Runes of Victory and Called Shot

[mica]

My interpretation, hence my initial question is that a sauron is treated as an undefined number required to achieve the target number (thereby eliciting a hit). This number has to remain undefined so as not to generate an edge response as is the case with a Gandalf.

As such it means that as the TN is always effectively reached on a Sauron, the worst case scenario with a Called Shot is no Tengwars, hence just a miss but fumbles are not possible.

If Called Shot is not treated as an attack and Runes of Victory are ignored, i.e. you can still fumble with a weapon blessed by Runes of Victory, then by extension all other abilities such as Keen etc should also be ignored for Called Shot.

I am swaying towards strict interpretation which is Runes of Victory means no chance of fumble with a Sauron but rolling the Sauron will cause the monster to perform a called shot on its next attack. A called shot with a Sauron but no Tengwars is still a miss as would be the case even with a Gandalf.

[Glorelendil]

So, possible interpretations:

"An Eye is actually a Gandalf"
Implications: Cannot fumble on Called Shot, but an Eye is also a Pierce.

"An eye is simply an automatic hit on a normal attack"
Implications: Can still fumble on a Called Shot, although less likely because TN is automatic so all it takes is a single Tengwar regardless of total on dice. An Eye is not a Pierce.

Yarp.

And a third one...

"An eye cannot fumble on a Called Shot attack, it's read as a Gandalf, even if the Called Shot attack fails (ie, no tengwars)"

Hrmm...I have a hard time seeing "An Eye is a Gandalf...sometimes." I think it's either

"An Eye is an automatic success vs. a TN, like a Gandalf is, but it's not a Gandalf it's an Eye"

or it's

"An Eye is, for all intents and purposes, a Gandalf."

But I might be missing something. It happens.

EDIT: Let me try that another way: either an Eye is considered a Gandalf for all purposes, or for just the single one that is described in the text. Adding some other meanings of Gandalf (e.g. not Fumbling on a Called Shot) but not others (e.g. Pierce), feels arbitrary to me.

[doctheweasel]

I hope Doc didn't mean I was being a "rules-lawyer" as that would be insulting and inaccurate as discussing points of clarification isn't rules lawyering. I'm sure he didn't.

Not at all. (not anymore at least )

And I wouldn't take the "Victory" thing all the way to mean always winning for all rolls. This is just a way to resolve a grey area.

The way this would probably go down at my table would be that I would rule it a fumble (because I tend to take the harsher side at the table than at my desk). The player would then remind me that his Runes of Victory couldn't possibly allow a fumble. Without an explicit callout from the book, I'd think "got me there" and negate the fumble.

[zedturtle]

In my mind, it all comes down to the what the word "hit" means.

If a hit is an opportunity for damage, then on a normal attack with a RoV weapon showing an Eye, the hit occurs and Endurance damage is done.

For a called shot the opportunity for damage requires a hit and at least one tengwar. Thus, a RoV weapon showing an Eye has hit and if a tengwar is showing has done damage (Piercing, usually).

Regarding the fumble, if you are doing a called shot and you roll an Eye the fumble happens. The arrow flies true but the bow string breaks right afterwards. You disarm your foe but he twists and your sword drops to the ground as well. Your spearhead is loose and the point comes off inside your foe. Your axe smashes the shield but is stuck in the wreckage and cannot be retrieved during the battle, etc.

[Falenthal]

Runes of Victory
Craftsmanship: Dwarven, Elven
Item: Any weapon
When you attack using a weapon possessing this Quality you
score an automatic hit on a Gandalf and also on an Sauron result.

As it does not state that the Sauron is treated as a Gandalf, I presume that this still triggers the called short for the enemy.

I'm reviving this thread because I still have this doubt regarding attacks with Runes of Victory: If an Eye is an automatic success, then there's no chance of "failing the attack AND rolling an Eye", which is the prerequisite for adversarie's Called Shot (p.65 of the old LMB). So, someone who uses a weapon with Runes of Victory will NEVER receive a Called Shot, right?

The OP made the mistake of thinking that Called Shots were triggered just by rolling an Eye, but they need also a failed attack roll. (I thought the same as him until a week ago ). Still, the question remains.

I know we might house-rule that Called Shots for intelligent enemies can be used at the LM's discretion, but right now I'm just asking about the RAW, please.

Thanks.

[doctheweasel]

RAW states that an adversary automatically makes a Called Shot on a failed roll with an Eye, not only. That doesn't preclude an adversary from making a Called Shot when the LM feels it's appropriate.

That said, I read Runes of Victory keeping the automatic CS from happening.

[Dunkelbrink]

This discussion never really dies it seems... Let us agree on that every LM can decide how he or she wants to handle the rules, including having adversaries (intelligent or not) making Called shots without any mechanical "trigger".

That said, over to the RAW. The rules clearly state:

Called Shots
The rules for triggering a called shot work differently for creatures confronting a company of heroes. A creature automatically attempts a called shot using the weapon it is currently wielding as its next action whenever the companion attacking it fails his attack roll and obtains a "Eye" result on his Feat die.

So, this is the mechanic for adversaries using Called shots. If the rules worked the same way as for heroes, i.e. the LM could make a Called shot at will, we wouldn't need this rule at all. The rules clearly point out that the rules work differently for creatures. So, no I don't agree on your Reading, doc.

That said, I too read Runes of Victory keeping the automatic CS from happening.

[Falenthal]

I share Dunkelbrink's opinion and reasoning, even if I find weird that adversaries cannot make Called Shots (per RAW) against a player with Runes of Victory.