Are Oaths too general for triggers?

[Sociotard]

Our Ch'i weilding martial artist has +1 variable advantage (any + 1/2 advantage one at a time) on his HKA, simulating a variety of ch'i attacks. He came up with one application that I let him do at the time, but told him I'd think it over and might change my mind. The party had captured a minor villian, and, after he begged for his life, decided to use him to infiltrate the bad guy's base. Then they started worrying that the NPC would double-cross them, so the Ch'i user said:

"I place my hand around his throat. Do you want me to roll to grab him?"

"Naw. He's bound and trying to be submissive"

*roleplaying* "Swear on your life that you will not betray us!"

*roleplaying* "I Swear! I swear on my life I won't betray you!"

*Roleplaying* "See that you don't. I just placed a curse on you. Oh, don't quiver. You'll live. Probably wind up with a nice quiet life somewhere. Unless you break your oath. In which case your head falls off."

"Um, hold on, I have your character sheet here. You don't have any curse powers."

"I set my advantage to "trigger: trigger can be changed each time". My current trigger is "target breaks his oath". He didn't have any neck armor at the time I used it, so if he ever breaks that oath, my 2d6 HKA, 4d6 with strength, will be brought down on his throat. Considering that's a vital shot, I doubt he'll survive. If he doesn't betray us and lives till we're done with his master, I'll use my dispel ch'i power on him, undoing his curse"

 

Eveyone thought that was pretty cool, so I let him do it. just that once. I'm just not sure that "oathbreaking" is sufficiently concrete to base a trigger on. Isn't that kind of subjective? Like "doing something evil".

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: Are Oaths too general for triggers?

 

My problem with it wouldn't be the use of Trigger... it would be his assumption that his attack would still get the benefit of the target's helpless condition, even if the target was no longer helpless when the Trigger went off. If he wants the target to get no defenses against it later, then it needs to be NND or something, IMO.

[Sociotard]

Re: Are Oaths too general for triggers?

 

So wait, you think that if he puts armor around his neck (chainmail, perhaps) it should still mitigate the effects of the curse? I mean, clearly any natural rPD the character had would still apply, maybe even combat luck, but I can't see any focus based armor working. Maybe something that changed his personal physiology temporarily, like drinking a stony-flesh potion, but no normal armor would work.

[OddHat]

Re: Are Oaths too general for triggers?

 

I would not have allowed it based on special effects, but that's just my preference as a GM: I can't recall seeing that particular use of a Chi power in the many dozens of Wuxia films I've seen, or reading about it. Still, maybe Chiun or Remo could manage it, and there are similar things, so my mind could be changed.

 

If I did allow it, I'm with Dereck. No free hit location. The crook breaks his word and triggers the attack if he thinks he has broken his word, at which point it's a generic KA.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Are Oaths too general for triggers?

 

I don't think that an Oath is too general for a trigger. However, the rules for Trigger in 5E state that it cannot rely on any senses that the character does not possess. This means that the betrayal must be pretty obvious; if the villain can tip off the other villains with a code-phrase or with a language the hero (okay, character ... this guy doesn't sound like a hero to me) doesn't know, then the Trigger won't go off.

 

Whether it's a curse or not, unless it's bought with some Advantage to the contrary, then the attack will be a normal HKA and subject to all the good news and bad news that entails; if the target straps on 50rPD of armor around his neck, he's in good shape. In this case, it's game mechanics; if he wanted the attack to bypass armor, he needed Penetrating or NND/AVLD Does Body, or just another attack entirely (Body Drain).

 

Does your campaign normally use Hit Locations? If not, then the neck location is irrelevant anyway.

[Zanthis]

Re: Are Oaths too general for triggers?

 

First, the "trigger" won't work like he wants:

 

1) He hasn't taken the attack yet. He just set the trigger. When the trigger condition is met the attack will then occur (requiring a to hit roll, etc).

 

2) I'm not convinced it would work unless the Martial Artist was in range at the time the Trigger is triggered. If the martial artist was in range however when the oath was broken, then a fist or foot might suddenly shoot out from him and strike the poor villian. It would likely be a surprise to the MA and could be a problem if he was doing something important (climbing a ladder) at the time.

 

3) Further, if he changes the Variable Advantage to something other than Trigger, the existing set trigger will go away, freeing the target of the "curse".

 

4) As already mentioned, he must be able to perceive the event in order for the trigger to work so it would have to be pretty obvious.

 

Clever thought on the player's part, and with some extra points spent he could come up with a workable "curse" Chi power. But I don't believe this fits the bill.

