Jump to content

Augments once per session


Tupper

Recommended Posts

The discussion of group tasks lead to me reading the section on augments rather carefully.  The section starts out as:

“Where appropriate, one ability—whether skill, Passion, or Rune—may be combined to augment another ability of the same or a different type ... Only one augment may be attempted per ability, and an ability can only be used once per session to augment a task being attempted.”

So if I’m reading that right, you can only augment with a *skill* once per session. 

This seems odd to me. I understand wanting to stop PCs “spamming” runes and passions (GM rolls eyes; “You’re not using your movement rune *again*...” scenarios). But skill augmenting might not be consensual from the PC (“Wait, did you say I have to roll Sing as an augment? I’m terrible at singing...” scenarios).  The rule as written would mean that the GM can’t *force* the use of a particular skill augment more than once on a player in a session. 

In particular, this seems at odds with the advice for Hide and Move Silently (that one will often augment the other). Second time it came up in a session, the PCs would skip the augment.

How does everyone else interpret this?

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the limitation of once per session is, as you mentioned, intended to reduce abuse and make the use of Augments a special case, particularly with Runes and Passions. Skill based augments however are, in my opinion, much more common, and should be encouraged. But the key factor is relevance. The PC must be able to reasonably justify the augment. I recently denied a player using a sing augment to casting a spell as they wanted to cast the spell immediately, how could they benefit from the music when they barely got past the first verse? Skill augment, unlike Rune or Passion, takes time to implement the benefit. It make for very good cooperative playing when your PC's factor in time to properly augment their skills.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I reckon skill augments can often be justifiably used more than once per session to achieve similar effects. So Sing and Play Instrument could routinely and even repetitively be used together. In conflict situations, though, where you're trying to use the augment to get an advantage, any given skill could probably only effectively augment another once per conflict, or possibly per opponent. So if your PC wants to use Jump to augment their shortsword attack, they'd need, first, a reason or means by which that could occur. To take Achilles' first appearance in Troy as an example, he evaluates that the gigantic lump he's up against will only very rarely have had to raise his (large and heavy) shield to defend against a descending thrust, so reasons that a high leap will allow him to cleanly neutralise the target's obvious preferred/habitual means of defense to score a kill. So Jump as an augment to Shortsword works that time, but, as a GM, I'd rule that it wouldn't work against anyone who'd seen Achilles do that: they'd be expecting it. Similarly, "most" opponents will be used to overhand attacks meaning they need to guard their head, so it wouldn't have worked (as is) against most in the first place; the character would have needed some sort of additional factor making the 'leaping attack' practicable and effective: a boulder to spring off, or distraction low-down, or some reason the target wouldn't expect attack, which could be sidestepped by the augmenting skill in a non-obvious fashion.

3 hours ago, Psullie said:

...denied a player using a sing augment to casting a spell as they wanted to cast the spell immediately, how could they benefit from the music when they barely got past the first verse? Skill augment, unlike Rune or Passion, takes time to implement the benefit. It make for very good cooperative playing when your PC's factor in time to properly augment their skills.

The Magic chapter gives specific times and benefits for using skills to augment casting and other magical spells. p246

Quote

If the adventurer spends only one melee round performing the augmenting skill prior to casting the spell or its equivalent, the chance of success with the augmenting skill is halved.

So denying it flat was perhaps a bit harsh, but saved time looking up the rule... Some skill augments wouldn't take any/much time to implement, even helping someone else, certainly no longer than the actual task being attempted would take. Using Fast Talk to augment someone's Sleight without attracting suspicion on yourself might only take moments. Others surely do take time in preparation, say using Plant Lore to augment a Treat Poison roll; might take hours to find the right herbs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PhilHibbs said:

Forcing the use of an augment? I'd never do that. I think it's a terrible idea.

I have to agree.  Given the possibility of the negative consequences of a failed( or fumbled! ) augment attempt, there is no way the GM should require a player to attempt an augment.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, womble said:

So denying it flat was perhaps a bit harsh, but saved time looking up the rule... 

not harsh, they didn't even want to spend the round Singing, they thought that they could just start singing and immediately get the bonus 😁. I still think that the GM has to adjudicate each request based upon the scene. P139 gives guidelines on Skill times, and Fast Talk, Sing etc all take 1-5 minutes. So it would follow that to gain the Augment for those types of skills requires the appropriate time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Psullie said:

...Fast Talk, Sing etc all take 1-5 minutes. So it would follow that to gain the Augment for those types of skills requires the appropriate time.

