ParanetOnline
The Dresden Files => DFRPG => Topic started by: Papa Gruff on June 13, 2011, 10:34:46 AM
-
Hello everybody.
Today I'd like to get a little debate going about the question of ambushes out of veils. During our last gaming session the winter knight in my game decided to veil himself and do a magical attack (could have been a maneuver my memory is a little fuzzy) onto two mortals that where guarding a train. He stated that since he was veiled and sneaky the ambush rules should apply.
In that situation I wasn't sure how to react. On the one side I can see some validity in the statement of my player. The concepts of veils and ambushes are reasonably comparable, yet the idea of ambush rules out of veils can lead to some pretty nasty rule breaking / power gaming. Imagine: It's relatively easy to create a powerful veil around your self. I won't go into detail on this, because I believe that by now we all understand the magic rules good enough to acknowledge this as true. The power of the veil makes it pretty much impossible for mortals and low to mid-level supernatural baddies to break it. Not only is the wizard able to carry his ambush around with him (since veils aren't stationary as common ambushes usually are) he is also able to cast a powerful magical attack from out under it that, if ambush rules apply and the ambush/veil isn't discovered is apposed only by mediocre skill-levels. The extra shifts that can come out of this are ... well ... potentially insane.
As I didn't want to create a precedent at my table I didn't allow the combination of veils and ambush rules at that point, but neither me nor my players where really happy with it. I'm curious on what other GM think about this and if similar situations have come up elsewhere.
My only idea so far is to make the ambush rules still apply in some form. For example the stealth role could still apply to set up the ambush. Since setting an ambush has lots to do with good positioning and terrain abuse this makes some sense to me. But how to do it? You could make the stealth roll aided by the power of the veil. You could do it the other way around and modify the discipline role for the veil by the stealth skill. It all seems clumsy to me.
Input please!
-
Yes, ambushes out of veils should work. A few points however;
1) Veils, whether through True Magic or Glamours are supernatural effects. The Lore skill, for supernaturally aware people, can be used for supernatural perception. That will not pierce the veil but will tell whoever is sensing it that something is wrong and they'd be on guard. I.e. they would still not act in the surprise round or be able to tell the exact location of the enemy but they would not have their defenses reduced to 0. The more powerful the veil, the more magic there is to sense so making a veil stronger does not help.
2) The Sight automatically pierces veils when open and gives a bonus to supernatural perception (see above) even when closed. Supernatural Senses may also ignore veils - if you can see magic for example, you will see the veil, even though what the veil hides might be concealed. Echoes of the Beast may give you additional perception trappings that most veils might not cover - i.e. a werewolf's sense of smell would ignore simple invisibility and so would a bat's sonar or a snake's infravision.
3) Foci and other magical items have a metaphysical size, in addition to their real size. If someone is carrying a +4 focus around, everyone with supernatural knowledge/training would get a +4 to their supernatural perception rolls to sense its presence. Thus wizards cannot easily use veils to sneak in with too much magical firepower.
4) Veils can't do anything vs precognition. Someone with "Cassandra's Tears" or "A Few Seconds Ahead" is justified in keeping their defense rolls vs veiled opponents, even though the veils could still prevent them from knowing where to strike back.
5) Cloak of Shadows is cheaper than veils and is a +2 to your stealth. In addition, you can see in the dark so you can tag darkness-related aspects for a bonus to stealth without any penalties. A stealth-trained vampire is essentially as hard to detect with normal perception as a faerie with Greater Glamours. Though the faerie could be sneaky in the day as well, the vampire is not going to go out in daylight anyway.
In the end, veils are better for an escape or defense (because the other guy doesn't know where to aim), or for sneaking up to those without trained supernatural awareness or extra senses. Sneaking up to a trained wizard might work... if that wizard is as inexperienced in the subtler parts of magic as Harry was in Summer Knight (i.e. a Lore of +3 or less) and they might still sense something is wrong.
-
My question is, how often do opponents defend at 0? If they never peirce the veil, do they ever know where the attacks are coming from? Is it just the initial attack/ambush? Do you need an exchange between attacks to re-set the ambush? Do opponents get a bonus to know where attacks are coming from after each exchange?
The thing about veils that confuses me is, as belial666 says, maybe a werecreature can smell you because you're not veiled against smell. But do veils automatically cover sound? If you're invisible, it doesn't mean you also make no sound. There still might be a stealth check involved here. I'm not sure how to adjudicate that. Maybe you need extra shifts for each "sense" you're trying to cover up. I might adjudicate it that way. This way you might have a power 8 veil against sight, Power 7 vs sight and sound, power 6 vs sight sound and smell etc..
@ Belial666 He's talking about mortals. Not things with supernatural powers.
