forums.cubicle7.co.uk
archive

Ha, ha sorry! Yes, fob off is being sort of dismissive but saying something to avoid further discussion (for whatever reason) which doesn't really deal with the matter at hand.

It's a British saying. May even be specific to Yorkshire or the North of England.

We have it in the Midlands too

Thanks for that explanation. I figured as much. Or in the psyche world, we'd call it Passive-Aggressive.

Again to be clear though - i didn't detect your response as such - it was helpful that you steered me towards the source that your info is written. Thank you.

When I have some time I'll fully read it again - I have some comments and thoughts already on the issue, and would like to have more clear understanding before offering opinions.


Robert

NEW QUESTION:

When in combat and you you roll an attack that misses with an Eye of Sauron (as a player-hero) on the Feat die Fumbles. The TN to hit the PC is his/her basic combat TN.

Is the basic combat TN the target number of the stance the PC is in? For instance, if in Forward stance the TN (basic combat TN) would be 6? And would you get your Parry score added in if so?

daddystabz wrote:NEW QUESTION:

When in combat and you you roll an attack that misses with an Eye of Sauron (as a player-hero) on the Feat die Fumbles. The TN to hit the PC is his/her basic combat TN.

Is the basic combat TN the target number of the stance the PC is in? For instance, if in Forward stance the TN (basic combat TN) would be 6? And would you get your Parry score added in if so?

I've never read anything to leads me to believe that you ignore your parry score in that instance. If it said something to the tune of 'the stance's base TN', then I would go with just the 6.

Robert

daddystabz wrote:NEW QUESTION:

When in combat and you you roll an attack that misses with an Eye of Sauron (as a player-hero) on the Feat die Fumbles. The TN to hit the PC is his/her basic combat TN.

Is the basic combat TN the target number of the stance the PC is in? For instance, if in Forward stance the TN (basic combat TN) would be 6? And would you get your Parry score added in if so?

The fumble only happens when a character rolls an eye on a failed Called Shot. Normal attack rolls don't fumble (at least according to RAW).

The way I read the text (pg. 161) you would not use your Parry. I don't know what other bonus you would get from your Attributes.

Correct...this is a failed Called Shot roll and the text does indeed make it sound like you do NOT get your Parry nor anything from attributes, etc. added to the base TN to hit you when this occurs, which makes sense to me.

Woodclaw wrote:

Angelalex242 wrote:Since heart scores range from 2 to 7, that leads to everyone picking the archer for their focus. As happened in your game.

I think that in another discussion it was observed that if you choose a melee fighter as your focus you can use the Protect Companion task freely to protect him, since you would get the Hope back immediately.

I think they were wrong: "Fellowship focus - As a source of inspiration: 'If a player spend a Hope point to get a Attribute bonus to acomplish an action that can be considered to directly protect or favour his Fellowship focus…'" (AB 106).

fbnaulin wrote:

Woodclaw wrote:

Angelalex242 wrote:Since heart scores range from 2 to 7, that leads to everyone picking the archer for their focus. As happened in your game.

I think that in another discussion it was observed that if you choose a melee fighter as your focus you can use the Protect Companion task freely to protect him, since you would get the Hope back immediately.

I think they were wrong: "Fellowship focus - As a source of inspiration: 'If a player spend a Hope point to get a Attribute bonus to acomplish an action that can be considered to directly protect or favour his Fellowship focus…'" (AB 106).

It was me that suggested that and I quoted the section that you just have acknowledging that it wasn't as per the RAW; but in keeping with the spirit of using Hope to aid and protect your Fellowship Focus.

I am glad that my players do not select a fellowship focus based on who they can use a free point to protect or who the archer is.


My players tie their character's focus to who is truly meaningful to them. The hobbit may select the other hobbit in the group. The dwarf selected the player who came to his rescue in the first fight he played in. The Woodman has a background that is keyed towards friendliness towards elves; so he naturally has the elf in the party as his focus. And so on.


I will say to Rich, that it seems too lucrative to be able to "protect" their focus and get their point back. But that's my opinion without having actual tested it in play. YMMV.

Robert