It might follow if the bit in the Magic chapter didn't specifically say that one round would be enough to have a (halved) chance of getting some benefit for the cast. And those are guidelines as you say; there are plenty  of ways Communication skills can get used in less than a minute. Most of those ways still involve some sentient being comprehending and 'appreciating' the use, which isn't necessary for spell casting augmentation; I'd think of that use as "using the song to help get the right mind shape for casting". Much more internalised and much faster.

Your table, your rules, but if your player was basing their "want" on a misremembering of page 246, or a vague "you can use Sing to improve your casting" statement some other session, requiring their character to spend minutes singing to get a casting boost seems punitive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

Forcing the use of an augment? I'd never do that. I think it's a terrible idea.

I should probably clarify what I mean by "forcing" the use of an augment.  A player says they'll sneak across the bandit camp and into the cave.  GM thinks about it and says: "That's a move silently task, but I also think hiding is important, so I'd like you to augment your move silently with your hide."  The GM is suggesting that two skills are relevant here, and is using the augment to handle that, rather than a Player suggesting a skill, or one PC helping another PC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Tupper said:

I should probably clarify what I mean by "forcing" the use of an augment.  A player says they'll sneak across the bandit camp and into the cave.  GM thinks about it and says: "That's a move silently task, but I also think hiding is important, so I'd like you to augment your move silently with your hide."  The GM is suggesting that two skills are relevant here, and is using the augment to handle that, rather than a Player suggesting a skill, or one PC helping another PC.

Hmmm... different strokes. In this situation, I would think that the character would be limited by the lesser of the two, not adding to the chance of success. 

SDLeary

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, SDLeary said:

Hmmm... different strokes. In this situation, I would think that the character would be limited by the lesser of the two, not adding to the chance of success. 

The suggestion of augmenting comes from the RQG rules: "The Move Quietly skill may be used to augment the Hide skill, and vice versa." (p. 189, Hide skill description)

Seems counter-intuitive to me, too.

  • Like 1

— 
Self-discipline isnt everything; look at Pol Pot.”
—Helen Fielding, Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Skills can interact in different ways.  One skill Augmenting another skill is one of those ways; but skills capping one another (mounted attack uses lower of relevant Ride & relevant Weapon) is another.

I don't recall anywhere in the rules seeing that the GM can/should "force" a player to Augment a skill; but a skill cap IS one of the tools a GM can/should use to further challenge a PC...

  • Like 1

C'es ne pas un .sig

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Asking players to roll against a skill happens all the time. Player: I climb the tree, GM: Roll your climb skill. So making PC's roll dice is part of GMing. Why not extend this to Augments.

Example. PC: I want to sneak past the guards. GM: Well it is very quiet and reasonably well lit. So Roll your Move Quietly first then your Hide. Now it's up the the GM to interpret how to handle these two dice rolls. Limit one against the other as with Ride & Attack. Treat them a separate tests where a fail in either alerts the guards, or that the first augments the second. With the latter, a fail with Move Quietly only makes the Hide more difficult but doesn't necessarily expose the hero. That to me adds tension and more fun. So I think they are times when a GM could require PC's to augment a skill, but then I a harsh GM 😀

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Psullie said:

So I think they are times when a GM could require PC's to augment a skill, but then I a harsh GM 😀

I guess you're right, as long as you then don't say "sorry you already used your Sneak to augment your Hide, so you can't use it again"!

Per-session augment limits should only apply to runes and passions anyway, in my opinion. And I initially mis-read the thread title as "per season"... 🙄

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Generally, I allow any augment that seems reasonable or can be quickly justified, as well as multiple augments. I don't restrict augments to one per session, just one per skill use at a time.

However, I prefer a free-flowing game, rather than one that is hamstrung by rules.

  • Like 3

Simon Phipp - Caldmore Chameleon - Wallowing in my elitism since 1982. Many Systems, One Family. Just a fanboy. 

www.soltakss.com/index.html

Jonstown Compendium author. Find my contributions here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/23/2019 at 1:55 PM, PhilHibbs said:

I guess you're right, as long as you then don't say "sorry you already used your Sneak to augment your Hide, so you can't use it again"!

