Ryhope Wood Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 Hi Steve Thanks for the short and sweet answer to my question. I probably shouldn't have posed it that way - sorry! My follow on question is that in order to cover both types of intimidation, would it be better to buy bonuses to both EGO and to resist Presence attacke like fear? If one is likely to be more common, which is the most important to have? Also would it be reasonable as a GM to give a bonus to resist Presence attacks for have a stronger EGO characteristic roll and if so - what would be reasonable to do? Thanks Ian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Long Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 Re: EGO Rolls and PRE Attacks (2) That strikes me as more of a GMing or character creation issue than a rules one, so I'm going to move this over to Discussion to allow other people to offer opinions and ideas. As my contribution, I'll point out that the rules for Presence Attacks allow a character to use his PRE or EGO, whichever he prefers, to resist a Presence Attack. If you, the GM, wanted to rule that for those purposes, Skill Levels with EGO Rolls count as, say, +3 EGO, I doubt anyone will send the Gaming Police after you. Note: if someone does, in fact, call the Gaming Police on you, remember that the Game Cops can be bribed with d6-shaped brownies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryhope Wood Posted March 2, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 Re: EGO Rolls and PRE Attacks (2) Thanks again Steve! It would be useful to expand the discussion to ask other GMs what they use EGO characteristic rolls for? I'm thinking the best thing to do would be to purchase +5 EGO with an appropriate limitation that would allow it to be used for EGO rolls and to resist presence attacks only (say -1). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Waters Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 Re: EGO Rolls and PRE Attacks (2) Why not buy extra PRE, which is cheaper, and call it 'EGO', as a sfx? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fabricati Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 Re: EGO Rolls and PRE Attacks (2) Why not buy extra PRE' date=' which is cheaper, and call it 'EGO', as a sfx?[/quote'] Well, I always liked the idea of someone who is quiet, reserved, nevertheless impossible to shake (many mages are like this), because Ego does not make one more impressive, but PRE attacks are resisted as the better of Ego or Presence. If the character is naturally impressive as opposed to merely willful, buying up PRE makes sense. If the opposite is true, then Ego makes more sense (and helps later if you buy off the Limitation/Skill Roll). In short, it's a little clunky to buy up your PRE when what you're resisting with is EGO. I'm tempted to call it a -2 Limitation, "Only to Resist PRE attacks", and let him buy up as much as he likes (in lots of two points gets you three). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Waters Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 Re: EGO Rolls and PRE Attacks (2) Absolutely - extra PRE 'only to resist PRE attacks' seems indistinguishable from extra EGO with the same limitation. Actually, although it makes 'kinda' sense I never really liked PRE attacks being resisted by PRE or EGO. It should be one or the other IMO. Probably EGO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fabricati Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 Re: EGO Rolls and PRE Attacks (2) Not quite- then it would be -3; EGO has one big thing up on PRE for Presence Attacks. EGO also supplies your Breakout for PRE damage, just like everything else. Hence, -2. It can actually help a lot when you're hit by someone's 70 damage PRE attack and not only do you get hit for a 'mere' +30, your Breakout is say around 14-, because your EGO for this purpose is 40. You'll probably get to move before therest of your party, and if you're the spellcaster or mentalist, that means you have just saved your own bacon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Neilson Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 Re: EGO Rolls and PRE Attacks (2) There is no breakout roll for presence attacks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Waters Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 Re: EGO Rolls and PRE Attacks (2) Hugh is quite right, although some sort of breakout mechanism might be quite useful - as 'how long does a PRE attack last' is a question that has vexed our minds for some time. Well, my mind anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tech Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 Re: EGO Rolls and PRE Attacks (2) Hugh is quite right' date=' although some sort of breakout mechanism might be quite useful - as 'how long does a PRE attack last' is a question that has vexed our minds for some time. Well, my mind anyway.[/quote'] It lasts as long as necessary or until you bring the GM food, whichever comes first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Waters Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 Re: EGO Rolls and PRE Attacks (2) It lasts as long as necessary or until you bring the GM food' date=' whichever comes first. [/quote'] Does throwing soft fruit count? