Rules Discussion

[Marullus]

Yes, the Gakusho do Prophecy, Blessing, and Healing magic. That's also the list they get XP for. (They get no XP for participating in combats.)

You make a good point about the separate actions... maybe we consider Observing and Relaying Information as a single combined Secondary Action (meaning it can be done as basic, primary, or secondary)?

[ffilz]

One additional thought I had is that PbP probably makes combat take even longer relative to other scenes than face to face, thus making quite a challenge for characters who don't have much to do in combat.

I'm really enjoying learning Bushido and I'd really love to play face to face sometime, but I may be running out of steam for PbP, we'll see how things go, not ready to quit yet.

[jmacatty]

Bushido face to face is much faster. Combat can go extremely quickly. I would love to play FtF if you want to start a group near me; of course, I suck as a GM, so we would need someone to do that.

[jemmus]

Don't quit ffilz! In this game we're still at the introductory "fight the bandits" phase. We'll get to more supernatural stuff later. Or make a combat character if you'd like.

[jemmus]

Revised cover rules, starting now:
- If a PC sees an NPC going behind foliage, no need for a Perception of Hidden Things roll.
- Being fully behind cover is -4 to BCS. If the NPC is hiding, this applies.
- Being partially behind cover is -2 to BCS. I think about the only time this will apply in this combat is if a character is behind a lying rock (medium gray square). They're about a yard high.
The same rules apply to NPCs, of course.

[ffilz]

Don't quit ffilz! In this game we're still at the introductory "fight the bandits" phase. We'll get to more supernatural stuff later. Or make a combat character if you'd like.

OK, I won't quite yet Just need to figure out something useful Taisho can do during combat.

[jemmus]

Everybody needs to remember to use their Blessings from the morning.

[Marullus]

Since we're talking about restricted terrain and weapons...

It bothers me that the Wakizashi and Katana are both Medium weapons. That seems to eliminate the benefit of using a Wakizashi in tight quarters because it has the same disadvantage at short range as its longer counterpart. Whereas if the Wakizashi were a Short weapon, it would gain a bonus when you get inside someone's reach. That appears to be the province of only a dagger.

Things I see about the Wakizashi:

• A wakizashi can be thrown with shurikenjutsu, like a knife. (p. 12)
• It can use the Thrust maneuver (like a Katana)
• It takes half as much poison to coat (a Wakizashi is coated by one unit, a katana by two units)
• It can be wielded one-handed at 10 STR, where a katana needs to be two-handed at 15 STR and one-handed at 19 STR. So, good for weak samurai.

...that's kind of it.

I see no real place a Bushi would choose to use their wakizashi rather than their katana or why they would even bother carrying the dai-sho except for social purposes (but usually social purposes come from some original form of utility).

If the Wakizashi were a Short weapon it would be the perfect complement to the Katana. The Katana being best at medium distance with a -1 at long or short and a -2 if in Contact; the wakizashi being +1 in contact, 0 at short, and -1 at medium. If you get in constrained quarters, the wakizashi is a clear advantage. But the book makes them both medium.

</rant>

[jemmus]

Historically, wakizashi were useful for combat in confined spaces indoors. In game terms, fairly low ceilings and door lintel could be Hindrances for using a katana. I'm OK for changing wakizashi to Short range if other people are.

Something else that I thing the game gets wrong is allowing ronin to carry the dai-sho. I read somewhere that they could carry a katana or wakizashi, but not both. Only samurai could do that. But then again, there's a lot of misinformation in English-language books about samurai. There used to be so few sources that if a writer got a fact wrong, it would be stated again in subsequent books, so that it became an established (but false) meme that just kept carrying on.

A big one is that samurai committed seppuku to retain their honor. In most cases, it was because they didn't have a choice. Some reasons for seppuku:
-One's lord "invited" you to do it.
-You're in so much trouble that dying is the best option. In Japan, there really wasn't anywhere escape to. Outside groups such as villagers wouldn't accept you, they'd turn you in to the authorities. (Well, bandits might accept you. But more likely they would just rob you and kill you, if they didn't know you already).
-If you don't do it, not only you will die, but your enemies will kill your family members also. With seppuku, you take blame for your individual actions. No seppuku, and your whole family and group take blame for harboring a "rebel" or "criminal."

Another one is that samurai never ran away in battle. They ran away all the time, especially during the time period we're in. Not that they were afraid, but "he who fights and runs away lives to fight another day"applied. Later, when battles got bigger and more organized, samurai and ashigaru seem not to have run away as much. Probably because the country was more populated and developed, and armies were much bigger. The survivors of a losing army would just be hunted down and killed individually. So better to just fight and have at least a chance of winning and surviving.

And a last one is that samurai were "honorable." Samurai history is full of them doing self-serving and dishonorable things-- double-dealing, betraying allies, not keeping their word, making a subordinate's wife a concubine, etc. If they could get away with it and somehow preserve on, a lot of them would do it. Very Machiavellian. I think rather than "honorable," a better description would be "proud" or "prideful." There's a saying, "A samurai who hasn't eaten in two days uses a toothpick on his teeth." He pretends to have just eaten, rather than admit that he's hungry and poor.

[jemmus]

If I understand Marullus's post in the IC thread viewtopic.php?p=574847#p574847right, moving in any direction but ahead (while maintaining the same facing is 2 yards of BMA per yard. In the specific situation I'm considering, the NPC wants to move a yard behind himself and still face the charging PC. Because of the terrain, he doesn't have enough BMA to step backwards. But he can use the Turn and Flee. That forces him to run his full BMA, which he doesn't want to do. He just wants to go one yard.

