What are the implications of an ally and an opponent being engaged in a [partial] Lock when you target the opponent with a AoE:Presence spell? I do not see anything mentioned, which implies no difficulty with targeting one and not the other. However that does not sit particularly well in my mind, and wonder if this is just a matter of economy of verbiage that requires player interpretation.
In the particular circumstance that occurred it involved the target being a huge snake wrapped around the ally of the sorcerer. The question did not even occur to us, because we mistakenly treated the AoE as 10’s of paces instead of presence. But I am interested for the future as the caster is a PC so there is a high likelihood of a similar circumstance occurring in the future.
Related Question, while I am at it: I do not see anything mentioned in Lock about issues with Strike, either. I was not sure if that would be handled via an assessed circumstantial Ob penalty or it is expected there is no issue.
Assuming you’re asking about Lock affecting Strike, Strike dice should be reduced as per the Lock value like any other die pool. If you’re wondering more about partially locking someone and then striking, there’s no direct penalty beyond the fact that you’re at Fists/Knife optimal so anything longer than that (like, say, a sword or lance) will be penalized appropriately.
For the first question, Area of Effect in Fight (Page 515) specifically says “Presence: you hit all enemy targets with whom you are engaged.” Since it says enemy, I think you can assume it hits the snake and not the ally. If it was 10s of Paces you’d hit both the ally and the snake.
You misunderstand the question, it is about a third party Striking.
For the first question, Area of Effect in Fight (Page 515) specifically says “Presence: you hit all enemy targets with whom you are engaged.” Since it says enemy, I think you can assume it hits the snake and not the ally. If it was 10s of Paces you’d hit both the ally and the snake.
I see and acknowledged the wording, under ‘normal’ circumstances. My issue/question is with its implied ability to sort out targets that are embracing other things/people. If that is intentional and/or I have missed something located elsewhere.
I’ve always assumed that sorting stuff out is what makes it different from 10’s of paces. The interesting part about AoE Presence is that you need to be engaged with your target(s) to affect them. So you can have 5 enemies in a conflict but if you’re only positioning against two of them you hit can’t hit the other three with your Presence spell, regardless of the distances. 10’s of paces hits everyone, friend or foe, regardless of their positioning.
Ah, a 3rd party. I’m not sure what the official answer is, but I know that when there was a 3-on-1 lock-and-brawl fest at the end of Thelon’s Rift at 10/10/10 (three adventurers vs. the Ophidian) there weren’t any penalties applied. To be fair that was a) BWR and b) the PCs were the ones doing the locking. I’d say that if the lock-er scripts block they could reasonably block by putting the lock-ee in the way. Otherwise you hit your target.
Yeah. I just have a tough time picturing Fire Fan hitting the snake wrapped around someone but not also BBQing the wrapped up victim. shrug Maybe that is a short-coming of my imagination?
In any event done is done. It was a joint oversight by the table, and the Mi damage to the PC in question was likely offset by another oopsie of allowing more than 3 successes to be added to the DOF roll (crazy 9 success roll!) which put the snake out before he could finish snacking.
If I have not missed anything in the book on this we will just discuss it at the start of the next session and get things clear how we’ll handle it going forward.
I’d say that if the locker scripts block they could reasonably block by putting the lock-ee in the way. Otherwise you hit your target.
The thought of “human shield” had occurred to me when I was pondering this. Seems quite situational, of course. In my mind requiring the complete Lock of the lock-ee and some very close attention and assessment to stated Intent. If you have ever does any [non-WWE] wrestling, or at least watched it closely, I think you would find someone that is not completely pinned/wrapped up a decidedly unwieldy ‘tool’ to use.
Thanks for the insight Luke. He had a couple extra advantage dice from positioning, it should have occurred to me to offer (or he suggest) that opportunity.
That I expect will be the options offered going forward for similar entwined situations. The sorcerer [hilariously] declares both ‘opponents’ and Tests at normal Ob or takes a penalty and risks even worse [hilarious] outcomes.