@ Papa Gruff - You have to remember that ifyou're using veils as evocation, the timing of an ambush is difficult. You have to put shifts into duration to get your ambush set up - assuming you have to be in a position where your opponent didn't hear/see you cast the spell in the first place. As well, you may even have to put extra shifts into duration in a consecutive round(s).
1. So, you're using power for duration, which makes the veil less powerful and easier to detect
2. You're taking mental stress on potentially multiple exchanges - and you still haven't even attacked yet.
-
The concepts of veils and ambushes are reasonably comparable, yet the idea of ambush rules out of veils can lead to some pretty nasty rule breaking / power gaming. Imagine: It's relatively easy to create a powerful veil around your self. I won't go into detail on this, because I believe that by now we all understand the magic rules good enough to acknowledge this as true. The power of the veil makes it pretty much impossible for mortals and low to mid-level supernatural baddies to break it. Not only is the wizard able to carry his ambush around with him (since veils aren't stationary as common ambushes usually are) he is also able to cast a powerful magical attack from out under it that, if ambush rules apply and the ambush/veil isn't discovered is apposed only by mediocre skill-levels. The extra shifts that can come out of this are ... well ... potentially insane.
Why do you see this as a problem? It's very situational due to a veil's limitations. Besides, the PCs should trash low level opposition!
Just keep a veil's limitations in mind. A big one is simply remembering it's not invisibility. Even a "don't notice me" veil lets you see someone there at a subconscious level (and possibly enough to allow a roll to avoid surprise in some situations). The better ambush veils are going to be illusory - those which make you appear to be something harmless. Another limitation is time. Evocation veils are per exchange...and the more shifts you put into duration, the easier it will be to see through it. Thaumaturgy veils require a symbol - which may or may not be portable. A True Seeming is possibly the best veil-like tactic...but that dedicates a fairly significant amount of refresh to a power which doesn't do anything other than conceal. Shouldn't it be good?
-
Maybe it's a miss perception on my side born from my understanding of veils witch might be tainted by how they are described in the novels.
Outside of conflict I usually pretty much hand wave the duration of veils, because they would be utterly useless otherwise (they would drain the mental stress track really fast and at least my players wouldn't ever use them again out of conflict). Maybe that's my mistake but like I see it this is in par with the canon. As the ambush situation is a conflict starter, the relevance of this limitation is somewhat rendered mute.
Again maybe my understanding of the rules has been mislead, but the idea of a veil is a block against perception, yes? Therefor it blocks the perception through every sense, may it be olfactory, acoustic or otherwise. @UmbraLux ... Now, if the veil blocks only against one kind of sense, then you are right. However: My reading of the block and magic rules tell me that the block is total. At least that is how me and my players are handling it at the moment. I don't have a huge problem with anything. I just don't see veils as greatly limited. Quite the contrary.
@belial666: You first point seems interesting and makes sense to me. If a veil gets stronger it seems reasonable that it should be easier to detect with supernatural perception. Problem is that this isn't in the rules. A block versus perception is always a block versus perception. It doesn't matter if it is supernatural perception or not. Rule wise if the block is strong enough, it won't be broken and we are back at the starting point. Secondly what @Taran stated is right. I'm aware of the possibilities by witch a veil may be circumvented. But that isn't the point of this thread...
I want do discuss the possibilities an resulting ramifications of using the ambush rule in conjunction with magical veils and magical attacks.
-
My point is that evocation is limited. And veils done with evocation are limited because of duration. If you hand-wave duration outside of combat, then I can see veils being extremely potent. Now, exchanges are an abstract amount of time, so each one could be a few minutes. But even so, I wouldn't allow a wizard to walk around with a semi-permanent veil. If you want a long-lasting veil, you need to pump duration into it and it's going to make the veil weaker and cost stress.
If one of my players wanted a veil for one scene, I'd say that one exchange, being "a few moments", is about 3 minutes. One scene, by default on the time chart, is about 15 minutes. So that's 5 shifts into duration. How much is left for the power of your veil? As well, if you want to veil the whole party, that's another 2 shifts.
-
My only idea so far is to make the ambush rules still apply in some form. For example the stealth role could still apply to set up the ambush. Since setting an ambush has lots to do with good positioning and terrain abuse this makes some sense to me. But how to do it? You could make the stealth roll aided by the power of the veil. You could do it the other way around and modify the discipline role for the veil by the stealth skill. It all seems clumsy to me.
Input please!
I've read on another thread (I'll try to find it) that people use a veil as an opportunity for an ambush. Meaning you could set up an ambush in a circumstance where it might not normally be possible. So in mid-combat, for instance, the wizard veils someone and this gives that person an opportunity to do an Stealth vs Awareness. The success of the stealth check indicates whether or not the opponent is surprised, not the veil.
