[Circle of Hands] Session Report: Hohhalde

[Nyhteg]

So we played Circle of Hands last week - the venture prep I posted for Hohhalde, in fact.

It went...OK. A good time was had. Players are up for another session ASAP.
The wizard was quickly identified as the problem to be fixed (for 'fixed' read 'confronted, probably killed') with the rest of the soap opera between the named characters left to slide away into the background. So it goes.

Couple of things cropped up which I thought worthy of mention.

1. Don't give opponents too much armour unless you want to risk a long, drag out scrap to a standstill. I had a couple of guys well-armoured 'cos they were badass mercenary guards (to the extent that the term makes sense in the setting), with mail, shield and helm. That put them at the 15 points mark or so and nothing was getting through the defences, even when the PCs won the clashes pretty well with advantage. So the fight *really* went on a long time. By the end of the scene, two of the PCs were unwounded but reduced to zero Brawn due to fatigue from spell casting and Brawn spends to get up in the order. They survived in the end but...it was all a bit uncharacteristically laborious and didn't have the visceral thrill I've come to expect from CoH combats.

There were doubtless a few better tactics they could have used (MAGIC!!!) but it played how it played.
Is it 'OK' to give opponents whatever armour score I like, regardless of the fictional description? So it made sense to have these guys in mail and so on because...tough guys...but an armour score of 10 (or even less) would have made for a more dynamic combat. I guess I can do what I want, but I'm not sure if that's 'pure' enough by the rules.

Perhaps my players just need to get more aggressive in their magic use - although in their defence I think they were holding back their Brawn usage to take on the Rbaja wizard causing trouble on the other side of the room.

2. Can a player legitimately seek to manhandle/grapple/stongarm an opponent in a specific way as their intent and outcome of a clash?
For instance, one of the players wanted to grab the guy he was fighting, and and kind of switch places to pull/shove him into a freshly spawned Splotch.
Tactically it was kind of cool...rules-wise...I didn't think a vanilla Q vs 12 test was the right way to go and in the end we resolved it as a straight clash with the opponent having the advantage die - if the player came out of it well I ruled he'd have succeed in his intent. That sound OK?

Thoughts welcome; if you have questions about other aspects of the session just let me know.

G

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Gethyn,

Armor: I'm a little surprised the advantage die didn't tell the tale sooner or later; in my experience, it typically does.

2. Can a player legitimately seek to manhandle/grapple/stongarm an opponent in a specific way as their intent and outcome of a clash?

This came up in a G+ conversation, which always annoys me because I answer with great care and it's visible to 10 people, then disappears forever. I just hunted for it and the search function there is terrible, so I'm getting pissed off.

Anyway, treat it as a plain attack using the non-lethal rules, but you have to do enough damage to bring him to 0 Quickness and 0 Brawn.

Yes, that's hard. Possible, but hard. Movies make it seem way too easy for an unarmed person to step up to an armed person who's trying to kill you, put your hands on him however you want, and toss him wherever you want. You're not doing that unless you actually hurt him. I wouldn't want to try it without the advantage die, and the only way I could see doing that is if the guy got hit hard in as the last thing that happened to him.

Best, Ron

[Nyhteg]

Thanks.

Armor: I'm a little surprised the advantage die didn't tell the tale sooner or later; in my experience, it typically does.

I was too, but it really didn't help that much, for whatever reason. I mean, eventually it did, but it took a looong time - I'd say 8 out of 10 of all damaging rolls simply weren't dealing enough to get through the armour points (on both sides of the fight).

I still keep getting the feeling that I'm not quite running combats right, especially with creatures described as scary combat horrors. Using narrative consequences from die rolls more aggressively than I am perhaps. That big hit from a Wyrm or whatever isn't just 'nasty damage', it's knocking you flying off your feet, or maybe placing your arm squarely in its jaws, say.

Do you ever rule that elements of armour become discounted under certain circumstances?
Like, I don't know, staggering around in a clinch where one guy has a dagger would be a case of not just handing over the advantage die but saying a shield (and maybe even helm) is of no earthly defensive use to you any more?

G