Re: [BNW] Leaping, etc.

[Theo McGuckin <tsm@jlab.org>]

I think some of these have been answered.

> > The jumping distances seem pretty wacky. [snip]
> 
> The problem is the issue of what trait (mainly Strength) bonuses do (and
> don't do).  Unfortunately, there are almost no examples in the rulebook
> that feature trait bonuses.
>
> 1)  There are several places in the rules where traits are treated as
> straight numbers, rather than dice pools + bonuses.  Are the bonuses
> treated as extra dice?  Horizontal leaping, for instance--a half inch for
> each "point" of Strength.  I'm playing a Bouncer, with a Strength
> of 2d6+3.  Is that 2 "points", or 5?  I would hope it's 5, since being a
> Bouncer I plan to jump a lot.  Lifting, carrying, and throwing are based
> on comparing Strength to the Size of the object.  In the example for
> throwing, a 4d6 is clearly treated as a 4 for these purposes--how's a
> 2d6+3 treated?  What about wounds?  "Up to his Strength", "double her
> Strength"--do bonuses affect these?  The rules are silent on this.  It
> could've been clearer, if some of the exmples had used something other
> than a Blaster.

Well the FAQ that I printed off of the Barony of Gilead page indicates:
A. The Goliath's bonus does effect leaping distance (so the bouncer's
would too)
B. It also effects # of wounds per location.

> 2)  Incidentally, there is no rule for vertical leaping.  My GM will be
> happy to house-rule it (hi, Mike!), but this seems like an oversight in a
> game that spells out everything else in term of map inches.

What did you think of my rules suggestion?

> 3)  Fighting.  Okay, this is just irking me.  What's the most accurate 
> form of attack in the game?  The Gunner's astounding marksmanship, you
> say?  Well, he can only tie the Goliath's Fighting.  That Strength bonuses
> should give a damage bonus makes sense to me--but a bonus to hit?  Let's
> say I've given my Bouncer a Martial Arts of 5 and a Speed of 5--ie, the
> most accurate you can be with Martial Arts at the beginning of the game
> (no, that's not how I've written him up, but just for the sake of
> argument).  Let's say I'm standing shoulder to shoulder with a Goliath
> with Strength 5 and a Fighting of only 1, and a Speedster runs past us,
> dodging for all he's worth.  Because of his Strength bonus, the Goliath
> stands a better chance of laying a hand on the Speedster than I do.  Seems
> really odd for someone who's "Dirt Slow".  (Oh, and since throwing is a
> Strength skill, they're just as deadly accurate with thrown objects.)

One possible "patch" for this would be to allow multiple dodges (i.e. the
Goliath rolls to hit with his one action, the Speedster dodges and doesn't
make it, so the Guide lets him use another action to try and dodge again).
If you really wanted to up the odds you could do a reversal of normal and
give the dodger a BONUS to dodge for each extra action he puts into (he is
focusing most/all of his effort on dodging, so he'll do it better). This
would fit perfectly with the old Fesic/Wesley image of the giant swinging
slowly and the little guying dodging like a fiend, but not being able to
respond.
Thoughts?

> Of course, I'm screwing myself by choosing Martial Arts--it fits with my
> character concept, but with the +3 Strength bonus for Bouncers, I'd be
> much more effective using Fighting.  This doesn't seem to fit with the
> concept of the Bouncer package, really--even the Bouncer _archetype_ has
> taken the trouble to learn Martial Arts, when he'd have better luck just
> wading in there and duking it out!  I guess what I'm trying to figure out
> is, why is there a combat skill where accuracy is determined by strength?
> There's nothing inherently wrong with the concept of a Goliath who rarely
> misses--but shouldn't he have to spend a lot of points on it?

Oh! Oh! I had another idea. How about this:
Unless the book specifically states it bonuses to not apply to "skilled"
rolls. So for the Goliath, his str. bonus would apply to damage, size for
wounds and leaping because there are no skills associated with these
rolls. It would not apply to fighting or throwing as there is a skill that
adds to the dice (so he would just get his 5d6, not 5d5+5).
Likewise the bouncer would then be better off with martial arts (4d6 vs.
2d6) but his damage would still be above normal (+3) as would his ability
to take hits (5 wounds per area). Now his dodge would still be nuts as the
book specifically says he gets +5 to dodge (plus what ever skill in dodge
he has).
Also (getting long winded here...) the Genius would get his +5 to all int.
rolls cause the rules say so.

> 4) Acrobatics.  Okay, maybe I'm the only one who cares, but it looks
> unfinished.  Is it supposed to do anything other than halve falling
> damage?  (Impress women on a Challenging(10) roll?)  Can it decrease it by
> more than half if I get a lot of successes? I'm just not sure how
> comfortable I feel leaping from rooftop to rooftop without knowing these
> things. :)

Yeah, I wasn't too sure about this one either, seems like a really
phenomonal roll should allow you to catch that flag pole sticking out of
the building, swing around it three times (a la spiderman) and then land
gently on the ground.

> my GM has house-ruled most of these quite reasonably IMO.  (I haven't
> asked him about Acrobatics, and I probably should, before I bounce off
> some broad, flat surface.)  But I still think this stuff should be
> errata'd.

Could you share some of his rulings? It might help others who have similar
quandries...

> Incidentally, the first two game sessions have been a blast!  The second
> session was the first 14-hour session I've played in forever.  Being a
> team of people who are both heroic and paranoid is... unique :)

Lucky snot, we have yet to start playing (focusing on getting our old
Deadlands game up and running) which really blows my credibility in
suggesting rules changes/clarrifications (oh well).

-Theo McCracken, whose thoughts and ideas are solely his own and do not, 
in any way, reflect those of Jefferson Lab or its staff. Unless of
course there is any money to made off those ideas, in which case the lab
says: "Gimme, gimme, gimme!"