Spreading an Entangle...

[Delthrien]

In a situation where a character wishes to spread an entangle,

how does "spreading" affect the DEF/BODY of the entangle? Since normally, spreading an attack subtracts 1 DC per +1 OCV(or per hex it's spread), how would you work that out for the entangle?

 

Right now I'm leaning toward alternating between reducing the BODY then the DEF per OCV bonus (or hex traversed).

 

For example: a 5d6/5DEF Entangel is being used to attack 3 targets. The targets are spread out over 5 hexes (i.e., one empty hex between each target). In order to cover all the targets, the Entangle is reduced 4DCs to be able to hit the two additional targets which would drop it to a 3d6/3DEF entangle (-1d6 for the first hex, -1 DEF for the second, -1d6 for the third, -1DEF for the fourth).

 

Does this sound right or am I grossly off somewhere?

[Tom McCarthy]

I'd leave the DEF the same, but reduce the dice of BODY, 1 die per hex to fill. Yep, they just won't spread far.

 

Of course, there may be serious game balance issues here; agents just won't break out of a DEF 5 entangle, even with 1 BODY.

[Killer Shrike]

I believe that there are already rules as part of Entangle to cover 1 hex per body of the Entangle. That may only be for making walls with Entangle, cant recall off hand (need more coffee )

 

I dont have my book handy, but someone who does might check that out to see if thats true.

[Delthrien]

If memory serves...

 

... and it rarely does, I think the option to use it as a barrier allows you to cover 3 hex sides (i.e., one hex wide) with the normal BODY/DEF of the entangle. This would just create the barrier, not actually entangle anyone. It was suggested, for the sake of reducing the book keeping, that extending the barrier an additional hex would merely drop the BODY/DEF by -1d6/-1 DEF, instead of the normal 1DC per hex as in a spread energy blast... I think. The downside of not having FREd on hand.

 

Charlie "FREd-less at work" Ball