Per-session augment limits should only apply to runes and passions anyway, in my opinion. And I initially mis-read the thread title as "per season"... 🙄

Agreed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
1 hour ago, Julian Lord said:

Some practicalities and principles of HQ as opposed to the smorgasbörd of HW are simply common sense as and when translated to RQ -- a GM *could* in particular circumstances allow more than one active augment ; but fundamentally, that's just not how RuneQuest works.

I think augments as a concept are new enough that "how it works" is still pretty up in the air.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

I don't think it's the sort of thing that they want to make official proclamations on, a GM or group should come to a consensus on what they prefer.

Why?

On the surface, this appears to show an appalling lack of playtesting but I believe significant play testing was performed hence why I hope they have a solution ready to go

The suggested rules are clearly broken.

1) They state that an Augment can only be used once per session.

2) They instruct that to sneak past someone then one (such as Move Quietly) should be used to Augment the other (such as Hide).

 

This limits an adventurer to doing this action once (or arguably twice) a session.

 

I would be really surprised If their playtesting did not have a session where this situation occurred.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mechashef said:

This limits an adventurer to doing this action once (or arguably twice) a session.

I infer from RQG that augments are meant to be a special thing - NOT meant to be a tool hauled out for just "any old purpose".*

*Some editorial comments:

- I frankly dislike breaking the 4th wall with abilities.  Having a character's ability reset-time based on PLAYER activity frequency is unappealing for a lot of reasons.

- I rather suspect from the 'balance' of the augment table & results (that crit/fumble, and success/failure balance each other exactly leaving your 'special' chance as the only advantage to even using augments in the first place) that originally it was intended to be used more frequently but the vagueness of the wording in testing led to abuse.  Honestly, I'm not a fan of the RAW.

A far simpler approach for skill augments with less fooling around would be that if a character recognizes and explains to the GMs satisfaction how one skill can synergize with another, give the character a bonus on the main skill +% equal to the special chance on the supplementing skill.  And then "use limitations", I'd toss them out the window for skills.  If sing can help them in a dancing competition, and then can help them orate 10 mins later, who cares?  If it works, it works.  And then let them take any resulting skill check on one OR THE OTHER.  It encourages players to train in generalized skills too, which is realistic.  (The fumble chance for the augment goes out the window unmourned; you already have the fumble chance of the base skill.)

As far as Passions and Rune augments, yes, I'd probably limit them to one per season or per high holy day, respectively.  But then I'd certainly make the buffs more significant - these are basically one-use buffs to be used in meaningful circumstances, to the point of maybe making their use hero-point-ish (to the point of surviving a lethal blow ala "Hello, my name is Inigo Montoya, you killed my father, prepare to die").  A rune augment might give you back a rune point to be used only with a spell of that runic association. 

IMO use of a passion would result in it either increasing, decreasing, or staying the same.  Using a runic passion should always increase a players Runic affinity.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, styopa said:

I think augments as a concept are new enough that "how it works" is still pretty up in the air.

It's an old idea, but it's quite true that its fundamental limitations have never been theoretically established.

Nevertheless RuneQuest has its hard skill % use that is a bit foreign to these d20 notions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, styopa said:

I infer from RQG that augments are meant to be a special thing - NOT meant to be a tool hauled out for just "any old purpose".*

 

I would generally agree, except for Moving Quietly while hiding, the manual states this is the way to do it every time.  That changes it from a special thing to a common thing that may be needed multiple times in a session, and the RAW do not allow this. 

 

Quote

I frankly dislike breaking the 4th wall with abilities.  Having a character's ability reset-time based on PLAYER activity frequency is unappealing for a lot of reasons.

I totally agree.  It is very D&D like and in my opinion is a step backwards.  Though I do really like the idea of Augments.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rules exist to provide framework to player actions. It is the method by which games confirm that gravity most often pulls downwards and fireballs do xDy damage. I myself prefer some fairly firm rules to limit the amount 'uberGawdliness' that player characters can get up to. Others are more freeform with it. At the end of the day, RQ has ONE hard and fast rule: Maximum Game Fun. Stick with that one and you'll probably be alright.

As to the specific question in the top post, I would work a trade-off with players. If they will use Runes to augment one roll a session, the GM can only use their 80%+ Passions to direct character actions once per session at an appropriately dramatic time. That seems reasonable to me.

[note: @PhilHibbs showed me a typo that considerably changed my point here. Sorry 'bout that.]

Edited by svensson
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...