Rules calrification

[Zipp Dementia]

One clarification... I'm guessing, from the description, that when you attack multiple enemies at once, you don't combine their CS scores but you take them on one at a time (or rather, on your turn you would attack three different creatures with three different Combat Ratios), but each of them with bonuses to their CS. I guess the benefit to doing this would be to distract or detain multiple enemies so your buddies can get away or get better position.

So if Joe attacks a doomwolf (CS 17) and a giak (CS 16) on one turn, he would roll the attack die twice, but the giak would have CS 18 for this fight because Joe is attacking two enemies.

Is that right? Is Engaging Many Enemies at once essentially a way to do multiple attacks on your turn, but at the penalty of each enemy having a higher CS score?

Or does it work like Joe would be attacking a doomwolf+giak, and it would have CS 19 (+2 to the higher combat score for the grouping enemies) and each of them would take damage from his attack?

By the way, this is all under Engaging Many Enemies, page 20.

 

[Keystonegamingsociety]

I would say that when a rider is on a mount that is also attacking they are treated as one enemy, the rider gaining a bonus to the CS. So theoretically four Giaks mounted on four Doomwolves could attack one Kai Lord at the same time.

I would say, no, the attacked Kai Lord does not get four actions that round. That's just silly in my book.

 

[Zager Krahl]

Well, the Kai would have to roll 4 combat rolls, since he has to fight off 4 opponents.

 

[Random Code]

... Or you could run the 4 giaks/doomwolves as one opponent.

 

[Srehtorc]

Well, the Kai would have to roll 4 combat rolls, since he has to fight off 4 opponents.

one roll for one opponent (or he can deal out damage to whichever opponents he chooses from a pool if you like, but its probably sounder to deal it all to one opponent), the reduces combat ratio more than well enough reflects the fact he is surrounded by enemies

 

[Zager Krahl]

Yes, one roll per opponent:

Kai vs Doom 1
Kai vs Doom 2
Kai vs Doom 3
Kai vs Doom 4

All this would be in one round, since all four Doomwolves are attacking him in the same round. He'll roll 4 diice and deal damage 4 times - but because each of the Doomwolves get a +6CS bonus to represent their Gang Up bonus, the Kai will do significantly less damage to each of the four than if he had only been attacking one that round.

 

[Srehtorc]

sorry, I managed to word that very badly- I meant to say one roll that encompasses all those opponents

 

[Zager Krahl]

So... You mean that the Kai gets attacked by 4 targets, but deals only damage to one of them (and that target had +6CS)?

 

[Srehtorc]

I'm saying that the player makes a single roll, the combat ratio for this roll is effected by the presence of the other doomwolves.
extra damage taken by the player (as is likely to be happen with a lowered combat ratio) represents him being laid into by by the others as he is fighting the one he deals damage to

 

[Zager Krahl]

Hmm. So:

- one roll
- targeting one opponent
- targeted opponent has +6CS
- targeted opponent is the only one to take damage

This... I dunno, it seems wrong. Read this way, the strongest villian will be faced by the Kai, and each of his henchmen will contribute only +2CS.

Problem: a Szalls henchman (CS 8 ) will contribute the same CS bonus to the strongest attacker as a Death Knight (CS 24).

My interpretation: you roll against each of the ganging opponents, and the +2/+4/+6CS bonus represents the bonus that they get from teamwork and coordination - and from the Kai having to split his attention and defences against multiple targets instead of a single, focused opponent.

So: Kai CS 18
Doom 1-4 CS 14, each get +6CS for ganging up

Round 1:
CR = -2 vs Doom 1; roll 2; E= -3, H= -5
CR = -2 vs Doom 2; roll 7; E= -8, H= -2
CR = -2 vs Doom 3; roll 6; E= -7, H= -2
CR = -2 vs Doom 4; roll 1; E= -2, H= -5

At the end of Round 1, the Kai has taken -14 EP, and the Doomwolves have taken -20 EP in total, split 3/8/7/2 among Doomwolves 1/2/3/4.

