Mixed bag of many questions after first BWG play.

Burning Wheel Subsystem Advice and Guidance
1

Hi All I’ve switched from BWR to BWG. And have a few questions after playing, I know some of these questions would have arisen in BWR too but I still don’t know the answers! :slight_smile:

Q1: Unless explicitly told otherwise (like with working out an incidental hit result) do you always round down in BWG?

Q2: If a stat like PER goes up during play do all linked skills also immediately go up, or do skills advance independently once opened?

Q3: WWBWHQD? In the session I was running a bunch of orcs jump down from some low cliffs with the intention of fighting, subduing and capturing the PCs. I used regular tests and vs tests for this and I’m not sure I handled it well. Here’s what I did:

  1. Rolled stealth vs Observation to set up the ambush (no concerns here)
  2. (The orcs succeeded at point 1) I made the PCs take Steel tests for the ambush (they all failed by margins of 3 or 4 and chose to stand and drool)
  3. (Here’s what I wasn’t sure about) I didn’t want to just say “ok since you are standing and drooling they easily bundle you up into sacks and drag you away”. So instead I said the orcs were trying to grapple and lock or throw the various PCs, since the PCs were hesitating I made the orcs roll as if rolling against “No Action” from the fight matrix (despite not being a FIGHT! rules mode) and gave them a 1D advantage due to the fact they were against hesitating PCs.
  4. I did not take into account the time of hesitation, I just abstracted it into the 1D advantage. So the orcs didn’t get 3 or 4 shots at the capture.

So how would you chaps have handled this?

Q4: We had a situation where someone with REF 4 (Alf) was fighting someone with REF 3 (Bert). Alf uses his extra action in volley one scripting great strike “SET” > “STRIKE”, Bert scripted block. I ruled that the block “went off” against the SET and then the STRIKE bit of great strike was counted as happening against “No Action”. Was this right? Is the way around this (as an unfortunate defender) to script Avoid instead, since it works against everything that volley?

Q5: If I have advantage in a FIGHT! for my weapon and as we go from exchange 1 to exchange 2 I decide to position with a different weapon am I right in saying I lose the “vie for position” dice advantage for the weapon I was using and instead my opponent gets the advantage dice for his weapon (or do I just lose mine but he gains nothing)?

Q6: WWBWHQD? - It comes up a lot in my games that there are fairly “standard” (not much at stake beyond getting past the opposition to continue exploring) fights do the death using vs or bloody vs rules. The players intent is almost always “Kill them” now as the GM I don’t want to do the same for my NPCs (would be short games with insane amounts of high stakes rolls) so I generally declare I’m trying to wound the PCs instead (intent of superficial, light or moderate wounds). Is this what you chaps do too? I do go beyond this when occassion calls / when it’s at all possible e.g. intent “drive the PCs to the cliff edge”, “send the PCs sword flying”, “Prevent access through this narrow defile, driving the PCs off” etc. But what kind of NPC intent do you HQ-ers tend to use in more “standard” fights?

Q7: A player with higher REF than the others was hesitating, along with them, outside of FIGHT! mechanics, and he felt he should hesitate less than the others due to the fact that if it were in FIGHT! he would have more actions per exchange. I ruled that outside of FIGHT! time is more abstract and it’s just how many heartbeats you hesitate for so I wasn’t going to have REF factor into it. Was I right?

Thanks! :slight_smile:

2

Hi tigermuppetcut, I’ll give you the answers I can now. Normally I give out page numbers, but I’m away from my books right now, so maybe some kind and enterprising soul will follow and provide them.

Yes. Always round down unless told otherwise.

Q2: If a stat like PER goes up during play do all linked skills also immediately go up, or do skills advance independently once opened?

All skills are completely independent of stats once they’re open. They advance separately.

