Stunting- Difficulty?

[JadedSmile]

keep running into this problem when I'm running game... my players will try this stunt, and sometimes it will be really cool and cause no problems... but other times, they're trying things that would legitimately make what they're attempting massively more difficult. And while I get some stunt dice for it, often times and make them roll something as well... for instance, if a character wants to swing down on a rope grab an enemy and toss him on a rocking airship... I certainly give him stunt dice, no question there, but I also require him to make an athletics check and clinch attack. However, my players are saying that this makes it not worth it. Then again, if he were trying a regular attack he would go up against the opponents dv anyway. Thoughts?

 

[cyl]

You have to consider two things: realism and cinematics.


Realism is what makes you say "okay so you just grabbed a guy while on a rope... please make an athletics roll".


Cinematics is what makes you allow such a nice attempt to do something really cool.


I don't know how you would handle the situation, but I would do the following:


- possibly consider unexpected attack (coming from the air)


- grant a 2/3 die stunt bonus for the attack


- have him roll a str + athletics at a variable difficulty between 1 & 3 IF needed (the table for automatically lifting stuff still applies here, if the guy can pull his own weight + the weight of the other guy, no reason to have him roll anything) and if needed, grant him the 3die bonus, because it's still part of the action, as a reflexive roll.


- resolve the attack.


You have to keep the balance between realism and cinematics, and if the players are unhappy, then you got 2 options:


- who's the ST here ?


- ok, I see I'm going to be less realistic, but it will go both ways beware !

 

[Flagg]

To me, it's all about what gets accomplished. If the character's complex stunt all boils down to them basically punching a guy in the face, it doesn't matter how much flourish they put on it, it's still a single MA attack. However, if their extra description gives them additional meaningful gains, it calls for reflexive checks and/or flurries. However, in the latter case, when someone stunts a flurry I award them the stunt bonus to all of the actions in the flurry.

 

[JadedSmile]

In this case, it would have knocked the opponent clean off the ship, not an extra, either. I certainly agree with applying the stund bonus to all flurried actions. Still...it does kind of even out if you have to take a flurry penalty to do a stunt like that and get bonus dice to negate it. THen again, it's better than taking the full penalty like you would without the support of stunting. hmm.

 

[cyl]

You could have indeed considered the swinging with the rope as a Misc Action to make a flurry out of it. I know I wouldn't have, but I would definitely have added some modifiers to DV while in flight (like -3 for unstable footing).

 

[wordman]

In this case, it would have knocked the opponent clean off the ship...

This goes to Flagg's point, and brings up something about stunts. The text clearly states two of the benefits of stunts (gaining dice, regaining motes/Willpower), but there is a third benefit of stunts that is not so clearly stated (but strongly implied when you look at the books in total), but is their most important ability: they let you bend the rules.


As an example, when the player runs up a wagon, does a twisting double flip off it it to cut somebody in half, does it really matter that they might not have had enough movement distance to actually do that? In D&D: yes. In Exalted: no. The stunt lets them bend that rule.


Some play that a stunt can do all three of these things at once. Since you seem to want more realism, you might want to always give the dice, but offer the other two as an either or proposition. In the example you state, the rule that the player wants to bend involves knockback, to knock the guy off the ship. You might give him the extra dice, then say "you can either bend the knockback rule to knock him off, or you can get the motes/willpower from the stunt, but not both".


(Another thing to remember is to play Exalted as Exalted, not Stalingrad. The PCs are demi-gods living in a snowglobe world surrounded by infinite wackiness that hates them. Do they really need to make a fucking ancillary Athletics roll?)

 

[cyl]

(Another thing to remember is to play Exalted as Exalted, not Stalingrad. The PCs are demi-gods living in a snowglobe world surrounded by infinite wackiness that hates them. Do they really need to make a fucking ancillary Athletics roll?)

IMO Exalts are really powerufl humans. They can accomplish feats impossible for the mortals yet, their bodies are barely better than the body of a mortal without the support of charms.
Hold an exalt's arm and hit it with a testubo, and it breaks just like the arm of any extra.


The only difference is that the exalt does not die from it and heals the wound faster.


Their power comes from their essences, but they are not as divine as to regenerate once their forms have been destroyed (like spirits). They evolve and grow more powerful much faster, but they can bleed and die.


They still have natural body limits... an exalt cannot lift a ton if he doesn't gather the necessary pool / successes.


Now I don't know wether this was intentional, or if it was a simple mechanic to keep some sort of balance in the game, for it not to break right from the first session... but I kinda like this this way, preserves the balance between realism & cool.