 

[Random Code]

This example has a simple and straightforward solution. In all seriousness, if there's just one PC vs multiple opponents you'd group them up as one creature and just run the fight as effectively a PC vs 1 Enemy battle. There are rules in the multiplayer book for this.

 

[Keystonegamingsociety]

Hmm. So:

- one roll
- targeting one opponent
- targeted opponent has +6CS
- targeted opponent is the only one to take damage

This... I dunno, it seems wrong. Read this way, the strongest villian will be faced by the Kai, and each of his henchmen will contribute only +2CS.

Problem: a Szalls henchman (CS 8 ) will contribute the same CS bonus to the strongest attacker as a Death Knight (CS 24).

My interpretation: you roll against each of the ganging opponents, and the +2/+4/+6CS bonus represents the bonus that they get from teamwork and coordination - and from the Kai having to split his attention and defences against multiple targets instead of a single, focused opponent.

So: Kai CS 18
Doom 1-4 CS 14, each get +6CS for ganging up

Round 1:
CR = -2 vs Doom 1; roll 2; E= -3, H= -5
CR = -2 vs Doom 2; roll 7; E= -8, H= -2
CR = -2 vs Doom 3; roll 6; E= -7, H= -2
CR = -2 vs Doom 4; roll 1; E= -2, H= -5

At the end of Round 1, the Kai has taken -14 EP, and the Doomwolves have taken -20 EP in total, split 3/8/7/2 among Doomwolves 1/2/3/4.

Ahhhh... so you're beginning to see things my way! See how deadly this would be played with those rules? Your Kai Lord would be dead in two rounds against even simply Giaks!

DMs - take warning! GANGING UP IS DEADLY, DEADLY, DEADLY.

 

[Zager Krahl]

Our views have nothing in common, KS. I follow the rules in the gamebook - you follow your own tune.

 

[Random Code]

This example has a simple and straightforward solution. In all seriousness, if there's just one PC vs multiple opponents you'd group them up as one creature and just run the fight as effectively a PC vs 1 Enemy battle. There are rules in the multiplayer book for this.

Just in case you missed my post earlier Keystone. You're both overcomplicating this particular example. Just conduct the fight as one PC versus on opponent. Increase their CS appropriately as per the LW rules.

 

[Zager Krahl]

What are those lumping rules again?

I prefer treating them as split opponents anyway - it seems to be slightly unrealistic to have a Giak Squad (CS 17, EP 31) of 5 members still dealing maximum damage with CS 17 after having their EP reduced to only 1... Although, I can definitely see the appeal of this lumping approach!

 

[Random Code]

What are those lumping rules again?

I prefer treating them as split opponents anyway - it seems to be slightly unrealistic to have a Giak Squad (CS 17, EP 31) of 5 members still dealing maximum damage with CS 17 after having their EP reduced to only 1... Although, I can definitely see the appeal of this lumping approach!

I'll have to check my rulebook when I get home, assuming they are in there and I'm not just imagining them - I'm getting worried now with you not knowing.

They follow the same idea as the gamebooks though. LW would often face multiple opponents but in game terms he would face them as one enemy with a higher CS and EP. I'm sure the RAW has those rules in it.

 

[Zager Krahl]

Could not find the lumping rules. I do remember reading somewhere about lumping a Giak and a Doomwolf together, just don't ask me where...

 

[Random Code]

Could not find the lumping rules. I do remember reading somewhere about lumping a Giak and a Doomwolf together, just don't ask me where...

Yeah, its in the creature section of the main rulebook (p49). The Doomwolf adds +4 to the Giak's CS and +10 to his EP.

Guess I was getting that mixed up with actual grouping rules. They'd be easy to houserule from the above, though. Apols for the confusion.

 

[beowuuf]

It seems to be a unique occurrence nodding to the gamebooks. I don't recall other references to it in the stand alone bestiary to do with horses, humans nor Drakkarim cavalry.

 

[The Wolf]

I don't think it was put into the Bestiary, I certainly don't remember writing it since the goal of that book was to put a lot of monsters in the GM's hands and put even more information on Magnamund out there.