Questions: Luck, fumbles, magic.

Advanced Fighting Fantasy discussion
Post Reply
darksoul
Knight
Posts: 318
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 8:15 am

Questions: Luck, fumbles, magic.

Post by darksoul » Mon Oct 14, 2013 4:58 am

Now that I've fully read the book I feel I can ask questions which won't already have answers in the main book.

1) The original fighting fantasy books penalized you for failing to test your luck in combat. This is omitted in the new AFF 2e. There is no drawback for failing a luck test to do more damage to an enemy(in ff you would do 1 less point of damage), or failing to do less damage to yourself(in FF you would take 1 extra point of damage). Is this an omission or intentional design. If I add in something like this into my game will it unbalance things?

2)The section on using luck in combat states that if the hero has already used luck to hit his opponent, then he cannot use it again to make an increased damage roll. The book makes no mention of using luck to hit an opponent(except for the section where it says you can make a luck roll to substitute a skill roll) I've never even considered this as an option for a character, mainly because of how FF books are told. They only let you use luck in combat to do extra damge. It's not something I thought a player could do. I think it's important that this is clarified more in the book, unless this rule is a mistake.
If the rule is correct and a player can make a luck roll for any skill tests, then it seems that this means that a player can test his luck to make a magic spell roll as well, and he would not have to roll on the oops table. Unless, failing a test of luck would mean an automatic fumble and oops table check.

3)Combat and skill checks have rules for automatic success and fail, with the effects either penalizing or benefiting the player. Casting spells only acknowledges a fumble or oops roll as being special. Is this an omission or is magic already powerful enough that it doesn't need an auto-success roll that does improved effect?

Mr Nibbs
Knight
Posts: 256
Joined: Wed May 08, 2013 1:09 pm

Re: Questions: Luck, fumbles, magic.

Post by Mr Nibbs » Mon Oct 14, 2013 11:16 pm

darksoul wrote:Now that I've fully read the book I feel I can ask questions which won't already have answers in the main book.

1) The original fighting fantasy books penalized you for failing to test your luck in combat. This is omitted in the new AFF 2e. There is no drawback for failing a luck test to do more damage to an enemy(in ff you would do 1 less point of damage), or failing to do less damage to yourself(in FF you would take 1 extra point of damage). Is this an omission or intentional design. If I add in something like this into my game will it unbalance things?

2)The section on using luck in combat states that if the hero has already used luck to hit his opponent, then he cannot use it again to make an increased damage roll. The book makes no mention of using luck to hit an opponent(except for the section where it says you can make a luck roll to substitute a skill roll) I've never even considered this as an option for a character, mainly because of how FF books are told. They only let you use luck in combat to do extra damge. It's not something I thought a player could do. I think it's important that this is clarified more in the book, unless this rule is a mistake.
If the rule is correct and a player can make a luck roll for any skill tests, then it seems that this means that a player can test his luck to make a magic spell roll as well, and he would not have to roll on the oops table. Unless, failing a test of luck would mean an automatic fumble and oops table check.

3)Combat and skill checks have rules for automatic success and fail, with the effects either penalizing or benefiting the player. Casting spells only acknowledges a fumble or oops roll as being special. Is this an omission or is magic already powerful enough that it doesn't need an auto-success roll that does improved effect?
1. It looks like intentional design, as the FF rule has been replaced and characters now have skill bonuses to increase or reduce damage. The bad luck is covered in the fumble and oops table.



2. It looks like the intention here is that you can use a luck test as a substitute for a to hit roll or a damage roll, i.e. a lucky hit. Also, if a character is using luck, then it makes sense that skill bonuses will not be applied, as these are based on using a skill.

I would suggest that spellcasting is not about being lucky, and the spell would be cast correctly, with the oops table being a fail. I think it makes more sense to have the defender make a luck roll to reduce the spells effect.

3. I think spellcasters are at a disadvantage in combat compared to a fighter, which makes perfect sense. Magic is powerful in other ways, and spellcasters are probably more versatile than a typical fighter.

darksoul
Knight
Posts: 318
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 8:15 am

Re: Questions: Luck, fumbles, magic.

Post by darksoul » Sun Oct 20, 2013 2:03 am

Mr Nibbs wrote: 1. It looks like intentional design, as the FF rule has been replaced and characters now have skill bonuses to increase or reduce damage. The bad luck is covered in the fumble and oops table.


2. It looks like the intention here is that you can use a luck test as a substitute for a to hit roll or a damage roll, i.e. a lucky hit. Also, if a character is using luck, then it makes sense that skill bonuses will not be applied, as these are based on using a skill.

I would suggest that spellcasting is not about being lucky, and the spell would be cast correctly, with the oops table being a fail. I think it makes more sense to have the defender make a luck roll to reduce the spells effect.

3. I think spellcasters are at a disadvantage in combat compared to a fighter, which makes perfect sense. Magic is powerful in other ways, and spellcasters are probably more versatile than a typical fighter.
I don't remember which skill bonuses increase or reduce damage? Do you mean the character who isn't making the luck roll can alter their damage? I'm thinking of putting the failed luck results back into my game so I'd like to make sure I don't have other rules to consider.
A fumble/oops table result is due to a failed skill check so it's not exactly due to bad luck.

Thing is, if I say that spellcasting isn't about being lucky, then I'd have to say the same about other knowledge skill rolls. The way I looked at it, the luck roll doesn't mean the wizard is doing something impossible. The Wizard can still cast the spell but perhaps he has forgotten a word or something and needs to guess the right word to cast it. I'd still allow the defender to make his defensive rolls.

Mr Nibbs
Knight
Posts: 256
Joined: Wed May 08, 2013 1:09 pm

Re: Questions: Luck, fumbles, magic.

Post by Mr Nibbs » Thu Oct 24, 2013 6:03 pm

darksoul wrote:I don't remember which skill bonuses increase or reduce damage? Do you mean the character who isn't making the luck roll can alter their damage? I'm thinking of putting the failed luck results back into my game so I'd like to make sure I don't have other rules to consider.
A fumble/oops table result is due to a failed skill check so it's not exactly due to bad luck.

Thing is, if I say that spellcasting isn't about being lucky, then I'd have to say the same about other knowledge skill rolls. The way I looked at it, the luck roll doesn't mean the wizard is doing something impossible. The Wizard can still cast the spell but perhaps he has forgotten a word or something and needs to guess the right word to cast it. I'd still allow the defender to make his defensive rolls.
I may have misinterpreted something and probably should have written "increase the chance of doing damage" but I meant weapon skills. I think that's a separate check. Sometimes you need to customise the rules to suit your game.

Failing a skill check is pretty bad luck...Luck is used as a random factor when applying knowledge and abilities under pressure, and reflects the difficulty of the situation compared with the character's base skill level, which reflects optimum conditions.

Personally, I think a spellcaster who is hoping to ignore the hissing arrows and clanging swords, remain calm and recite a spell correctly first time is going to need a little luck... weapon fatigue and an unlucky hit can break a weapon... a break in concentration can cause a fumble... I think luck is meant to reflect little things like these in a general way, rather than a result of something the character does.

Post Reply