tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781060643507162251.post8599387294290702129..comments2023-10-08T08:54:40.079-04:00Comments on LARP Ohio: NERO 9th Edition: Gameplay ChangesTimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17437406306299325645noreply@blogger.comBlogger42125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781060643507162251.post-11212914442973046932011-04-02T15:44:47.512-04:002011-04-02T15:44:47.512-04:00As to spell strikes, I don't believe that the ...As to spell strikes, I don't believe that the rules specify that you can parry a spell strike and take the effect. It's one of those things that's on the fringe and makes sense in a spirit of the rules way. I know we've played with that in our chapter for some time now.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10979935681444364292noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781060643507162251.post-3020591770756433142011-04-01T17:39:29.363-04:002011-04-01T17:39:29.363-04:00in reply to the bow comment...hmm dunno how I miss...in reply to the bow comment...hmm dunno how I missed that in 8th. Thanks for pointing it out to me. I must not have made a shorter bow since 7th edition.dukrathahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11805845147159463930noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781060643507162251.post-30462733732343303572011-04-01T17:37:54.157-04:002011-04-01T17:37:54.157-04:00On the issue of parry vs spellstrike. A parry wil...On the issue of parry vs spellstrike. A parry will not block a spellstrike. However, a parry may have some use when it comes to spellstrikes. NPC A strikes PC 1 with a spellstrike Cause Mortal wounds 40. PC2 is standing within blade reach and calls out, Parry. PC2 then takes the effect, or shield magic/cloak/bane/whatevers it. I have done this in the past, but I haven't looked closely enough at the rules to see if I will still be able to do it in 9th.dukrathahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11805845147159463930noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781060643507162251.post-67334423752339881192011-04-01T16:35:33.852-04:002011-04-01T16:35:33.852-04:00Technically, construction for bows has not changed...Technically, construction for bows has not changed since 8th. They just added it to the weapons table.<br /><br />Pg. 83 of the 8th edition rulebook:<br />"The NERO Bow (referred to hereafter as Bow) must be curved and formed in the shape of a bow. Overall length in a straight line from tip to tip must be between 34 and 58 inches. Thrusting tips must be on both ends.<br />The NERO Crossbow (referred to hereafter as Bow) must be a T-shape, with a stock length of 12 to 24 inches. The cross piece must be at least half the stock length and may not exceed 24 inches. Thrusting tips must be on all ends."Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10979935681444364292noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781060643507162251.post-41919094023456011662011-04-01T16:26:26.462-04:002011-04-01T16:26:26.462-04:00one more new thing on weapons. There are now mini...one more new thing on weapons. There are now minimums and maximums measurements for bows. Which I don't think there were before. It is no longer possible to make a "short bow" or smaller. Also these measurements are made straight line from tip to tip.dukrathahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11805845147159463930noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781060643507162251.post-37034914366699283982011-04-01T13:41:36.670-04:002011-04-01T13:41:36.670-04:00Added the rules regarding targeted effects.Added the rules regarding targeted effects.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10979935681444364292noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781060643507162251.post-73386545292150535312011-02-21T11:16:47.286-05:002011-02-21T11:16:47.286-05:00Ohhhh...I see what was going on - a questioning of...Ohhhh...I see what was going on - a questioning of my use of "duplicitous"...FYI gentlemen, duplicitous implies duplicity, or the state of being contradictory...it doesn't just mean purposeful deception, but a contradictory or double nature. LOL...I wondered what Tim was talking about...it was funny, though. Anyway, check it out here:<br /><br />http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/duplicitousMike Ennishttp://warweb.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781060643507162251.post-31136112863345316172011-02-13T12:30:58.938-05:002011-02-13T12:30:58.938-05:00Mike,
I understand your objection, clearly we dis...Mike,<br /><br />I understand your objection, clearly we disagree. I was just confused about the use of "duplicitous". Thanks for clearing that up!<br /><br />MickeyMickeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08410370955403380206noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781060643507162251.post-30862576805157739552011-02-13T00:05:31.436-05:002011-02-13T00:05:31.436-05:00Mickey,
