Barf Forth Apocalyptica
powered by the apocalypse => Dungeon World => Topic started by: Michael Loy on October 23, 2012, 12:19:39 PM
-
The ranger, in their Command move. When you work with your animal companion on something it's trained in ...
"…and someone interferes with you, add its instinct to your roll"
Surely that's "add its instinct to their roll"?
-
if you are working with your animal and it's helping you, its bonus should always be in your favor. Right? "Istinct" isn't strictly something that gives you a disadvantage, even if you choose weaknesses based on it. With a higher istinct, you are trading in more weaknesses in exchange of being more capable of getting over whoever should have been your ally. That evokes something! Like, an even more lone-wolf ranger than usual, who's used to do everything by himself (and his faithful companion).
It's worth to clarify that by "interferes" is meant only when the move "aid or interfere" is triggered by another pc.
-
No, it just doesn't make sense. "Interfere" is something some another PC rolls against you, it's not something you roll. So how could you add instinct to your roll?
Also, I think instinct actually is supposed to be generally negative. Compare these two stat lines for companions:
• Ferocity +2, Cunning +1, 1 Armor, Instinct +1
• Ferocity +3, Cunning +1, 1 Armor, Instinct +2
High instinct indicates that your companion is less tamed, more difficult to control. It's just like the Driver's cars in Apocalypse World (when someone interferes with you, they add your car's Weakness to their roll).
At least, if that's not the intention, then other stuff is wrong instead. In any case, something's wrong! Probably just a typographical error, but still.
-
well, to be interfered with you have to roll something in the first place! However, I humbly retreat and wait eagerly for an official answer.
-
Mm. That would mean that if you took that second stat line, your companion makes you immune to interference, and you also get the best Ferocity available, which doesn't sound right at all.
-
Yeah, I think your companion adds Ferocity to your roll, then you subtract for the other player's successful Interfere. And you narrate your dog growling at them or jumping in their path or whatever,not course.
I don't see a problem with a Stat line that counteracts Interfere, if that's what the player chooses.
-
I think you're confusing Ferocity and Instinct, Scrape.
Anyway, that would make it a strictly "better" option. Compare those two stat lines I posted above. Apocalypse engine games aren't obsessed with game balance, I'll grant you, but it seems really fishy to figure that one animal companion would be just like another animal companion, except that half of its stats are simply better.
Plus, again, it's an identical format to the Apocalypse World driver.
But, sure. Let's wait and see.
-
The way it's supposed to work is that the animal is acting instinctively, and making it easier to mess with you. It is supposed to add to the roll of the person Interfering with you.
FIXING IT.
-
well, my ranger is NOT gonna be happy about this :D
-
@skinnyghost: now that's funny, that's totally not what I was picturing hahaha
-
It's pretty unclear, to be fair. We'll clear it up!
-
The fighter has to choose between different "skins" for his signature weapon.
A typical longsword that you can buy has +1 damage. If i take Longsword as my option, do i get the +1 damage or is this just for bought weapons?
Do Scent of Blood and Merciless stack? If yes then how? Do i really roll 1d10 + 2d4 or
2d4*b ?
Is there any reason i should take Scent of Blood before Merciless?
-
The way it's supposed to work is that the animal is acting instinctively, and making it easier to mess with you. It is supposed to add to the roll of the person Interfering with you.
FIXING IT.
Ok so your Companion's flaw will be shown only when someone wants to mess with you AND that person is a player?
Uhm.. I really don't like this feature, Cleric and Paladin have more bounds and the GM can put them in a spot with ease, while with this fix you cannot use the Ranger's Companion to do so.
-
The fighter has to choose between different "skins" for his signature weapon.
A typical longsword that you can buy has +1 damage. If i take Longsword as my option, do i get the +1 damage or is this just for bought weapons?
From what I understand, your signature weapon only has the benefits you give it. So "Just for bought weapons" is my call.
Do Scent of Blood and Merciless stack? If yes then how? Do i really roll 1d10 + 2d4 or
2d4*b ?
Is there any reason i should take Scent of Blood before Merciless?
Yes, 1d10+2d4, and "probably not", but I'm sure there are edge cases.
-
well, if you're a good, jedi-knight style fighter with maybe some cleric/wizard/paladin/druid multiclass, "merciless" is not what you really want to end up being.
@rino
Istinct comes into play when you sum it to another player's interfere roll. The companion's weaknesses are totally another matter, and they come into play all the time, just like its strenghts.