Q3: WWBWHQD? In the session I was running a bunch of orcs jump down from some low cliffs with the intention of fighting, subduing and capturing the PCs. I used regular tests and vs tests for this and I’m not sure I handled it well. Here’s what I did:

  1. Rolled stealth vs Observation to set up the ambush (no concerns here)
  2. (The orcs succeeded at point 1) I made the PCs take Steel tests for the ambush (they all failed by margins of 3 or 4 and chose to stand and drool)
  3. (Here’s what I wasn’t sure about) I didn’t want to just say “ok since you are standing and drooling they easily bundle you up into sacks and drag you away”. So instead I said the orcs were trying to grapple and lock or throw the various PCs, since the PCs were hesitating I made the orcs roll as if rolling against “No Action” from the fight matrix (despite not being a FIGHT! rules mode) and gave them a 1D advantage due to the fact they were against hesitating PCs.
  4. I did not take into account the time of hesitation, I just abstracted it into the 1D advantage. So the orcs didn’t get 3 or 4 shots at the capture.

If they all chose to Stand and Drool, I probably would have just gone ahead and captured them. But it’s also cool to give them a fair shot to escape the dire situation, as you did. However, I would have had them each hesitate for actions equal to their margin of failure on the Steel test.

Q4: We had a situation where someone with REF 4 (Alf) was fighting someone with REF 3 (Bert). Alf uses his extra action in volley one scripting great strike “SET” > “STRIKE”, Bert scripted block. I ruled that the block “went off” against the SET and then the STRIKE bit of great strike was counted as happening against “No Action”. Was this right? Is the way around this (as an unfortunate defender) to script Avoid instead, since it works against everything that volley?

You did it correctly. I don’t have my book with me, but as I recall, Avoid doesn’t work that way. It doesn’t defend against everything that volley. Instead, it defends against everything on that particular action. For instance, if I were facing off against three guys and they all chose to Strike me, my Avoid successes would be reduced from each opponent’s Strike successes respectively. If I blocked instead, I would choose one of the opponents to affect with my Block, and the rest of the opponents would Strike me as if I had No Action.

Q5: If I have advantage in a FIGHT! for my weapon and as we go from exchange 1 to exchange 2 I decide to position with a different weapon am I right in saying I lose the “vie for position” dice advantage for the weapon I was using and instead my opponent gets the advantage dice for his weapon (or do I just lose mine but he gains nothing)?

As I understand it, if you had the advantage at the end of the exchange, you vie for position with the advantage. However, you use the advantage dice granted by the new weapon you’re using, not the old.

Q6: WWBWHQD? - It comes up a lot in my games that there are fairly “standard” (not much at stake beyond getting past the opposition to continue exploring) fights do the death using vs or bloody vs rules. The players intent is almost always “Kill them” now as the GM I don’t want to do the same for my NPCs (would be short games with insane amounts of high stakes rolls) so I generally declare I’m trying to wound the PCs instead (intent of superficial, light or moderate wounds). Is this what you chaps do too? I do go beyond this when occassion calls / when it’s at all possible e.g. intent “drive the PCs to the cliff edge”, “send the PCs sword flying”, “Prevent access through this narrow defile, driving the PCs off” etc. But what kind of NPC intent do you HQ-ers tend to use in more “standard” fights?

In a versus test, you should consider the player’s intent and find a way to foil it. Death and capture are common ways, but it really depends on the context of the test. Failure is your opportunity to introduce a twist.

Q7: A player with higher REF than the others was hesitating, along with them, outside of FIGHT! mechanics, and he felt he should hesitate less than the others due to the fact that if it were in FIGHT! he would have more actions per exchange. I ruled that outside of FIGHT! time is more abstract and it’s just how many heartbeats you hesitate for so I wasn’t going to have REF factor into it. Was I right?

I would have ruled the same way.

3

What Thor said.

If you want an alternate option to the Ambush results you don’t always have to make it a Steel test. For example, if the PCs are wary and expecting trouble, the ambush wouldn’t necessarily result in a Steel test, but could instead either be Advantage dice to the orcs (per Linked Test), or advantage dice to winning the Positioning at the beginning of a Fight!

