[WFRP] The Bloody Crown OOC XV

[-Sentinel-]

Holy crap, I got two Furies here!

Confirm 83: (d100)[68]
Fortune: (d100)[53]
Extra damage: (d10)[6]

Confirm 83: (d100)[62]
Fortune: (d100)[34]
Extra damage: (d10)[8]

Extra-extra damage, if needed: (d10)[9] (d10)[1] (d10)[9]

[TheSummoner]

Also, Dark Magic, Tatiana? We need to have a serious talk, young lady!

*Tatiana takes a peek at Elsa's talent list*

Besides, from the IC it looks more like the result of a half trained beast wizard trying to pick up what she can from a fire wizard who also picked up most of what she knows on the fly rather than any deliberate attempt to use dark magic.

In the absence of Sieghard, we'll have to make do.

Funnily enough, I was half expecting Sforza to say something to the effect of "if you care so much about some goblins, you deal with it" and then Sieghard having to be the one to deal with the wyvern absent the rest of the party. I was already thinking of ways to get the cannon up there.

[LeSwordfish]

What would you want for a called shot on the existing body injury Ludo has put on the Wyvern? Has the bullet hole done enough damage to its scales to really get a sword or bolt in there?

Could either try and target it with ranged attacks, but I wonder if a melee fighter might have a better chance at hitting the weak spot while it's distracted fighting someone else? (EDIT: or taking like forty damage from fireballs at once) Would that require additional actions to pass "through" the wyvern? Could I make a Stealth roll for that? Could I try and use a crossbow for that at minimum range?

[-Sentinel-]

*Tatiana takes a peek at Elsa's talent list*

Besides, from the IC it looks more like the result of a half trained beast wizard trying to pick up what she can from a fire wizard who also picked up most of what she knows on the fly rather than any deliberate attempt to use dark magic.

It's only natural to want to steer your kids, younger siblings, etc. away from your own mistakes.

And yeah, you're right, it turns out Tattie was just poorly taught. That's on Elsa. Hopefully that can be corrected.

[RossN]

Terror test: (1d100)[3] vs 42

Edit: Finally!

LCP is Jarla close enough to use her pistol? She'd have spent the last two rounds trying to move away from the diet dragon but she wasn't running and screaming at least.

[TheSummoner]

Just summarising where we are at the foot of the round for my own benefit:

• Closest to the wyvern - Ludo, Bardhyl, Elsa, Tattie, Grim, Kreshnik.
• ~24 yards (a Run move) further back: Afrim, Wadim, Ortwin.
• ~48 yards back: Waldon, Zana.

Characters in yellow are still under the effects of Terror. N.B. Jarla could be anywhere between the second and third lines - she's only at the 2nd level of our terror chart so doesn't have to retreat 'as fast as she possibly can' in the same way that Waldon and Zana do, only end her turn further away from Da Big Wun than she started.

Jarla's somewhere between 24 and 48 yards. Long range of a pistol is 16 (short is 8). If Jarla is at the absolute minimum distance she can be, she can enter the absolute maximum of long range with a move action. Otherwise, she'd be at extreme range.

You can certainly fire it in either case, it's just a question of whether the bonuses from a big target outweigh the penalties from distance enough for you to hit.

[-Sentinel-]

Regardless of whether Jarla can shoot, Elsa's spell just dealt a tremendous amount of damage. If that's not enough, Bardhyl can still get a few good licks in.

RossN, I know it sucks to be late to the fight because of a couple of failed Terror tests, but keep in mind that guns are expensive and have a small chance to blow up in your hand each time you use them. So I advise you use them sparingly, and only at short range if you can.

[LCP]

What would you want for a called shot on the existing body injury Ludo has put on the Wyvern? Has the bullet hole done enough damage to its scales to really get a sword or bolt in there?

I'd say in either case it's a Called Shot (-20), but if you're trying to hit it with a missile weapon then you also need to roll under your target number without the size bonus. If you would have hit with the size bonus, then you still hit the wyvern, but you miss the wound.

In combat I don't think the size bonus should apply to begin with, so it'll just be a normal Called Shot. You'll need to be using a sufficiently pointy weapon to get any benefit though - a musket-wound is something like a 30mm hole, it may have cracked the scales but an axe or a mace isn't going to do noticeably more there than it would anywhere else.

In terms of getting in close, I don't think I should ask for any tests or rolls to simply be able to throw that attack. I assume in the cut and thrust of a hit roll there's a fair bit of footwork that goes on already. If you do want to do anything fancy with e.g. trying to get under its feet, an Ag roll is probably the go-to.

LCP is Jarla close enough to use her pistol? She'd have spent the last two rounds trying to move away from the diet dragon but she wasn't running and screaming at least.

You've described Jarla's last two rounds of actions - you're the authority on how far she's moved! Since the wyvern's now in contact with Bardhyl you can assume the distance she's moved is the range she's at, +/- a few yards at most.

