Enemy called shots

[tigermuppetcut]

Hi when an enemy automatically gets a called shot based on a player missing with an eye result do they also need a Tengwar for their called shot to actually succeed or is it enough to simply hit? Thanks

Also what if there is one enemy, like a troll, but two players trigger an enemy called shot by missing with eyes, does the troll get an extra attack to hit them both or does he have to choose who from those two to hit with his called shot?

[Falenthal]

1) He needs a tengwar, too.

2) By the RAW, I'd say the troll only gets a Called Shot for his next (one) attack. He'd probably attack the hero with the lowest TN to hit. But is an interesting possibility that he might get two Called Shots for the next two turns (one each turn, I mean).

[Glorelendil]

Also, a common house rule is that Trolls attack whoever did the most damage to them on the previous round. Not sure how that would intersect with called shots, but since the consensus is that having an Adversary used a Called Shot on you is, statistically, a good thing, maybe it's fine.

[tigermuppetcut]

Cool, thanks

[Random221B]

I admit this is something that I've had an issue with...the idea that if a Companion rolls an eye (which should be especially bad for them) then the Adversary--as I understand it--*must* make a called shot against them, they have no choice. And--as I have seen discussed previously--despite the fact that *if* a called shot hits, it's worse for the Companion, the fact of the higher chance of the adversary's attack doing nothing at all to the Companion means an Eye roll is actually beneficial to the player more often than it is a problem, in combat.

I have been seriously considering running it such that Adversaries succeed in a called shot with one or more Tengwars, but still apply the normal attack effects if they only get a basic success. I realize that seems an obvious thing to try, so I'm wondering if anyone has tried it in play, and whether it opens up unexpected pitfalls. I also realize that it makes Called Shots more effective for Adversaries than it does for Companions, but it seems this may be balanced by the fact that Adversaries cannot choose when to make a called shot, and also seems to fit with the idea that it is always the result of an Eye roll, which should be bad for Companions.

So, assuming others have tried--or at least considered--this, any comments?

[aramis]

I admit this is something that I've had an issue with...the idea that if a Companion rolls an eye (which should be especially bad for them) then the Adversary--as I understand it--*must* make a called shot against them, they have no choice. And--as I have seen discussed previously--despite the fact that *if* a called shot hits, it's worse for the Companion, the fact of the higher chance of the adversary's attack doing nothing at all to the Companion means an Eye roll is actually beneficial to the player more often than it is a problem, in combat.

I have been seriously considering running it such that Adversaries succeed in a called shot with one or more Tengwars, but still apply the normal attack effects if they only get a basic success. I realize that seems an obvious thing to try, so I'm wondering if anyone has tried it in play, and whether it opens up unexpected pitfalls. I also realize that it makes Called Shots more effective for Adversaries than it does for Companions, but it seems this may be balanced by the fact that Adversaries cannot choose when to make a called shot, and also seems to fit with the idea that it is always the result of an Eye roll, which should be bad for Companions.

So, assuming others have tried--or at least considered--this, any comments?

I've gone further - the free called shot just needs basic success. Doesn't unbalance things at all, and encourages players to do so, too. Why not? Because I let players do the same when a bad guy Gandalfs.

Mind you, my doing so comes from a "creative interpretation" of 1E LM 65... where it says the process for monster called shots is different, and fails to mention a t rune.

[Earendil]

I have been seriously considering running it such that Adversaries succeed in a called shot with one or more Tengwars, but still apply the normal attack effects if they only get a basic success. I realize that seems an obvious thing to try, so I'm wondering if anyone has tried it in play, and whether it opens up unexpected pitfalls

I do this, since (as you say) otherwise called shots for adversaries are a bit rubbish. I haven't had any problems with it; in fact I'm not sure an adversary has ever got a tengwar on a called shot in my game (maybe once or twice), so if I didn't do this they'd be even more ineffective against the heroes than they are!

[Glorelendil]

I dunno. I think there might be a little too much of the belief that combat options always have to make you "better" seeping into this conversation.

Before about 4+ weapon skill, Called Shots are usually a statistically bad choice. For players and for heroes. Yet sometimes it's fun to make the trade-off anyway: yeah, you'll probably lower your DPR, but if you succeed it adds something fun to the narrative combat. Risk/reward, where the "reward" isn't necessarily "I do more damage."

If Called Shots sometimes get to be used without any penalty (e.g., in response to an Eye/Gandalf from one's opponent) then there's no trade-off.

The Called-Shot-After-EoS rule is merely meant to throw some Called Shots into the mix, not necessarily to make adversaries more deadly on that round. Maybe Shield Smash and Disarm need to be tweaked to make them a little bit more punitive, but otherwise I wouldn't change the mechanic. If you need Adversaries to be more deadly, use deadlier ones. Or more of them. Or have them set up Ambushes.

[Falenthal]

In my experience, I have to agree with Glorelendil. Enemy's Called Shot aren't mortal blows or such (there are some nasty Abilities that cover that already...), but it's nice when once in a while, a hero gets poisoned, or disarmed in the middle of a combat.
Remember that failure AND rolling an Eye is not that usual, and less so the better the heroes get at their weapons skills.

The only "complaint" I have is that weapons that smash shields are inappropiate against shield-less opponents. I'd add another type of Called Shot to those weapons. Or simply give them a "Break Shield, or Disarm if target has no shield" option.

[Falenthal]

The only "complaint" I have is that weapons that smash shields are inappropiate against shield-less opponents. I'd add another type of Called Shot to those weapons. Or simply give them a "Break Shield, or Disarm if target has no shield" option.

Better still: "Break Shield or, if target has no shield, suffers the effects of being Knocked Back"

A character who is knocked back cannot change his stance
and will spend his following round recovering his fighting
position, unable to take any further action that turn.
If an adversary attacks while a hero is recovering from
knockback, the attack is resolved normally.

...or even "... the effects of a Fumble"

A fumbling attacker loses his footing, exposing
himself: the next time the fumbling character is
attacked, the difficulty to hit him will be equal to his
basic combat TN of his stance (he loses any bonuses
from his attributes, Virtues or equipment).