I would normally do the “caught completely off guard” thing where characters are in a totally non-danger, non-aware mode, like having assassins run up on you in the middle of Church mass, and similar.

Chris

4

Thanks you both so much for the quick and clear replies.

It leaves me with one (pretty big) concern about great strike. It seems that it will be an almost guaranteed fight winner against REF 3 opponents (if you are REF 4 or higher), unless they manage to so something with their very first action that turns the fight (like a quick and wounding strike). What’s everyone’s opinion / experience of this?

And another Q:
Weapon Speed: Is it purely strike actions (not great strike or block and strike or lock and strike (all the other “attack actions”) that count against this? i.e. could I with a WS 1 weapon script “Block & strike”, “Lock & Strike”, “Great Strike” with no issue?

Also I know (err I think) that once you have reached your WS limit you cannot use a great strike to end the chain of strikes and reset the WS count but can I use the other attack actions listed above to reset the WS count?

EDITED TO ADD: Oh yeah and what can great strike? Any weapon (including daggers (palm of your second hand on the pomell adding force?) and bare fists (axe handle or shatner dropkick)) or weapons of longsword length or longer?

Thanks again.

5

You can take a number of actions using your weapon up to your WS per exchange. That includes Strike, Great Strike, Lock and Strike, etc, I think.

6

Keep in mind you’re completely vulnerable during the first action of a great strike. If someone is consistently making a set on a first action and great strike on the second that gives you all sorts of opportunity to mess with them – hit them, lock them, charge/tackle.

If you look at the weapon table in the back of the book there should be a footnote for which weapons can great strike.

7

Also, Great Strike isn’t the be-all/end-all of combat actions–it grants +1 Power or +1 VA. Against unarmored opponents (or with a weapon that already has high VA), Strike/Strike in the first volley will usually do a lot more. If you’re expecting that 3 Reflexes combatant to come in with an early Strike, a Block/Strike is a good choice.

My point is, it’s not the Great Strike that will get you–it’s fighting people with higher Reflexes. Characters with 3 in Reflexes are very, very vulnerable in Fight, because anyone with higher Reflexes knows they can take an unopposed action.

8

Heh, guess I took too long typing this up.

What Thor said though if you want a PC safety valve in situations like this for the future, consider making an open test for the NPCs to determine how long it takes them to (in this case) bundle up all the PCs. If it takes too long, some of the unbagged PCs may start coming out of Stand and Drool, etc.

Q4: We had a situation where someone with REF 4 (Alf) was fighting someone with REF 3 (Bert). Alf uses his extra action in volley one scripting great strike “SET” > “STRIKE”, Bert scripted block. I ruled that the block “went off” against the SET and then the STRIKE bit of great strike was counted as happening against “No Action”. Was this right? Is the way around this (as an unfortunate defender) to script Avoid instead, since it works against everything that volley?

The Block against Set part is correct. Unfortunately the wording for Avoid refers to an opposing action (pg 443) as Thor stated. In a one volley action versus one volley action the Avoid result would be applied to all incoming attack, basic, and special actions (same page) and for all opponents (pg 460, where it again mentions, “against all incoming actions on that action that it is scripted”). Scripting Avoid against the Set would have the same result as scripting the Block, not very useful. The optional Oh, F&$k! rule allows for forfeiting an action to immediately switch an action to Avoid or Block but that also wouldn’t help here because Bert has no second action in the volley. It is a good display of the advantage of a high Reflex score. However, a Strike against a Set is a good example of a well-planned (or lucky) volley if one if fighting someone with more actions.

Q5: If I have advantage in a FIGHT! for my weapon and as we go from exchange 1 to exchange 2 I decide to position with a different weapon am I right in saying I lose the “vie for position” dice advantage for the weapon I was using and instead my opponent gets the advantage dice for his weapon (or do I just lose mine but he gains nothing)?

