roxas

Hello all! After being unsuccessful in the reddit subforum, I'm trying again here in the hope of getting advice. It's about the Fighting Maneuver. Disclaimer: I know that the rules are not very detailed in this regard, in order to leave as much room for interpretation as possible for the keepers. However, after a lot of research (online and in the rulebook), I still think that I must have overlooked things that should be written out. But I'm babbling too much, so here are a few examples of what I don't really understand: 1. A PC was taken into a hold by an NPC in the first round of combat (fighting maneuver). The second round starts with the PC but I wonder what possibilities the PC has now apart from fighting his way free with a fighting maneuver? Fleeing is pretty clearly out of the question. Attacking, although he is in the hold, i.e. without freeing himself, with the sole aim of injuring the NPC, is that possible? Difficult to justify with logic. No matter which action the PC chooses, does the PC get a penalty die AND the NPC a bonus die or just one of the two? Let's say he decides to get free and succeeds in his Fighting Maneuver, then it's the NPC's turn again, who can then grab him again, correct? 2. A (N)PC has basically two possibilities to escape from a grapple: In his own turn and when the person holding him has his turn and the PC can then escape by his "counter-reaction", correct? 3. Let's say the PC is again held in a hold and he fights against 3 NPCs. One is holding him, two are free. He tries to escape from the hold when it is his turn and fails. Now it is the turn of the two remaining NPCs to beat the PC. How do you deal with this? They get bonus dice, that much is clear. I'd probably still let them roll the dice too (a fumble and an accompanying punch to the one holding the PC is best Bud Spencer comedy), but is the PC allowed to roll a counter-reaction? Dodge and/or counter punch? Does this make sense or is the PC able to do this if he is held?... Fighting Maneuver wouldn't make sense as an option, would it? Does the PC also get a penalty die here (in addition to the attackers' bonus die s. 1.)? I can well imagine that not every question is fully formulated in the rulebook, but to my knowledge it is not even written what options an investigator has when successfully held in a hold.... Or have I missed something in the rulebook?

At the moment I'm still lost in 2 rules in the rulebook that, in my opinion, compete with each other and the book doesn't show a direct solution (at least I can't find one). As I said, I have already thought about it a lot and looked it up, but I keep coming back to this point. It revolves around opposed skills and how to use them properly in the NPC-PC relationship. I would like to briefly present my conclusions up to this point, perhaps the error can already be found there: When the player meets an NPC and wants to interact with him, a conflict quickly arises with the social skills. In the following I will deal with the social skills + psychology. So, let's start with my example. William would like to persuade the NPC he meets. Now, in my opinion, you have to consider the following things: ***1. The attitude*** * If the player has recently done the NPC a favour, the NPC is open-minded towards the player and will probably let his persuade attempt pass without rolling the dice. (E.g. if you suddenly have to ask the homeless man, whom you recently gave a decent tip, for something). * However, if the player is unknown to the NPC and he sees no reason to be persuaded, a roll of "Regular" is necessary. (E.g. one wants to persuade the librarian to help him intensively in the search for a book, although the NPC has better things to do - i.e. is rather unwilling). * If the NPC is very negative towards the player, the roll is even made more difficult by 1 to 2 levels. (The policeman should let the player escape caught in the act). ***2. Social skill values*** In addition to the attitude, however, there are the social skills, which, as I understand it, are applied to every social attempt. So if the player wants to persuade an NPC, the skills Persuasion or Psychology of the NPC are used. (You all know exactly how, I don't need to explain that) # Now to my question: How do I decide how difficult the roll is? In principle, I have 2 factors that influence the value - one is the attitude towards the player and the other is the difficulty of the attempt itself (values of the NPC). So what would be the interpretation of the difficulty in accordance with the rules? Example 1: The player tries to persuade an NPC who is neutral towards the player. This would set the difficulty to "Regular". The respective skills of the NPC are also below 50% (which, according to the rulebook, should be assumed for simple NPCs). The difficulty therefore remains "Regular". Simple. Example 2: Now, however, the player meets an NPC who has a negative attitude towards the player. I set the difficulty to "Hard". Now the respective skills are added and the NPC has a value over 50%, ergo I would have to increase the difficulty one more? Are both things added together? What if the NPC already sets the difficulty to extreme because of his setting? Would making it harder again with the skills then be an impossibility? I hope I have expressed myself well enough. 🙂 I thank everyone for help on the subject!