EDIT: I found the thread and I mis-read it. The opponent roles vs the veil.
I think, after re-reading the ambush rules, only allow the first attack to be an "ambush". Afterwards, the opponent is aware of an enemy who is targeting them and will take evasive maneuvers making it hard to get a second "ambush attack". If you want to ambush them again, then you'd have to use a fate points and compel them somehow. It would still be almost impossible to target the veiled foe. Once again, they can use a fate point to declare that they saw where they're being shot from and peirce the veil.
-
I run veils the way Billy's sidebar comment recommends: not charging shifts for duration, and just allowing them to persist (usually a scene or so) until pierced.
I would rule that
a) the Veil substitutes for the Stealth roll for setting up the Ambush
b) the first attack "pierces" the veil (though I would allow a player tagging an environmental Aspect like "Darkness" or "Fog" to rule that the attack didn't pierce the Veil - and even then, the target would still be able to defend against the next attack normally)
But what if a Stealthy character is veiled? Surely they can Ambush better than a clumsy character? Yes, they can: Maneuver to set up an Aspect like "Professionally Placed" or "Devastating Backstab" using your actual Stealth skill.
-
*Delurking*
Alright, so here's my take on this one, a veil used in an ambush situation allows a tag of the aspect Veiled for the stealth roll.
My thoughts follow thusly; When Murphy and Harry discover Molly at the beginning of the crime scene in White Night they list off all the clues she gave away while veiled that allowed them to detect her (creaking floorboards, her perfume, ect.) but they didn't see her at all. So veils are blocks against sight, not necessarily the other senses. (more on that in a bit). During Small Favor, footprints are clearly left in the wake of a veil, another clue. Thus while a veil is helpful in setting up an ambush it's by no means foolproof.
As to covering the other senses, I'd liken it to Harry in Fool Moon when he's brewing potions he's talking about an invisibility potion and Bob tells him no way no how, just too many senses to cover (granted he's talking about hiding from a werewolf but I think it still applies here). That leads me to an interesting question, the sidebar on YS 252 A Block is a block is a block, talks about using assessments and declarations to define weak points in an opponents defense. Should the NPCs who are about to get ambushed be allowed to roll make declarations to help them perceive the veil?
Lastly while re-reading the section on veils last time I noticed this YS pg 276 has a passage to the effect that veils block perception both ways, to overcome this limitation you have to increase the shifts by two. Yep that's right you veil yourself and sure you can't be seen but everything YOU see is blurry unless your putting more shifts (which don't contribute to the strength) into the spell.
*Lurk mode engaged*
-
Lastly while re-reading the section on veils last time I noticed this YS pg 276 has a passage to the effect that veils block perception both ways, to overcome this limitation you have to increase the shifts by two. Yep that's right you veil yourself and sure you can't be seen but everything YOU see is blurry unless your putting more shifts (which don't contribute to the strength) into the spell.
This is a very important limitation on veils that needs to be remembered. Needing to roll Alertness yourself to see your target makes ambushes at least a bit harder.
Also, I agree with the idea that only the first attack from under the veil has a CHANCE to force defending from zero. After that, either the veil is dropped (it's hard to maintain a veil and cast other spells together) or the target is aware they are being attacked and get to defend, perhaps with only a -1 penalty, and should be making alertness rolls or other actions to deal with the veil every round (e.g. the old bag-of-flour trick or whatever).
-
Also, I agree with the idea that only the first attack from under the veil has a CHANCE to force defending from zero. After that, either the veil is dropped (it's hard to maintain a veil and cast other spells together) or the target is aware they are being attacked and get to defend, perhaps with only a -1 penalty, and should be making alertness rolls or other actions to deal with the veil every round (e.g. the old bag-of-flour trick or whatever).
I just give the veiled character the "Invisible" aspect. If you want to spend a Fate point for a +2 bonus on dodging an attack or to make an attacker harder to dodge, sure, but bringing in situation modifiers like you're suggesting sets a messy precedent.
-
I run veils the way Billy's sidebar comment recommends: not charging shifts for duration, and just allowing them to persist (usually a scene or so) until pierced.
What page is this on?
-
Outside of conflict I usually pretty much hand wave the duration of veils, because they would be utterly useless otherwise (they would drain the mental stress track really fast and at least my players wouldn't ever use them again out of conflict). Maybe that's my mistake but like I see it this is in par with the canon. As the ambush situation is a conflict starter, the relevance of this limitation is somewhat rendered mute.
