying that magic users are very rare (even in Stygia) and I just don't see a bunch of players doing this in Conan. I think the Scholar is a sneaky attempt to introduce a weak magic user, for players who just can't give up D&D.

But, my opinions are extremely biased towards my own game.

Not sure about your last paragraphs. There were a couple of priests of Set in the Howard stories like Thoth Amon who's mentioned in a couple or the witch Zeriti, but there was also Xaltotun more of the way ancient Acheron line. Then there's the Black Seers of Mt. Yimsha who were a mighty powerful, albeit reclusive group. The Khitan priests in Hour of the Dragon, Yara the Priest of "Tower of the Elephant", the priest Totrasmek in Zamboula, and Baal-pteor, two of my favorites from "Shadows in Zamboula." Yeah you could argue the Totrasmek is Stygian, but Zamboula is more Turanian and the stygian priests in the House of Aram Baksh are displayed differently, so he's not a Stygian national at any rate. But this is getting carried away. ~While the TSR game is only a handful of pages, and an insert where the talents & weaknesses are listed, the Mongoose core book is over 300 pages (the skills and feats chapters alone are more pages than the entire TSR game contents combined), so players often don't remember the whole magic chapter alone, let alone the whole book. Others (aka power gamers) have selective memory.

I like many aspects of the TSR game, but I hate the poor arrangement of the game in general (too underdeveloped). By the same token I believe the Mongoose system to be exhaustively, encyclopedically comprehensive, but therein lies the problem that unless you have instant memory recall you can't possibly be expected to remember every aspect about how to play the game. Oh well, c'est le vie or asi es la vida (or is it das ist leben auf Deutsch? - Ich hatte vergessen).

End of line.

 

[ricardo440]

This is quite harsh, but you could say when you use the

DB the Sorcerer is reduced to 0 HP.

It is not as nasty as all the "hey just kill him with arrows until he decides not to play a sorcerer again"

It means that it truely is a last resort, and it means that the Player is responsible for the choice, not the GM. A player who ends up in a fight and is then denied his DB on a GMs whim is going to feel hard done by when he gets killed.
This means that the player knows the consequences before he starts.

0HP is enought to hobble away, but means you can't do strenuous stuff.

You should also add that not pp or hp can every be gained as a result of DB.

 

[Trailingvortex]

Ha! Let me tell you of the true twinkliciously broken might of the Sorceror.

1) With Opportunistic Sacrifice, whenever the sorceror uses defensive blast to kill people, he gets power back, possibly more than he started with. He could do it again the same round if he wanted to.

2) The sorceror, if he has Leadership, could have some or all of his followers be sorcerors as well. Under the Rule of the Master, they would count as thralls, as he could drain 5 MP form them each round as a free action, no matter where they are in the world. If they, in turn, have access to lots of helpless slaves to drain, the master sorceror effectively becomes a practically infinite wellspring of power when he needs to.

3) A fate point can be used to maximise the damage of ANY attack. Including DB. A fate point ridiculously well spent, that. Think on that and tremble.

4) Sorcerors are not anywhere as feeble and easy to kill as some of the above posts seem to suggest. Especially not a martial artist sorceror with Oriental magic.

Some of these rules need serious revision, and it´s no use asking players to be "reasonable", or else why would we be playing RPGs with rule systems are unnecessarily complicated, detailed and meticulous as D20 otherwise?

Rules can be dangerous, and do not tend to constrain. They tend to give power. When physicists used their understanding of the rules of the universe to build the atom bomb, and made mankind the potential destroyer of worlds, I bet God sat in heaven sulking that humans were unreasonable twinks...

 

[MadDog]

I ended up making Defensive Blast a feat for scholars. I also eliminated Opportunistic Sacrifice. I am considering the use of DB making the scholar fatigued.

Mad Dog

 

[Voltumna]

I ended up making Defensive Blast a feat for scholars. I also eliminated Opportunistic Sacrifice. I am considering the use of DB making the scholar fatigued.

Mad Dog

Any prerequisites?

 

[Trailingvortex]

There sure are a lot of good ideas on this to balance the whole thing out. Making it a feat is a good start, not because it´s any real limitation in its power (feats aren´t in such short supply, and it´s a bloody awesome feat) but merely because it brings it a bit closer to reflecting the canon of the original Conan literature where, as someone already pointed out, no-one actually uses it, ever, even when it would be stupdily useful and lifesaving, suggesting this ability is rare in the Conan setting, at best.

Of course, even if you made it fatiguing, it would still be very useful. An 8th level character, if he spent a fate point, would be certain of annihilating a demon lord, for one example, or king Conan, for another.

Perhaps a permanent sacrifice, maybe of a permanent power point (as Sorceror´s Obsession is kind of a way of gaining permanent power points, it wouldn´t be that much of a sacrifice anyway) or a point of constitution. That might make people think twice. Then again, depending of the player, it might not.

Perhaps the most obvious thing to do would be to limit its power. Make it D4s instead of D6s, or less?

Or, like someone also suggested, just eliminate defensive blast altogether. Because guess what? A competently played sorceror without defensive blast is STILL absolutely terrifying. Gelid Touch, for example, is a low level spell that completely disables an enemy for 1 power point on a touch attack if they fail a will saving throw. And frankly, the only two classes with high will saves are scholar and noble. Being utterly disabled is pretty much the same as being dead, except for the fact that, when the fight is over, the sorceror has to perform a coup de grace on his disabled enemies.

If anyone yet doubts that sorcerors are still more dangerous than the other classes even without the benefits of defensive blast and even if opportunistic sacrifice were eliminated (very good idea, that, Mad Dog) then I suggest he have another good hard look at the Sorcery rules and spells. I have no idea how a Scholar could be considered a "weak spellcaster" :?

I really like the idea, put forth a few posts back by some or other keen mind, both for play balancing and even more for the avoidance of the loss of mystery and fear that players should be discouraged from playing sorcerors.

Anyway, for my game this is all a bit moot, as I am neither the GM nor the player of the sorceror, so it would be rather ungracious of me to make too many objections.

-TV

 

[urdinaran]

Sorcerers are only a weak class early on; as they level, they become terrifying. A 1st level Scholar has very little to add to any combat situation and isn't very good in melee, much less defending himself.

As for the DB fix, Vincent hit it right on the head: just don't let your players use it for anything other than defense. I don't have any Scholars in my group, so I'm lucky. If I did, I would only let them use it in defense AND never let them recoup any PP's when they use it.