My two cents.

 

[wordman]

Your two cents raise a reasonable issue, while simultaneously missing the point of what I was saying entirely.

 

[cyl]

Oh noes, I got your previous point, just felt I had nothing to add to it.


Your alternatives for stunting were quite interesting, and it's up to the ST to make up his mind about how he wants to handle stunts, since there are no generic rules (because stunts are meant as you said to bend rules).

 

[Gylthinel]

This goes to Flagg's point, and brings up something about stunts. The text clearly states two of the benefits of stunts (gaining dice, regaining motes/Willpower), but there is a third benefit of stunts that is not so clearly stated (but strongly implied when you look at the books in total), but is their most important ability: they let you bend the rules.

Agreed. I run with a rule that I think may be a 1E throwback, and that is that a stunt allows you to flurry in an extra action w/out penalty, if appropriate to the stunt. In this case, the swing down the rope might require a roll (I probably wouldn't but it isn't wrong to require the roll), but would be given for free, not requiring a flurry.

 

[Ker'ion]

Agreed. I run with a rule that I think may be a 1E throwback, and that is that a stunt allows you to flurry in an extra action w/out penalty, if appropriate to the stunt. In this case, the swing down the rope might require a roll (I probably wouldn't but it isn't wrong to require the roll), but would be given for free, not requiring a flurry.

Interesting addendum...


Would it be pushing it too far to allow a free action per stunt die?


Or maybe just add a second free action when pulling off the badass 3-die stunt.

 

[cyl]

Might I point out that some systems like say L5R allow you to combine a certain amount of misc actions with attacks for free... like drawing / sheathing a sword.


You can actually draw+attack+sheathe your katana without consequences on your attack roll or you "DV".


But Gylthinel's solution seems very interesting.

 

[Gylthinel]

Agreed. I run with a rule that I think may be a 1E throwback' date=' and that is that a stunt allows you to flurry in an extra action w/out penalty, if appropriate to the stunt. In this case, the swing down the rope might require a roll (I probably wouldn't but it isn't wrong to require the roll), but would be given for free, not requiring a flurry.[/quote']
Interesting addendum...


Would it be pushing it too far to allow a free action per stunt die?


Or maybe just add a second free action when pulling off the badass 3-die stunt.

I don't think it'd be too much, so long as the granted actions are part of the stunt. I typically do not allow the free action to be an attack, but sometimes I do. Like, one time I had a player do a 3 attack flurry to spin in a circle and kill all the guys around him. He only had a rate of 3. I said "sounds good, just make 1 attack roll and apply it to all 5 guys, that's your 2 die stunt." So he got no dice, but 2 free attacks (and a fat wad of dice from not having to flurry... that was generous), and his motes/WP. Another common one is when I ask a player how he chooses to defend himself, he describes his defense in some horribly violent way. Like, one guy wanted to defend by hacking at the hands of his attacker, another guy wanted to defend by dodging aside so his foe impaled himself on a spiked wall. These would be pretty weak as a meager bonus to DV, so I gave a free counter-attack instead, modified based on the situation of course.

Might I point out that some systems like say L5R allow you to combine a certain amount of misc actions with attacks for free... like drawing / sheathing a sword.

If you used the free action thingy I use, this would be possible (I've allowed this specific thing, actually). It would not, however, be normal, as it'd be a stunt. And I don't allow the same stunt over and over and over again. I probably wouldn't mind if a player wanted the draw+attack+sheath thing to be his riff, like Ukyo from Samurai Showdown. But, nobody's asked me yet.

 

[Thorn Darkblade]

However, in the latter case, when someone stunts a flurry I award them the stunt bonus to all of the actions in the flurry.

Hmmm, you seem to have answered a question I was going to ask in the near future. Thanks.

 

[Gylthinel]

However' date=' in the latter case, when someone stunts a flurry I award them the stunt bonus to all of the actions in the flurry.[/quote']
Hmmm, you seem to have answered a question I was going to ask in the near future. Thanks.

I apply stunts to the entire flurry as well.

 

[Jakk Bey]

To me, it's all about what gets accomplished. If the character's complex stunt all boils down to them basically punching a guy in the face, it doesn't matter how much flourish they put on it, it's still a single MA attack. However, if their extra description gives them additional meaningful gains, it calls for reflexive checks and/or flurries. However, in the latter case, when someone stunts a flurry I award them the stunt bonus to all of the actions in the flurry.

Bingo.


Boil it down to the effect. All the rest is icing.