[LeSwordfish]

So i hit on 46 +10 standard attack, +10 aim, -20 Bardhyl is in combat, -20 called shot? i.e. 26? and then I hit the rest of the wyvern on an additional +30?

As I see it we have two options:

1. Bardhyl retreats, Ludo shoots the weak spot.
2. Ludo comes in and tries to distract the Wyvern, Bardhyl goes for the weak spot with his spear.

I think #2 might be our best bet there, not least because that brings us to a decent Plan B of Ludo and Bardhyl holding it up while Elsa The Artillery Cannon and Tatiana The Disney Princess do their respective things. What do you think Rax?

[-Sentinel-]

Bardhyl is equipped with his axe, and lacks Quick Draw. If he wants to swift attack with a spear, he can spend a Fortune Point to gain a half-action to draw his spear, assuming he has it on him and not on his horse.

Whatever we do, I think this wyvern is almost certainly dying or turning tail this round. Assuming a soak of 9, it's taken 52 damage just from Ludo's firearm and Elsa's fireball.

Edit: Scratch that, I just realized LeSwordfish's earlier damage calculation didn't subtract the soak. So Scaley has taken 43 damage. Still a lot!

[RossN]

It takes two full rounds to load a pistol apparently. Luckily Jarla has Master Gunner so it is only one round for her but help might be a little bit longer in coming!

[rax]

I appreciate all the strategizing, but the spear idea isn't going to fly. Firstly because Bardhyl doesn't have a spear (it's a glaive ) and secondly because it was almost certainly on his horse, which he just shooed away. So any fighting will be done with axe and shield.

It's possible that Bardhyl can do enough damage to drop the wyvern (hopefully it doesn't have 50 or 60 Wounds), but if the wyvern doesn't go down or withdraw this round, then he's in Fate Point territory because he's got 5 Wounds left and pretty much any half decent hit from the wyvern is going to crit him.

So, I think Bardhyl's options are more likely to be:

1. Stand and fight, hope to drop the wyvern by himself and/or Ludo gets off another killer shot.
2. As above, but Ludo rushes in to provide the wyvern with an extra target and both of them get an extra +10 bonus to hit. Probably not a great option for Ludo.
3. Disengage, use another FP to get an extra half action to put some more distance between him and the wyvern. The wyvern hopefully decides to try and kill someone else.

Unfortunately, it's nearing my bedtime and I just got back from a business trip, so I'm going to have to put off my decision until tomorrow.

In the meantime, here's hoping Bardhyl can snap out of his terror: (1d100)[43] vs. WP 59

[-Sentinel-]

The tail attack happens even if the wyvern has been killed, so whatever you do, don't perform an All-Out Attack or All-Out Swift Attack. You want to be able to dodge or parry that last blow.

[rax]

Ulric's Fury with +10 extra damage confirmed in IC post.

Not sure if the custom here is to just use the next pre-emptive Fury roll. If yes, add another +3 to Bardhyl's damage.

If no, rolling some more d10s to see where we end up: (1d10)[3], (1d10)[5], (1d10)[4]

Edit: Same as before, so Bardhyl's Ulric's Fury is 28 Wounds before Da Big Wun's TB+AP.

[-Sentinel-]

@ rax: LCP said earlier that the size bonus doesn't apply in combat, but your one hit scored a Fury for 19 damage before soak, so hopefully that'll do it.

If Ludo charges in, that would also cause Bardhyl's first attack to hit thanks to outnumbering bonus, though I don't know if LCP would retroactively allow that.

Edit:

Not sure if the custom here is to just use the next pre-emptive Fury roll. If yes, add another +3 to Bardhyl's damage.

Pretty sure the first attack to Fury uses the first Fury-confirm roll, and the first extra damage roll.

[rax]

@Sentinel
My bad, I misread that statement as applying to fancy tricks, not melee in general.

Regarding "soak", have you considered that WS, S and A aren't the only characteristics where Da Big Wun is superior to a standard wyvern? I don't see a post where our GM has been kind enough to tell us how tough this beastie is...

Edit: Re Fury damage, I always roll separate confirms and damage rolls for each attack, so my intent is to read off each confirm against the same initial attack. In this case, Bardhyl's second attack was a hit and potential Fury, so the idea is to read his second confirmation and extra damage roll, which is a confirm and another +10 damage. My question only concerned whether I should then use the next damage roll for simplicity's sake or roll again.

@LCP
Can Bardhyl spend an FP to re-roll his first attack and still keep the damage roll? An 8 on the die roll is better than any DoS he can achieve.

[TheSummoner]

Not sure if the custom here is to just use the next pre-emptive Fury roll. If yes, add another +3 to Bardhyl's damage.

I don't think anyone pre-emptively rolls Fury confirmation. It's a roll you don't need 9 times out of 10, so it just makes more sense to do an extra post in the OOC thread when it comes up.

As for the question of damage and stats, I imagine the thing was in dead or running territory before Bardhyl hit it, so I don't think the exact numbers matter all that much. And trying to guess enemy stats from any source outside of what you've seen in ethe game itself just seems like a good way to be wrong - I don't see why stat blocks from sourcebooks would have to be any more than a suggestion, especially when dealing with a large creature that you're likely only ever going to encounter one of.