It seems that the main benefit of Turn and Flee is to get out of Engaged status. Thus, possibly the required to use all BMA fleeing. In this case, the NPC isn't Engaged. So, can he turn in his primary action phase and Walk a yard back? Then in his Secondary Phase, turn around to face the PC again? I don't see that changing facing requires use of BMA, or that it's an Alter Position (Primary Action) action.

Sorry, this is probably covered in the rules, but I haven't spotted it yet. Basically, I don't know how changing facing to move works with Walk, Run, Leap, etc.

[ffilz]

If I understand Marullus's post in the IC thread viewtopic.php?p=574847#p574847right, moving in any direction but ahead (while maintaining the same facing is 2 yards of BMA per yard. In the specific situation I'm considering, the NPC wants to move a yard behind himself and still face the charging PC. Because of the terrain, he doesn't have enough BMA to step backwards. But he can use the Turn and Flee. That forces him to run his full BMA, which he doesn't want to do. He just wants to go one yard.

It seems that the main benefit of Turn and Flee is to get out of Engaged status. Thus, possibly the required to use all BMA fleeing. In this case, the NPC isn't Engaged. So, can he turn in his primary action phase and Walk a yard back? Then in his Secondary Phase, turn around to face the PC again? I don't see that changing facing requires use of BMA, or that it's an Alter Position (Primary Action) action.

Sorry, this is probably covered in the rules, but I haven't spotted it yet. Basically, I don't know how changing facing to move works with Walk, Run, Leap, etc.

Seems like you should almost always be able to go at least one yard, even a step back. Maybe in particularly treacherous terrain not? What examples are there of things that require multiple actions other than magic?

[Marullus]

I think this might be the section you're missing...

Code: Select all

1116.4 EXECUTING MOVEMENT
The various Options available to a character can limit the way in
which he moves. The basic distance that a character can cover in
straight movement during a Detailed Turn is equal to his Base
Movement Allowance in yards.
Characters normally move forward within the arc represented by
their front facing. If a character wishes to move in a direction other
than one covered by this facing or wishes to alter direction one
movement is begun, the final distance traveled is shortened to reflect
the speed and time lost in turning. For convenience, movement is
made in 1 yard increments.
Think of the Basic Movement Allowance as a number of points that
the character may expend in order to move. For each point spent, he
may move forward 1 yard. To change facing by 60 degrees, he must
expend 1 point.
A character who wishes to move sideways or backwards without
changing his facing must expend 2 points per yard traveled.
A character who has chosen the Movement, Run, or Turn and Run
Options may not deliberately place himself in Engaged status during
his movement. Characters choosing Options that allow them to
conduct an attack are assumed to move to the most advantageous
range for the weapon in use unless they have insufficient movement
allowance to reach that range.
Any of the Options that allow the character to move only 1 yard are
assumed to allow this movement in any direction, forwards,
backwards, or sideways, without penalty.

That describes how to use BMA as "points" to cover movement and changing facing, and I think that the last line applies for minimum moving (you should always be able to move at least 1 yard).

I don't think turn and flee is appropriate here... or anywhere that fleeing is not the object. Because it specifically has them "turn" and then wait to flee, it essentially gives those present the opportunity to take their attack on those intervening phases with the +10 rear facing bonus before they can actually run away. (Like a D&D opportunity attack, but with an initiative limiter.)

[jemmus]

Perfect, thanks Marullus. So one yard of BMA for each 60 degrees of facing change. (Not sure why I've never seen that text before). I have to revise PHdh's action, he can't move back a yard. Sorry, everyone.

[ffilz]

Perfect, thanks Marullus. So one yard of BMA for each 60 degrees of facing change. (Not sure why I've never seen that text before). I have to revise PHdh's action, he can't move back a yard. Sorry, everyone.

Why can't he move back a yard? He shouldn't need to turn to take a step backward.

[jemmus]

It's because of the rule I set about the rocky (gray) squares. It takes 4 BMA to enter one. So stepping backward into one would take 8 BMA. He doesn't have that many. I suppose he could do it over two turns. For simplicity, the next map I make might be as clear and flat as a football field.

[ffilz]

It's because of the rule I set about the rocky (gray) squares. It takes 4 BMA to enter one. So stepping backward into one would take 8 BMA. He doesn't have that many. I suppose he could do it over two turns. For simplicity, the next map I make might be as clear and flat as a football field.

I guess the question I would ask as GM is "is it reasonable to step back into this terrain" if so, then it should be allowed. If not, then it shouldn't be allowed no matter the BMA. How big do you visualize the rocks? If the step up is more than a foot or even as much as a foot, then, yea, I wouldn't allow a step back. But I wouldn't allow it even for someone with a BMA of 8+, that amount of difference is something you need to be facing to get up.

[jemmus]

The rocks about a foot to two feet high. There are 2-3 of them per square yard. So it's a matter of stepping on, over or between them. Kind of tricky to do with a backward step.

[ffilz]

The rocks about a foot to two feet high. There are 2-3 of them per square yard. So it's a matter of stepping on, over or between them. Kind of tricky to do with a backward step.

Yep, cool, then I actually wouldn't allow anyone, even with a high BMA to step back, well maybe a ninja could...

[jemmus]

In this situation, what do you guys think about letting character make the move over two turns? He needs 8 BMA points to step backwards, but he only has 5. On one turn he does a Walk action as his primary, using 5 BMA. The second turn he does another Walk as his primary, using 3 BMA, and enters the square. (This is a unique situation because of the special terrain rules I made for this scenario. It may never come up again).

[Marullus]

You already edited to have him make a failed attack roll, right? I think it would be right to let that stand.

I don't have a problem with him stepping backwards cautiously, taking two turns to move.
Otherwise, it sounds like he turns and flees, exposing his backside to attack while he clambers up the stone.

Remember he can't use the Walk action if engaged, too. You have to deal with the person trying to kill you. (Not sure if he's Engaged.)