I'm with you on this, even inside of conflict sometimes (though usually only when the veil is being used avoid conflict). If you've ever tried to use a veil you'd know that it's a lot harder to use a veil to achieve something when you have to worry about exchanges and duration. When it's not going to be game breaking I don't worry about the duration.
@belial666: You first point seems interesting and makes sense to me. If a veil gets stronger it seems reasonable that it should be easier to detect with supernatural perception. Problem is that this isn't in the rules. A block versus perception is always a block versus perception. It doesn't matter if it is supernatural perception or not. Rule wise if the block is strong enough, it won't be broken and we are back at the starting point. Secondly what @Taran stated is right. I'm aware of the possibilities by witch a veil may be circumvented. But that isn't the point of this thread...
I think belial is merely trying to point out that it is weaker in some circumstances, and I would agree. If your veil is 6-8 shifts that's going to block most people's alertness rolls, but if someone's already got a +4-6 (+2 for supernatural senses and probably at least +2 for gear, etc) before you even factor in their lore (which will be high) then it makes it much more likely that they'll pierce it.
I run veils the way Billy's sidebar comment recommends: not charging shifts for duration, and just allowing them to persist (usually a scene or so) until pierced.
I would rule that
a) the Veil substitutes for the Stealth roll for setting up the Ambush
b) the first attack "pierces" the veil (though I would allow a player tagging an environmental Aspect like "Darkness" or "Fog" to rule that the attack didn't pierce the Veil - and even then, the target would still be able to defend against the next attack normally)
But what if a Stealthy character is veiled? Surely they can Ambush better than a clumsy character? Yes, they can: Maneuver to set up an Aspect like "Professionally Placed" or "Devastating Backstab" using your actual Stealth skill.
Agreed on all points Devonapple. I think there might even be RAW backing for the attack breaking the veil, but I don't remember. Also, it's still an option for them to roll stealth and they can take the higher of the two.
My thoughts follow thusly; When Murphy and Harry discover Molly at the beginning of the crime scene in White Night they list off all the clues she gave away while veiled that allowed them to detect her (creaking floorboards, her perfume, ect.) but they didn't see her at all. So veils are blocks against sight, not necessarily the other senses. (more on that in a bit). During Small Favor, footprints are clearly left in the wake of a veil, another clue. Thus while a veil is helpful in setting up an ambush it's by no means foolproof.
Consider this: Molly is really only capable of generating a few shifts for an evocation spell at that point in the series. Harry and Murphy both have pretty good alertness skills. It's not tough to beat a block of 2 or 3.
This is a very important limitation on veils that needs to be remembered. Needing to roll Alertness yourself to see your target makes ambushes at least a bit harder.
I don't like the concept of having to roll alertness to see your target for two reasons. 1) the veil makes it harder to see, it does not make it impossible to see. Seems ridiculous to create something that makes you invisible, but also makes the world just as invisible to you. 2) If you have to roll to see if you can roll things get a bit frustrating. It's just not good game mechanics, too many rolls, etc.
Having said that I would definitely give a penalty (likely 2) to their shot or a bonus to their target's defense.
Really I don't see anything game breaking about allowing the ambush rules to apply to veils so long as you aren't allowing them to maintain those veils after the first attack. They get a really good first attack, maybe in the situation you outlined he takes them both out stealthily (assuming they're both mooks) and then he has to either take time and energy to create another veil, or we move on and there's conflict. Additionally I don't think I'd allow them to use the ambush rules mid conflict. An ambush really does mean that the enemy is completely unaware of you. After that first attack they're on edge and trying to be ready for the next attack. You might get a bonus to your attack if you're veiled but they aren't going to defend at zero.
-
What page is this on?
I don't have it at the moment - if somebody else can please link to it, that'd be awesome - otherwise I'll get to it later.
-
It's YS255:
Duration with Evocation veils
is largely a matter of GM judgment call.
Personally I wouldn’t go for “1 shift gets
you one extra exchange” with a veil;
I’d just let it hang around until something
pierces it, or until the end of the scene. I
see them simply as REALLY GOOD magical
Stealth rolls.
-
@devonsapple/sinker
Thanks for the correction.
It seems my take on it was wrong, which is exactly why I participate on this forum - to get a better grasp of the rules. But sometimes it hurts just a little bit... :'(
-
It's not necessarily wrong, just not the way "Billy" would run it. Even in the blurb you can tell it's a suggestion. If you enjoy keeping track of the veil's duration and it adds tension or challenge to your game then do it that way. I like the more abstract way because it gives veils a little more usefulness over standard blocks and encourages non-combat solutions to problems. Also because as I age as a gamer I seem to be drawn to the more abstract rules (I started with GURPS and Palladium, now I love FATE and rules free storytelling games).