As I stated before, I believe that the ab...Mickey,<br /><br />As I stated before, I believe that the ability to Parry packet-delivered attacks is misplaced. I am simply restating my contention that confusion of meta-rules by overloaded instances of exception is a bad design practice. In the short term and when viewed in isolation, utilizing Parry to stop "Physical" packet attacks seems at worst a minor learning curve issue. When viewed through the concept of Game Design however, I think it lacks credibility in the context of the question "is it truly worth adding an exception to the game's meta-rules?" One of the most frustrating things about our game over the years has been these inconsistencies, and I see this modification as adding to the scope of them in a small, but significant way. The deception lies in the fact that the change adds an exception to the met-rule that Parry blocks weapon attacks. I think Bill stated it earlier, and while I'm not a fan of it I think it would make more sense from a design perspective to have Spellstrike blockable by a Parry than to have Parry blocking packets.<br /><br />Tim - Parry is a hussy...Mike Ennishttp://warweb.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781060643507162251.post-60821925873661671002011-02-11T13:37:38.595-05:002011-02-11T13:37:38.595-05:00Parry tricked me into making out with it. It was t...Parry tricked me into making out with it. It was terrible. Malapropism can be funny.Timhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17437406306299325645noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781060643507162251.post-2386538628180246542011-02-11T13:35:05.967-05:002011-02-11T13:35:05.967-05:00What is duplicitous about Parry? I don't see a...What is duplicitous about Parry? I don't see anything about it that is deceptive, even if you don't like the blanket ability to Parry physical.Mickeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08410370955403380206noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781060643507162251.post-46431268697372018882011-02-10T19:40:30.847-05:002011-02-10T19:40:30.847-05:00Bill,
I agree that Parry is not a huge learning c...Bill,<br /><br />I agree that Parry is not a huge learning curve issue, but taken with other inconsistencies each little bit counts. It is always better design to utilize meta-rules where they apply, rather than approach each aspect of the rules as its own portion free and independent of each other. This seems to be the timbre of the utilization of Parry against "Physical", and has been a significant detractor of the NERO rules designs in the past.<br /><br />I find the duplicitous nature of Parry to be bad form and am still hopeful that it can be rectified now before it grows into "how we've always done it" a version or two down the road.Mike Ennishttp://warweb.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781060643507162251.post-20786814234814549902011-02-09T11:24:41.080-05:002011-02-09T11:24:41.080-05:00Despite the fact that it might be a mistake, I rea...Despite the fact that it might be a mistake, I really do like the new system. There was always a lot of fudge when people were under two charm effects when they were determining whether or not they were in conflict. In addition, with the limited durations on most of the charms it isn't particularly powerful to charm players to prevent calms/shuns.<br /><br />The biggest oversight that people mention is the Enslaved to an NPC thing, but what they forget is that Enslavement says it acts like charm except they follow orders. Charm says you want to be around your charmer. <br /><br />So unless said noble gives you a direct order to go to some land and do X, you probably wouldn't leave your own lands while enslaved.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10979935681444364292noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781060643507162251.post-27855141468072764582011-02-09T10:56:23.312-05:002011-02-09T10:56:23.312-05:00I am not 100% convinced the paragraph explaining t...I am not 100% convinced the paragraph explaining the Charm immunity stuff on page 47 isn't an oversight. Adam wrote various paragraphs meant to clarify things and I halfway suspect that rather than deliberately changing how Charms work (without bothering to change all the actual descriptions of them) he was trying to explain them and made a mistake.<br /><br />I suppose we'll see when the book goes to print.Mickeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08410370955403380206noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781060643507162251.post-56358801005428186512011-02-09T10:51:23.911-05:002011-02-09T10:51:23.911-05:00Added the fact that Dominate was removed, as well ...Added the fact that Dominate was removed, as well as the new way Charms work.<br /><br />Can't believe I forgot to put that one down...Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10979935681444364292noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781060643507162251.post-45777824687312580162011-02-09T10:11:35.760-05:002011-02-09T10:11:35.760-05:00Added the change to rip from Pin/Bind/Web/ConfineAdded the change to rip from Pin/Bind/Web/ConfineAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10979935681444364292noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781060643507162251.post-90229023324919936262011-02-08T08:56:44.835-05:002011-02-08T08:56:44.835-05:00I would have been happy with parrying both physica...I would have been happy with parrying both physical and spellstrikes, personally. I don't think it's much of a stretch in thought, as a parry is a heroic act of defense against anything physical. Being able to stop those two attacks would give fighters a big bump to survival that I believe they've been sorely missing. <br /><br />Parry wouldn't confuse new players much, as new players don't have access to that skill in their first game, and it really only needs to be known by the person with the parry. It's not like it's a new effect they need to learn.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10979935681444364292noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781060643507162251.post-90107842382302120492011-02-07T23:18:32.220-05:002011-02-07T23:18:32.220-05:00And I for one, really appreciate the explanations ...And I for one, really appreciate the explanations (even if I personally don't agree with them) Mickey.<br /><br />ThanksEricnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781060643507162251.post-37331771335192626892011-02-07T23:00:16.445-05:002011-02-07T23:00:16.445-05:00Mike -
Fair enough. We disagree on this one it s...Mike - <br /><br />Fair enough. We disagree on this one it seems. Anywhoo, just explaining some of the thinking that went behind it and why we made (typos to the contrary) it possible to Parry a Physical attack but not a Spellstrike.Mickeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08410370955403380206noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781060643507162251.post-54723826140698225452011-02-07T22:49:54.234-05:002011-02-07T22:49:54.234-05:00Mickey - all due respect, but I disagree with your...Mickey - all due respect, but I disagree with your assertion that either had to change. The spellstrike is an exceptional skill. I think its call should be changed, but that is another discussion...<br /><br />It is not about the out-of-game definition of "packet" or "weapon" attacks as much as the in-game. Parry has always been designed to stop weapon blows from an in-game perspective, not spider webs, acidic spittle, poison globes, etc., which is what the delivery type Physical is supposed to cover. Spellstrike is not a weapon blow from the in-game perspective, but instead is a magical effect delivered through the weapon. I have no problem with Magic Armor as a stopper, but I think Parry is a poor decision.Mike Ennishttp://warweb.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781060643507162251.post-606527031087371022011-02-07T15:29:55.875-05:002011-02-07T15:29:55.875-05:00You're correct. I was going with the old Phys...You're correct. I was going with the old Physical Pin/Bind/Web/Confine, before Entangle was added with the Physical Attacks Playtest.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10979935681444364292noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781060643507162251.post-37268772557720360482011-02-07T15:17:37.149-05:002011-02-07T15:17:37.149-05:00Bill, technically I don't think you could cut ...Bill, technically I don't think you could cut out of physical Pin/Bind/Web/Confine in 8th. (Could be wrong) You could only do that if they were physical entangles (which have been removed in 9th)Ericnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781060643507162251.post-8071181296516876372011-02-07T14:49:55.377-05:002011-02-07T14:49:55.377-05:00Added the change to Physical Pin/Bind/Web/Confine....Added the change to Physical Pin/Bind/Web/Confine.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10979935681444364292noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781060643507162251.post-23848827943027222152011-02-07T14:20:09.178-05:002011-02-07T14:20:09.178-05:00I realized I should add something. The actual reas...I realized I should add something. The actual reason we went with vertical consistency (for lack of a better word) vs. horizontal is to minimize how much we changed how people actually play the game. Spellstrikes being completely unblockable has been a long long part of NERO. When I worked on the delivery types and the damage calls areas I wanted to clean them up, make them easier to deal with, but with an eye to making the gameplay as relatively similar as possible.Mickeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08410370955403380206noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7781060643507162251.post-74361991878185198502011-02-07T13:33:24.262-05:002011-02-07T13:33:24.262-05:00There are different lines of consistency. You coul...There are different lines of consistency. You could do it by packet-weapon or by delivery type. In this case, the consistency was to say "Physical = Parryable".<br /><br />You could go the other way and say "weapon = Parryable" which is not bad by any means, but then you'd have to change it so you can, in fact, successfully Parry a Spellstrike.Mickeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08410370955403380206noreply@blogger.com