-
Ok so your Companion's flaw will be shown only when someone wants to mess with you AND that person is a player?
Uhm.. I really don't like this feature, Cleric and Paladin have more bounds and the GM can put them in a spot with ease, while with this fix you cannot use the Ranger's Companion to do so.
Doesn't the GM have a move "show them the downside of their gear" or something like it.
-
Ok so your Companion's flaw will be shown only when someone wants to mess with you AND that person is a player?
Uhm.. I really don't like this feature, Cleric and Paladin have more bounds and the GM can put them in a spot with ease, while with this fix you cannot use the Ranger's Companion to do so.
Doesn't the GM have a move "show them the downside of their gear" or something like it.
Yep. You could definitely cover stuff like this with "Turn their move back on them" or "show a downside to their class, race or equipment" or "Tell the requirements or consequences and ask".
The point is that there's a tension between the Ranger and their companion. The beast is fighting its instincts, to flee, to be feral, to eat the flesh of men, whatever. That can cause all kinds of complex problems.
-
That's a cool concept that I'd honestly never considered. I always thought of the companion as totally tamed.. but even the Ranger isn't totally tamed. I like it.
-
That's a cool concept that I'd honestly never considered. I always thought of the companion as totally tamed.. but even the Ranger isn't totally tamed. I like it.
Part of what I love about the Ranger is how they struggle - born of man or elf but their heart is all red red blood and fangs and the howl of the pack. What's even better is seeing how the players interact. Whether the Ranger and the Druid are friends "by default" or rivals. Or how the Ranger and the Paladin get along. It's really interesting to see the archetypes get exercised.
-
Still not clear how instinct works; could you provide a example?
For Companion, we (I and Rino) have actually agreed to follow this rule:
1) Wolf (a generic companion) can choose among: fight humanoids, hunt, search, f.monster, labor, Guard.
With fight humanoids or f.monster the ranger get (only) +ferocity in damage
With Hunt the ranger gets (only) + Cunning in hunt and track
With Search only + Cunning in discern reality
With Guard only + Armor when the ranger is attacked.
If you fight a monster and Wolf is trained in fight monster but untrained in Guard, you get only damage bonus.
It seemed to us that the rules as were stated were a little to helpful for the Ranger.
Any opinion about that?
From a fictional point of you, I see the relationship between Ranger and companion, similar to that between a Marat and its chala (for those who knows the Codex Alera books).
-
I don't think the rules as written are over generous. Here, let's say we have a ranger fighting humanoids, attacking in tandem with his companion and otherwise making optimal use of the Command rules.
First that ^ won't always be the case. The companion might not be acting within its training, the companion might be injured, the companion might just be on the other side of the room, etc.
Still, even assuming an optimal situation, what do we get? +1 damage puts my d8 damage die on par with a paladin or fighter's d10 damage die. +2 damage starts to put me on par with the paladin or fighter's superior weapons. +3 damage means I finally have an edge, except actually the paladin and fighter still have more options to boost damage.
And +1 armor. Because fighters and paladins can ignore the Clumsy tag on armor, they'll usually be wearing 2-armor. As a ranger, I won't, so again I get to be as good as the big fighty classes, except for me it's only under certain circumstances.
Where I get to shine, then, is with skill-based activities like tracking and discerning realities, where my companion is giving me solid bonuses (though even then, if I want the sweet +2 bonus, I need to give something up in combat bonuses). And tracking and being sharp-eyed are things rangers are supposed to be good at.
-
The worst possible thing that can happen, re: the Ranger and her companion is that the GM forgets the companion exists. It should be a source of woe and danger and trouble, the same way an intelligent sword or ancient tome of magic can be. Think about all the trouble that the Direwolves caused for the Starks. It's a symbol of the wild that binds the Ranger and alienates her from the world at once. It's part of who she is, but maybe that part of her doesn't "fit" right in the world anymore.
Anyway, if the GM forgets about using the companion in the game, the Ranger just gets all these crazy bonuses without any fictional drawbacks. What you really need to do is "oh, you failed a roll, that's fine..." and save that hard move for later, so you can say "when you wake up, Icecloak is nearby, his muzzle stained with blood, chewing what you could SWEAR is a human arm..."
-
Yeah, the animal companion is a great resource for the GM to work with. Put it in danger, use it to complicate a fight. It's not just a passive bonus, it's a living creature that matters to the Ranger. It's a hireling, almost.
-
I say that because I forget ALL THE TIME and am a bad GM. Please, be better than I am.