[-Sentinel-]

Regarding "soak", have you considered that WS, S and A aren't the only characteristics where Da Big Wun is superior to a standard wyvern? I don't see a post where our GM has been kind enough to tell us how tough this beastie is...

True, but even with soak 10 (if it has TB 6), it's taken a tremendous amount of damage, and is certainly about to understand that it messed with the wrong group of travelers.


Re: FP re-roll: I think we have (or used to have) a house rule that allows you to spend a Fortune Point to add +10 to any test, just like in Dark Heresy, but I'm not seeing this rule in the first post of the thread, so I'm not sure where we stand on it.

[LCP]

You don't need to confirm a Fury more than once. That's what the rulebook says on p130 anyway - roll WS to confirm, then after that it's just exploding d10s.

[LeSwordfish]

If Bardhyl's getting stuck in and dealing damage, I think Ludo will as well. Charging swift attack!

(1d100)[53] to hit vs 40something
(1d10+2)[4] damage

(1d100)[81] to hit vs 40something
(1d10+2)[5] damage

[LeSwordfish]

Hilariously bad! That first one hits due to the outnumbering bonus if we get that but sure doesn't do any damage.

Let's also try a free action "hey look at me" test, presumay vs 31 Charm Animal or 72 Fellowship: (1d100)[22]

[rax]

I don't think anyone pre-emptively rolls Fury confirmation. It's a roll you don't need 9 times out of 10, so it just makes more sense to do an extra post in the OOC thread when it comes up.

I do the opposite, and it's been the rule in pretty much every WFRP or other Warhammer game I've been in. Throw in lots of pre-emptive rolls in the action post so the GM just has to read off the whole sequence of events in one place. Admittedly that's often more relevant for things like parrying/dodging, but confirming and rolling Fury tests just in case in the same post is standard for me.

[LeSwordfish]

I don't know about Fury confirmations (seems a waste of time mostly) but rolling dodges and parries pre-emptively means that LCP knows if the enemies are going to hit before deciding who they attack.

[-Sentinel-]

I don't know about Fury confirmations (seems a waste of time mostly) but rolling dodges and parries pre-emptively means that LCP knows if the enemies are going to hit before deciding who they attack.

This is my view as well, on both counts.

Well, this wyvern fight looks like it'll be a short one (especially given how long the wyvern's shadow has been looming over us), but I'm glad it'll be over before I go on vacation.

[LeSwordfish]

Forgot to say this earlier but my intent is for Ludo to have crossbow in one hand and sword in the other, so he can take a pot shot if the Wyvern runs away.

[rax]

I don't know about Fury confirmations (seems a waste of time mostly) but rolling dodges and parries pre-emptively means that LCP knows if the enemies are going to hit before deciding who they attack.

This is my view as well, on both counts.

Well, this wyvern fight looks like it'll be a short one (especially given how long the wyvern's shadow has been looming over us), but I'm glad it'll be over before I go on vacation.

Your opinions are noted. If LCP wants me to stop with pre-emptive rolls, I'm happy to do so in the future.

[LCP]

It doesn't bother me much one way or the other. In general, I do like anything that anticipates what will be needed and avoids additional PbP back-and-forth. For UF, I'd think you'd generally see whether you'd rolled a 10 right after your post and so can roll the additional dice right away, so it's no harm either way, but certainly no objection if you want to pre-roll them (as long as it's clear which roll you intend for which attack). For dodges and parries, my usual method has been to roll them myself after any NPC attack rolls, but if you'd rather make your own rolls there I can understand that. The only problem is that, as LeSwordfish says, you're letting me know the outcome of NPC attacks before I decide whether to allocate them to you.

[rax]

I find it doesn't take that much more time to copy paste some extra roll 1d100 and roll 1d10 instructions into a post I'm writing anyway, so I may as well continue adding pre-emptive UF rolls. As far as I can tell, the matter wouldn't even have come up if I hadn't had the extremely improbable result of rolling two tens in a row.

If you're concerned about being influenced by the pre-emptive dodge and parry rolls, I have no issue letting you roll them.

[LCP]

As far as I can tell, the matter wouldn't even have come up if I hadn't had the extremely improbable result of rolling two tens in a row.

As I mentioned above, you don't ever need more than 1 WS test for a fury, so you should be fine to continue as you are!

If you're concerned about being influenced by the pre-emptive dodge and parry rolls, I have no issue letting you roll them.

If you don't mind, that does also make it slightly easier for me to remember (in terms of treating all PCs the same).

Will try to have the IC post up after dinner. Then I'm reporting you all to the RSPCW.

[rax]

As I mentioned above, you don't ever need more than 1 WS test for a fury..

Yes, I know that. The reason there's three confirmation rolls is so that there's one for each attack made. Otherwise I'd still have to make an extra post to confirm if more than one attack generates a possible UF.