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: Are Oaths too general for triggers?

 

So wait' date=' you think that if he puts armor around his neck (chainmail, perhaps) it should still mitigate the effects of the curse?[/quote']Yes. I know that sounds nonsensical, but it's because of the way the power is bought. The attack wasn't being allowed to evade defenses because of anything innate in the power (like an NND advantage)... it was being allowed to evade defenses because of the circumstances (the target was held down and helpless). If those circumstances are no longer true when the power triggers, then their effects should no longer apply.

 

The problem is that a curse wouldn't be based on circumstances. If he wants a curse that always avoids defenses, then he needs to take NND or something like it, IMO.

[SSJ Archon]

Re: Are Oaths too general for triggers?

 

In any case, I would want to know if the baddie believed him or not. A pretty good bluff.

[rebeccared50]

Re: Are Oaths too general for triggers?

 

Mmmm... sounds like something I would let go once (as long as I felt it wasn't game unbalancing and good for the storyline) and I would ask the group for a consensus (later) on how it might have been done better. And yes, I think I would want the "breaking of the oath" to be fairly obvious for the curse to go off.

[Sociotard]

Re: Are Oaths too general for triggers?

 

I would not have allowed it based on special effects' date=' but that's just my preference as a GM: I can't recall seeing that particular use of a Chi power in the many dozens of Wuxia films I've seen, or reading about it. Still, maybe Chiun or Remo could manage it, and there are similar things, so my mind could be changed.[/quote'] I really don't know enough about ch'i to make any call based solely on SFX. I just think of it as Martial Arts based magic. I once saw a cartoon where an old master became immortal because he kept his Ch'i so in tune with his surroundings that he drew life from nature itself. He couldn't move anymore because he was rooted to the ground, but he was immortal. Once things like that can happen, I say anything goes.

If I did allow it, I'm with Dereck. No free hit location. The crook breaks his word and triggers the attack if he thinks he has broken his word, at which point it's a generic KA.

I think I'm starting to agree with you on this. I'll tell the player. Besides, it's still 4d6 damage, more than enough to get the average dude bleeding to death, if nothing else.

I don't think that an Oath is too general for a trigger. However' date=' the rules for Trigger in 5E state that it cannot rely on any senses that the character does not possess. This means that the betrayal must be pretty obvious; if the villain can tip off the other villains with a code-phrase or with a language the hero doesn't know, then the Trigger won't go off.[/quote']That is a good point. I'll tell the character he may want to add some sort of detect to cover this in the future.

(okay, character ... this guy doesn't sound like a hero to me)

I don't know. Most hero's I've seen on TV don't mind guarding prisoners with a gun at their head or a knife in their back. It's just prudent. And yes, we used declared hit location rules. I don't bother with them for generalised attacks.

First, the "trigger" won't work like he wants:

 

1) He hasn't taken the attack yet. He just set the trigger. When the trigger condition is met the attack will then occur (requiring a to hit roll, etc).

True. Point taken.

2) I'm not convinced it would work unless the Martial Artist was in range at the time the Trigger is triggered. If the martial artist was in range however when the oath was broken, then a fist or foot might suddenly shoot out from him and strike the poor villian. It would likely be a surprise to the MA and could be a problem if he was doing something important (climbing a ladder) at the time.

I don't think range matters. The trigger example in FREd shows a wizard leaving an AOE entangle with a trigger (if person enters and doesn't invoke a password). The wizard doesn't have to be in range for this to happen.

3) Further, if he changes the Variable Advantage to something other than Trigger, the existing set trigger will go away, freeing the target of the "curse".

I'm going to disagree again. Trigger means that a power has been "prepared and activated, but not yet used". When he set the curse, he had to pay END. The attack had already been put into place. I wouldn't rule that he couldn't reallocate his advantage later if he wanted to.

In any case' date=' I would want to know if the baddie believed him or not. A pretty good bluff. [/quote'] He believed the threat, but as soon as I thought it was a good time for the action to start, his loyalty to his master won over his fear of death, he called for the guards, and his neck exploded.

[Sociotard]

Re: Are Oaths too general for triggers?

 

Oh, and one more Item I've reminded my character, any trigger should be visible to some sense, and defusable. I told him that anyone with ch'i senses could possibly notice there was somthing around the guy's throat, and maybe defuse it with a power skill roll.

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Are Oaths too general for triggers?

 

re: The Neck Armour thing.

 

He can set more than one trigger, surely?