Page 458 has this covered and your first thought is correct: anytime you switch weapon in a Fight you cede the advantage to your opponent (you don’t just lose it). Your opponent gets the bonus to positioning tests from the table on pg 436 and you get the penalty from the pg 431 table. Note that this works like a successful Beat action.
Jaf (with his mace) is fighting Al (with his sword). Al wins the engage with help of the +1D for having a longer weapon. Jaf has a +1Ob for the exchange. Al wants to capture Jaf so he scripts Strike/Avoid/Lock and Jaf has Counterstrike/Block/Strike. Things go well for Al and the last volley comes around. Lock uses the Hands (and their weapon length); Jaf immediately gains the advantage, losing the +1Ob penalty, and Al gains +1Ob. For the Vie at the start of the next exchange, Jaf has the advantage (assuming he made it through the Strike/Lock interaction).
If you were disadvantaged from positioning (taking a penalty from the table on pg 431) then switching weapons can lower the penalty (going to sword hilt from sword against a knife with the advantage for example) or raise it (going from sword hilt to sword against a knife with advantage).

Q6: WWBWHQD? - It comes up a lot in my games that there are fairly “standard” (not much at stake beyond getting past the opposition to continue exploring) fights do the death using vs or bloody vs rules. The players intent is almost always “Kill them” now as the GM I don’t want to do the same for my NPCs (would be short games with insane amounts of high stakes rolls) so I generally declare I’m trying to wound the PCs instead (intent of superficial, light or moderate wounds). Is this what you chaps do too? I do go beyond this when occassion calls / when it’s at all possible e.g. intent “drive the PCs to the cliff edge”, “send the PCs sword flying”, “Prevent access through this narrow defile, driving the PCs off” etc. But what kind of NPC intent do you HQ-ers tend to use in more “standard” fights?

As Thor noted, context is everything.
If the PC intent is to clear an obstacle to exploration (with the action being kill it) than result of failure should probably relate to the intent and not the action. Failure of a Versus test would translate to complicating the exploration in some manner. The “prevent access” access is a good example, as is stealing the map/camping gear/food, cursing the group with bad navigation mojo, etc. Anything that that makes achieving the initial intent harder, in a manner that leads to more story, is good.
If the PCs are going into Bloody Versus, they will most likely get wounded in addition to any complications to intent from failure. Which teaches the PCs a valuable lesson: don’t engage in lethal combat with the expectation of walking away unscathed even if successful.

Q7: A player with higher REF than the others was hesitating, along with them, outside of FIGHT! mechanics, and he felt he should hesitate less than the others due to the fact that if it were in FIGHT! he would have more actions per exchange. I ruled that outside of FIGHT! time is more abstract and it’s just how many heartbeats you hesitate for so I wasn’t going to have REF factor into it. Was I right?

Yes. If he had asked for a +1D to a versus or graduated test coming out of the Stand and Drool because he reacts faster then it might have been more appropriate.

9

Hi, I looked on pg 554 (Appendices) but the weapon table didn’t have a footnote about great strike.

Anyone know where the info is?

And thanks again for the great responses.

10

I thought WS was the number of consecutive strikes you could script, not number of weapon actions per exchange.

11

I think pseudoidiot is thinking of BWR. In BWG any weapon you can conceivably get a good two-handed grip on can great strike.

12

Also, if the entire group is hesitating, Stand and Drool is NOT a good choice unless you want to be captured or killed. Think of a show where the police bust in, guns out, and catch everybody off-guard. There’s no effective resistance, and they’re all captured. If you’re all hesitating and you DON’T want to be captured, choose Run Screaming.

Either way, failing a Steel test is pretty brutal. It pays to have an advance scout–one who will either be able to spot the ambush (thus avoiding a Steel test), or, failing that, Run Screaming back to everyone else to warn them. Just like in real life.

13

Ah, you are correct! I’d forgotten that change. Which I believe means if you have a sword and shield you can’t great strike unless you remove the shield.

14

Remember, all actions against someone who is Stand and Drool hesitating are at Ob 1 (p. 454); this is different from No Action, where only Strike and Great Strike are Ob 1, and everything else is against half of the relevant skill or stat (p.441).