-
I don't think that blocks function against defence rolls. With that in mind:
Ambushes require multiple steps. First you have to hide, then you actually have to make the ambush. I'd certainly allow veils to cover the hiding rolls, but maybe not the final ambush roll. (And yes, I know that the final step says you can keep your hiding roll. But a veil isn't really a hiding roll.)
-
'Duration with Evocation veils
is largely a matter of GM judgment call.
Personally I wouldn’t go for “1 shift gets
you one extra exchange” with a veil;
I’d just let it hang around until something
pierces it, or until the end of the scene. I
see them simply as REALLY GOOD magical
Stealth rolls.'
I run with this rule set and would argue that as a veil is a really good magical stealth roll it can be used for anything a stealth roll can including ambushes.
-
It's not necessarily wrong, just not the way "Billy" would run it.
Exactly! It's not a correction - just an option! That we use.
-
'Duration with Evocation veils
is largely a matter of GM judgment call.
Personally I wouldn’t go for “1 shift gets
you one extra exchange” with a veil;
I’d just let it hang around until something
pierces it, or until the end of the scene. I
see them simply as REALLY GOOD magical
Stealth rolls.'
I run with this rule set and would argue that as a veil is a really good magical stealth roll it can be used for anything a stealth roll can including ambushes.
Thanks for pointing that out! I may need to modify how I treat veils.
Hmm, do we need to allow for some type of maintained power?
-
It's not necessarily wrong, just not the way "Billy" would run it.
Fair enough, but saying that's how Billy would run it is kind of like saying that's how the developers intended it. That said, I think I'd still make a caster spend some extra shifts to make it last a scene...
-
Fair enough, but saying that's how Billy would run it is kind of like saying that's how the developers intended it. That said, I think I'd still make a caster spend some extra shifts to make it last a scene...
That's a fair middle ground.
One other option people have previously suggested is that each shift spent on "duration" actually counters a single instance when the Veil is pierced (or, if you prefer to think about it, recharges the Veil when it is pierced).
-
First of all thanks to everybody for their constructive contributions. I'd like this thread to go on a bit longer, so please feel free to further add your opinions.
It seems like the majority of participants lean towards allowing ambush rules to be used from under a veil. Billy's side note slipped my mind (I sometimes tend to overlook them) and seems to be the only guidance to how veils are supposed to work. If they are meant to be a really god stealth role then use for ambushes clearly seams to be implied.
I don't think that blocks function against defence rolls. With that in mind:
Ambushes require multiple steps. First you have to hide, then you actually have to make the ambush. I'd certainly allow veils to cover the hiding rolls, but maybe not the final ambush roll. (And yes, I know that the final step says you can keep your hiding roll. But a veil isn't really a hiding roll.)
That was my first assessment that lead to my moratorium on veiled based ambush during our game session. But it seems like I have to change my opinion. Point is: when veiled you are hidden. The attack is covered through an other skill.
Now, if veiled ambushes are meant to be possible, would you allow for navel gazing maneuvers too? Further aiding an already devastating possible magical attack with free tags seems like a big deal. The ambush rules allow for it. Is there a line to be drawn?
-
Now, if veiled ambushes are meant to be possible, would you allow for navel gazing maneuvers too? Further aiding an already devastating possible magical attack with free tags seems like a big deal. The ambush rules allow for it. Is there a line to be drawn?
The question seems to be exactly the same as that with a high stealth sniper. I do think after a handful (no, I don't have something more concrete) navel gazing manoeuvres you shouldn't be able to do anymore.
-
Remembering the fight with the shang-nasty, when Harry and the Alphas took it on, Harry commented on how powerful and perfect its veils were. It attacked from inside them and still didn't go visible. Maybe a couple shifts can allow this, but I think that regular veils wont. Pure book logic, not rules lawyer-fu (my rule book knowledge is sketchy)
-
Remembering the fight with the shang-nasty, when Harry and the Alphas took it on, Harry commented on how powerful and perfect its veils were. It attacked from inside them and still didn't go visible. Maybe a couple shifts can allow this, but I think that regular veils wont. Pure book logic, not rules lawyer-fu (my rule book knowledge is sketchy)
I think it had it as a perpetual power, rather than casting it as Evocation or Thaumaturgy as used in the system - much the same way that an experienced specialist can buy Breath Weapon or Shape Change powers to reflect their practice and reliability with such spells.
-
I still reckon Shagnasty had the glamour power (the fifth most poorly described power in your story), I definatly agree that evocation veils should be removed when attacking.
-
Now, if veiled ambushes are meant to be possible, would you allow for navel gazing maneuvers too? Further aiding an already devastating possible magical attack with free tags seems like a big deal. The ambush rules allow for it. Is there a line to be drawn?