At that point, it's going to take magic neck armour for him to survive, and maybe that _should_ save him.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Are Oaths too general for triggers?

 

Had he bought the trigger/variable advantage to cover his STRENGTH damage too? Expensive...

 

I'd allow this as is. Look, you've got him helpless, you could kill him anyway. It is a good way to give characters a way out of that final solution. I wouldn't allow 'real' armour put on afterwards to protect: it wasn't there when the trigger was put actually on his neck, similarly I would not require a seperate roll to hit or hit location penalty if you allowed him to put his hand around the mook's neck. Imagine you'd defined it as strapping an explosive necklace tightly around the guy's neck...

 

Very relevant about the way to 'diffuse' it. If you assume that the curse is at least partly psychosomatic then anything that allowed the mook to believe the curse had been lifted would probably get rid of it (a really convincing argument by the main villain, for instance), as would the appropriate dispel, and maybe a few other SFX based things (like washing your neck in a scared river).

 

Trouble is this is likely to get abused when the player realised that it can be used as a lie detector, or whatever, blowing fingers off and suchlike. Solution to that one, IMO comes down to how trigger works: I'd specify that the player had to make the target aware of the consequences of the curse before it could be put on...if the mook doesn't agree to not double cross them, knowing in the knowledge of the consequences ahead of time then it doesn't work. Given the chance to run away, the average mook would probably take the curse, but at least it hands control back to the GM.

 

If you just didn't want it at all, you say that it can only work on the mook's perception, and the curse can not take effect unless the character has some sense that allows them to read minds or motivations.

 

Otherwise you have the silly situation that the mook can go into a dark room and write out a warning to the villain, put it in an envelope, hand it over then leave before it is opened, and escape the consequences.

[Zanthis]

Re: Are Oaths too general for triggers?

 

Otherwise you have the silly situation that the mook can go into a dark room and write out a warning to the villain, put it in an envelope, hand it over then leave before it is opened, and escape the consequences.

A situation that would occur only if the mook happened to have KS: HERO 5th Edition rules 15- and made a check to reveal that the power that had just been used on him was a trigger rather than a summon invisible "curse" creature to observer (physically and mentally) that the mook doesn't break the oath. I cannot, as a GM, justify to myself (or my players) a mook ever pulling this off. Do it to Dr. D on the other hand and yes he'll find a way to break it given a bit of time to think on it.

 

I don't have my book on me, so I cannot read up on the details of trigger ATM, but I seem to recall the AOE explosion example. However, I also have a recollection of range being required on a power set by a trigger on a moving target (a person) versus a stationary target (the spot right in front of a door) which would not require a ranged power. Of course, that could also just be an old house rule mucking things up in my memory .

 

As far as the to hit roll goes, I'd be fairly strict on this power because it is a variable advantage and not a standard power of the character. I think fudging the rules for dramatic effect in this case gives a flexible power too much benefit. It's flexibility should be its benefit. In cases like adding AP or Double Knockback, the extra cost of the Variable Advantage reduces the overall effect of the power. But in cases such as Trigger or Variable Special Effect (inside Variable Advantage) for example, effects can occur that far eclipse the value of the Variable Advantage. This I believe is one of those cases.

 

Munchkin fun with Trigger: Nano Grenades

1 pip HKA [5 Base Cost] Area Effect (5" Radius, Selective Target, +1 1/4), Penetrating (+1/2), Variable Advantage (+3 3/4 Advantages, +7 1/2) [Active Points 51]; Charges (4, -1), Concentration (1/2 DCV, -1/4), Extra Time (Full Phase, -1/2), OAF (Grenade, -1), No STR Bonus (-1/2) [Real Points 12]

 

Standard setup for the 3 3/4 points worth of advantages would be:

Affects Desolid (Only Spirits, +1/4)

Autofire (40 shots, Nonstandard Attack, +3)

Variable Special Effect (Any SFX, +1/2)

 

Occasional setup for 3 3/4 points worth of advantages:

Affects Desolid (Any form, +1/2)

Megascale (1" = 1000km, +1)

Penetrating (4 more for a total of 5, +2)

Trigger (Set Trigger: "I touch or look at you with intent to kill", +1/4)

 

Using the occasional setup, trigger it say 300 or so times over the course of a few days (its radius is greater than that of Earth) and anyone you meet from then on will die instantly when you touch or look at them and wish for them to die. As a bonus, you can still use the grenades against non-terrestrial foes in their standard nearly-as-lethal configuration.