15

I’m on the road, too. Can someone do us a kindness and quote some page numbers?

16

[QUOTE=cesius;117319]
Page 458 has this covered and your first thought is correct: anytime you switch weapon in a Fight you cede the advantage to your opponent (you don’t just lose it). Your opponent gets the bonus to positioning tests from the table on pg 436 and you get the penalty from the pg 431 table. Note that this works like a successful Beat action.

Page 458 covers switching weapons DURING an exchange;

"Q5: If I have advantage in a FIGHT! for my weapon and as we go from exchange 1 to exchange 2 I decide to position with a different weapon am I right in saying I lose the “vie for position” dice advantage for the weapon I was using and instead my opponent gets the advantage dice for his weapon (or do I just lose mine but he gains nothing)? "

This is covered under Positioning During A Fight pg:435/6. “If you vie for position, test your speed plus advantages for stride and your positioning advantage-do not use the weapon length list in the engage section. Use this (pg:436) table instead.”

This is made explicit under Retaining or Taking the Advantage pg:438.
“Regardless of how you got it, the fighter with the advantage at the end of the exchange gets a bonus to vying for position at the start of the next exchange.”

Its up to him to decide which weapon to take advantage with…

17

Ok just to go over it one more time (please), Oh and another question!:

VfP: Alf with his sword has the advantage over Bert and his spear at the end of volley 3.
Between exchanges Alf declares he will VfP with his hands, Bert will VfP with his spear.
Does Alf:
A) Retain the advantage but now use the VfP bonus dice for hands.
B) Retain the advantage and still use the VfP bonus dice for the sword, despite switching to hands
C) Lose the advantage (futzing with weapons) giving Bert his VfP spear vs hands bonus.
D) Something else (please explain).

C feels right to me but it sounds like folk are saying it’s A

NEW QUESTION:
The bonus dice you get from a stance can be applied either to your actions in a volley or to VfP. But how does this work?
A) You can use the bonus for actions in the frst two volleys and as long as you don’t use it in the final volley you can apply it to VfP for the next exchange.
B) If you used it for ANY actions in the entire exchange you may not use it to VfP before the next exchange.
C) It’s the other way around, as in the bonus resets at the start of each exchange so if you use it in the VfP at the top of the exchange then it will be unavailable for the actions in the upcoming volleys of that exchange, BUT if you save it and use it in the actions instead then it will reset and be available at the top of the next exchange to help VfP.

I’m guessing C is right (it’s cleaner).

18

As I understand it, its important to separate switching weapons DURING an exchange from switching weapons BETWEEN exchanges.

Ceding advantage is only mentioned under “Switching Weapons During an Exchange” on page 458.
I assumed the intention was to make each exchange like the flurry of combat in a Douglas Fairbanks Junior movie. The combatants slash their swords etc. and then retire briefly…If you happen to have the advantage at the end of that flurry, YOU call the shots regarding which weapon you position with next exchange. If you try to switch weapons DURING that flurry, you cede advantage BECAUSE you didn’t position with it.

(To be honest though, if I played BW as much as I talk and read about it, I would be much more certain of my answer :wink:

19

[QUOTE=tigermuppetcut;117381
NEW QUESTION:
The bonus dice you get from a stance can be applied either to your actions in a volley or to VfP. But how does this work?
A) You can use the bonus for actions in the frst two volleys and as long as you don’t use it in the final volley you can apply it to VfP for the next exchange.
B) If you used it for ANY actions in the entire exchange you may not use it to VfP before the next exchange.
C) It’s the other way around, as in the bonus resets at the start of each exchange so if you use it in the VfP at the top of the exchange then it will be unavailable for the actions in the upcoming volleys of that exchange, BUT if you save it and use it in the actions instead then it will reset and be available at the top of the next exchange to help VfP.

I’m guessing C is right (it’s cleaner).[/QUOTE]

pg446 says “Obviously, this must be declared at the top of the exchange.” I’d say the answer is a fairly confident ‘C’.

20

<removed drunk-post>