Just make sure that if they're using the same skill twice that you increase the difficulty of the maneuver/declaration.
Also, I don't want to beat a dead horse, but if you have a veil that lasts one scene (using evocation), It'd be a hard sell to say that the scene lasts four hours while they set up a perfect ambush situation...Of course, I guess they could spend four hours setting up the perfect ambush situation and THEN cast the veil - but I think you know what I'm getting at. Either there might not be enough time to set up tonnes of maneuvers or the time between the maneuver and the actual ambush may be so long as to make the maneuver useless(like setting up the ambush and placing a "shadowy" aspect in the wee hours of the morning, but the ambush ends up taking place at noon). I guess what I'm getting at is I think navel gazing maneuvers are completely independant of the use of a veil - so use your judgment. I might disallow a maneuver called "veiled" as that's a little redundant.
I think that most people are in agreement that the ambush situation should only be for the first exchange. That first exchange will be devastating, and possibly enough to finish the encounter. Realistically, if you have lots of time to set up a really good ambush - veil or no- it should probably be devastating.
-
I'd like to add my 2 cents
Veils & Ambushes
For the purpose of an ambush a Veil can replace the stealth roll. In any other regard, the Veil-Ambush works like any run of the mill Stealth-Ambush.
The Veil might still exist after the Ambush, provided there are shifts of duration left. Otherwise it drops. If it stays active It does not however allow for a second ambush attack, or support further attacks in any way.
That brings me to
Ambushes in General
In General Ambushes can only occur once per conflict, namely at the beginning of said conflict. The Mediocre Defense is based on the fact that the target it totally unsuspecting, and that's simply not the case once the conflict has started. Any attempts to "attack from under a veil" during a conflict are best modeled as tags on maneuver aspect like for example "under a veil".
Once an ambush is set you can do nothing else but wait for your shot. This holds true for normal Stealth Ambushes, as well as those from under a Veil. If you do something else than wait, your ambush advantage is lost together with all the aspects created to aid it.
Last but not least
Magical Attacks out of Ambushes
I don't see any reason to disallow it. Where would be the big difference between firing a gun or rifle from ambush and an evocation cast from ambush?
There really isn't one. The Target is still caught unawares, which is what the ambush rules are built on.
As for maneuvers in an ambush to aid in casting. Sure, it's basically just like aiming your rifle, steadying your breathing, adjusting the sights on the gun, putting up little flags to judge the wind... as long as you can think of things to help your spellcasting, you can add aspects just like you can for any other ambush attack.
So Long story short:
1: A Veil can replace the Stealth roll. It does not add additional utility, so no moving ambush or something like that.
2: An Evocation attack acts just like any other attack when used in an ambush.
3: If the Veil has been cast with additional shifts for duration, then it could still exist after the ambush attack. However, it does nothing to aid further attacks.
I think number 3 could use some playtesting to see if it really makes a big difference to allow a block to carry over into the conflict. If it does one can easily say that the Ambush-Attack removes the veil.
That's my take.
-
I run on veils are removed once you attack but if you re-veil aka hiding roll (using your turn) then you can ambush again.
-
I was thinking about the 2 shifts to make the veil a one-way block. In the book it says
"Veils often block detection in both directions. Perceiving things outside a veil while you are within it faces a similar block, at half the veil’s strength.Increase the complexity of a veil by 2 in order to create a veil that doesn’t impede lookingout at all."
So if you are sitting in an 8 shift veil waiting to ambush, you need to get past a 4 shift block to "perceive" the target of your ambush. It seems that your first attack would need to equal or beat 4 to hit any target outside the veil. Given that as soon as a block is defeated it goes away, it means that the ambushers would automatically break the veil when they successfully attack.
If you put 2 shifts to make the veil one-way, maybe the veil won't go down after the first attack.
What do people think of this? I'm not making a comment whether or not you should get multiple ambush attacks if you add the 2 shifts for a one-way veil, I'm just commenting on how you can justify a veil disappearing after attacking.
-
Not sure I like at, considering the nerfing it does compared to powers, for instance I could take the Cloak of Shadows, a +2 to stealth for Ambushes stunt, and a +2 to stealth for maneuvers, given with ambushes you have the drop on someone, you can reliably set up to +6 shifts worth of power not counting the hypothetical character in questions Superb Stealth.
Or in other words a Legendary +3 for Ambushes. Then considering some gun stunts to compliment... well you get the idea.
I just don't feel its necesary over all.
-
Regarding veils going down after an opening attack...doesn't the ambush begin a new scene? A combat scene at that. So even if handwaving veil duration to per scene or some other arbitrary time frame it should end as the new combat scene begins. If it doesn't, you probably should carry casting stress over and start using a per exchange duration.
I'd go with the new scene ending the veil even if attacking through it does not.
-
Not sure I like at, considering the nerfing it does compared to powers, for instance I could take the Cloak of Shadows, a +2 to stealth for Ambushes stunt, and a +2 to stealth for maneuvers, given with ambushes you have the drop on someone, you can reliably set up to +6 shifts worth of power not counting the hypothetical character in questions Superb Stealth.
Or in other words a Legendary +3 for Ambushes. Then considering some gun stunts to compliment... well you get the idea.
I just don't feel its necesary over all.
If you're tagging enough maneuvers and have gun stunts to boot then you'll have no problem getting through a block of 4; you'll successfully carry out the ambush and take down your veil.
@umbralux I like the combat=new scene.
-
Its already two shifts too remove the both way limitation its in the veils section.
-
Its already two shifts too remove the both way limitation its in the veils section.
Yes, I know. In my post you can read the quote that I copied right out of YS. I edited it to include the 2 shift rule. What I'm saying is when you ambush, if you don't want to face a block with a strength equal to half the strength of your veil, you'll be forced to add 2 shifts. This effectively reduces the power of your veil by 2.
All I'm saying that if Papa Gruff thinks veils and ambushes in combination are too powerful, this may be an option to reduce the strength of the veil.
-
I don't actually mind the way that Taran suggests. It's relatively clever and supported by RAW, while still holding up the answer I like. ;D
As far as the combat being a new scene, I'm not so sure. I mean a lot of that previous scene is still present. You're still in the same location, most of the scene aspects should still be there. You aren't really framing a new scene, you'd just be saying "It's exactly the same as the last scene" and if you're doing that then why are you changing scenes. It doesn't seem justified to me as a scene change, just a change in context.
I run on veils are removed once you attack but if you re-veil aka hiding roll (using your turn) then you can ambush again.
This I'm not a fan of because of what has been mentioned earlier. Even though you're invisible the second time they shouldn't have no defense roll whatsoever because at that point they are expecting an attack.
-
Not sure I like at, considering the nerfing it does compared to powers, for instance I could take the Cloak of Shadows, a +2 to stealth for Ambushes stunt, and a +2 to stealth for maneuvers, given with ambushes you have the drop on someone, you can reliably set up to +6 shifts worth of power not counting the hypothetical character in questions Superb Stealth.
Or in other words a Legendary +3 for Ambushes. Then considering some gun stunts to compliment... well you get the idea.
I just don't feel its necesary over all.
By the Rules As Written, you lose some efficiency when you stack stunts. If you have two stunts that give +2 that apply, the final result is generally +3, not +4.
One guideline you could go by is the +4 you get to see through a shapechange deceit if the shapechanged object or creature does something unusual.
So a veiled mage who fires a fireball is going to give everybody a +4 to see through their veil. Maybe if the spell is significantly stealthier it would not have as great an effect.
I don't see a problem with a veiled character getting off an ambush on the first exchange. But maintaining stealth after firing should be MUCH harder.
And coordinating an ambush where people can't see each other could be tough. Hand signals where you can't see your OWN hands?
Don't forget it costs a shift for each extra sense you wish to affect.
I would certainly support a GM who ruled that attacking causes the person veiling to Immediately lose the veil. But stealth would still apply, and coming out of Veil if the target had had no inkling that you were there would yield a couple exploitable aspects to boost your effective stealth.
That means that Joe apprentice with no ranks in stealth is not going to be killer effective ambusher.
-
Don't forget it costs a shift for each extra sense you wish to affect.
Does it? I mentionned that earlier in this thread but I was just making stuff up/thinking out loud to find ways to reduce the potential power of a veil (or I think I was just mistaken). I think, as others have mentionned earlier, a veil covers all senses. "The power invested in a veil serves as the difficulty for using skills or other magic to detect anything that’s concealed by the veil." YS 255
It doesn't specify a specific skill, it just says "skills". So regardless of the sense, if you're using a skill to detect something under a veil, you have to beat the power of the veil.
One guideline you could go by is the +4 you get to see through a shapechange deceit if the shapechanged object or creature does something unusual.
So a veiled mage who fires a fireball is going to give everybody a +4 to see through their veil.
This makes sense.
What do people do for trying to shoot/attack veiled foes? Assuming the veil has extra exchanges in it and hasn't been peirced and, I guess, assuming that you don't adjudicate the veil dropping when someone in it attacks, how do you adjudicate shooting in a random direction because you saw an arrow come flying at you "from that direction". Would you allow the person to attack "over there somewhere" and let the attack, if it succeeds, break the veil? Or would that just be an awareness with, as Micheal Sandy said, a +4 because you saw the arrow coming from that direction?
-
Don't forget it costs a shift for each extra sense you wish to affect.
Does it? I'd love to know the page number, if you can get it.
-
@Taran I usually treat it one of two ways. If they have no reason to expect that someone is veiled (not the case here I know) then they just can't attack that person. If they've seen the person disappear or know they're there for some reason then I usually just have them attack and see if it gets over the block. It's not quite right thematically (ideally you'd want alertness in there somewhere), but it cuts down on rolls. I've never liked the whole "Roll to see if you are able to roll" idea.
-
Might, then, want to have Alertness (or Lore) restrict the attack roll
-
Might, then, want to have Alertness (or Lore) restrict the attack roll
Agreed
-
Does it? I'd love to know the page number, if you can get it.
Shoot. That must have been a house rule, that you have to spend a shift for each sense the Veil operates against, because I can't find it.
-
Might, then, want to have Alertness (or Lore) restrict the attack roll
I'd actually be fine with having alertness modify the roll (I.E. a higher alertness would add 1 and a lower alertness would subtract). Thanks for reminding me about combining skills though, I had forgotten all about that.
-
Shoot. That must have been a house rule, that you have to spend a shift for each sense the Veil operates against, because I can't find it.
Perhaps one could approach the other way, and provide a discount of X shifts (say, 1-3 shifts) for there to be a sense which a given veil doesn't cover:
Uncommon: 1-shift discount (a particular supernatural sense)
Common: 2-shift discount (hearing or sight)
Very Common: 3-shift discount: veil only protects against a particular sense
Thoughts?
-
By the Rules As Written, you lose some efficiency when you stack stunts. If you have two stunts that give +2 that apply, the final result is +3
This is NOT stacking stunts, this is a Power (Cloak of Shadows), a Stunt for +2 to Ambushes, and a secondary Stunt towards Maneuvers which makes it all but impossible to fail to create a relevant taggable aspect. This is perfectly legal to RAW, simply being excellent synergy between them.
-
@devonapple
I like the idea in theory, though I think 'a particular supernatural sense' is likely TOO uncommon to be worth a discount, rather like having a veil that doesn't obscure taste: how often is that going to matter?
Lore's generic Mystic Perception trapping might be more fitting for a +1 (it won't tell them where you are, or what you are, or what you're up to, but it'll tell them that you're nearby, and you're not mundane)
-
*Delurking*
@Devonapple, not too sure I like that idea of changing shifts (either way) to cover more or fewer senses, really such a thing seems to fly in the face of RAW and the A Block is A Block is a Block sidebar. I think declarations and assessments are the way to go with weaknesses in veils. Which brings me back to this question...
YS 252 A Block is a block is a block, talks about using assessments and declarations to define weak points in an opponents defense. Should the NPCs who are about to get ambushed be allowed to roll make declarations to help them perceive the veil?
How PCs make assessments and declarations is really well spelled out, but the book says nothing about a GM's ability to do so. Consider the following quick scenario. The PCs are up against a wizard who casts a veil to escape combat. A few scene's later they run across the same wizard, mid combat he's veiled and one of the PC's makes an assessment and tacks on the It doesn't cover your BO aspect to the veil spell. Well within RAW and the spirit of the setting. But as the GM if I want to point out the weakness in a PCs spell how would I go about this, GM fiat is too heavy handed for my taste (and just plain a bad way to GM imnsho), but am I allowed to make assessments and declarations (or would they be compels upon the High Concept of the PC spell caster?) and if so what are some good guidelines for going about this?
*Lurk mode engaged*
-
NPC's can make assessments just as much as PC's can, that makes complete sense. Declarations are really sort of a player thing in how they work, however as the GM you can introduce scene aspects whenever you want. Now this doesn't allow you to effect the players in quite the same way since you can't effect their characters directly, however I would think you should be able to make it work.
As to how often you should do something like that, I would say that it really depends on the players and the table. You should know your players reasonably well, how often do you think they would take kindly to that kind of thing? Perhaps if you explain it as "turnabout is fairplay" response to declarations? I'm not sure, it's always going to depend on the people that you're with.
-
What do people do for trying to shoot/attack veiled foes? Assuming the veil has extra exchanges in it and hasn't been peirced and, I guess, assuming that you don't adjudicate the veil dropping when someone in it attacks, how do you adjudicate shooting in a random direction because you saw an arrow come flying at you "from that direction". Would you allow the person to attack "over there somewhere" and let the attack, if it succeeds, break the veil? Or would that just be an awareness with, as Micheal Sandy said, a +4 because you saw the arrow coming from that direction?
I just let you attack them normally, if you're somehow aware of their existence. I give someone who's veiled a free tag on an aspect of "Invisible" though.