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CUnknown Posted March 5, 2009 Report Share Posted March 5, 2009 Re: EGO Rolls and PRE Attacks (2) Well, it kind of has to be both PRE or EGO, whichever is greater, at least the way I do things. Certain types of creatures (giants, say) have a really high PRE but a low EGO, and they are of course brave. A giant wouldn't be scared by a little human most of the time, although I suppose elephants are scared of mice... I think they just have a Vulnerability to PRE attacks v mice, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Waters Posted March 6, 2009 Report Share Posted March 6, 2009 Re: EGO Rolls and PRE Attacks (2) PRE (defensive only -1) is 'bravery', IMO. I don't think you need EGO for this - it complicates things unnecessarily IMO. I understand the logic, I just don;t agree with using it that way systemically. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Neilson Posted March 6, 2009 Report Share Posted March 6, 2009 Re: EGO Rolls and PRE Attacks (2) Well' date=' it kind of has to be both PRE or EGO, whichever is greater, at least the way I do things. Certain types of creatures (giants, say) have a really high PRE but a low EGO, and they are of course brave. A giant wouldn't be scared by a little human most of the time, although I suppose elephants are scared of mice... I think they just have a Vulnerability to PRE attacks v mice, though. [/quote'] It does not have to be the higher of PRE or EGO, any more than CON needs to be the higher of STR or BOD. When I build a very durable, or very tough, character, I buy him CON to go with his STR or BOD. I can just as easily build a high PRE, low EGO character with +X EGO, only to resist PRE attacks. Why should it be impossible to have a Cowardly Lion or a fearful con man? Either would have a high PRE, but limited defense against PRE attacks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Utech Posted March 6, 2009 Report Share Posted March 6, 2009 Re: EGO Rolls and PRE Attacks (2) PRE (defensive only -1) is 'bravery'' date=' IMO.[/quote'] Or stupidity. There's a fine line, you know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Waters Posted March 6, 2009 Report Share Posted March 6, 2009 Re: EGO Rolls and PRE Attacks (2) Or stupidity. There's a fine line' date=' you know. [/quote'] ...and I'm all over it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Neilson Posted March 7, 2009 Report Share Posted March 7, 2009 Re: EGO Rolls and PRE Attacks (2) Or stupidity. There's a fine line' date=' you know. [/quote'] "I do not know the meaning of the word Fear" "Yes, the substantial lacks in your vocabulary have not gone unnoticed. We'll work on that one right after 'Personal Hygiene', OK?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Waters Posted March 7, 2009 Report Share Posted March 7, 2009 Re: EGO Rolls and PRE Attacks (2) "I do not know the meaning of the word Fear" "Yes, the substantial lacks in your vocabulary have not gone unnoticed. We'll work on that one right after 'Personal Hygiene', OK?" Whenever I see one of those t-shirts with 'No Fear' emblazoned across them, I want to add a K and a W: Know Fear. Much more appropriate, I think Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IndianaJoe3 Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Re: EGO Rolls and PRE Attacks (2) Absolutely - extra PRE 'only to resist PRE attacks' seems indistinguishable from extra EGO with the same limitation. Actually, although it makes 'kinda' sense I never really liked PRE attacks being resisted by PRE or EGO. It should be one or the other IMO. Probably EGO. I've considered creating a new Figured Characteristic specifically to resist Presence Attacks - WILL. It defaults to the higher of EGO or PRE, and 2 points of WILL would cost 1 character point. Like any other Figured Characteristic, it may be sold back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveZilla Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Re: EGO Rolls and PRE Attacks (2) PRE (defensive only -1) is 'bravery'' date=' IMO. I don't think you need EGO for this - it complicates things unnecessarily IMO. I understand the logic, I just don;t agree with using it that way systemically.[/quote'] I respectfully disagree with your definition of Bravery as it applies to PRE. IMO Bravery is doing what needs to be done *despite* fear, which takes willpower, which is EGO. EGO - Only Vs Intimidation/Fear(-2) is more appropriate IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Waters Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Re: EGO Rolls and PRE Attacks (2) I respectfully disagree with your definition of Bravery as it applies to PRE. IMO Bravery is doing what needs to be done *despite* fear, which takes willpower, which is EGO. EGO - Only Vs Intimidation/Fear(-2) is more appropriate IMO. I think PRE is simply a facet of your character that incorporates elements of will, as is EGO. Having high PRE can certainly mean you are so self confident that you don't give much credence to threats against you but it might also mean that you are able to put on a brave face despite feeling the fear. My problem with the current system is that it is unnecessary to use either PRE or EGO - we are better off picking just one. I mean, arguably you should be able to resist being stunned with EGO, but we don't do either/or with CON. Specifically PRE attacks are not necessarily 'fear' they can be all kinds of manipulation or emotions. Having a high EGO doesn't necessarily mean you are not going to be taken in by trickery. Sure, I can see a direct 'attack' being resisted by EGO, but if you are not aware that you are under attack - if, for instance, the PRE attack is based on the 'attacker' being apparently innocent and harmless, encouraging you to calm down and stop attacking, I do not see EGO as particularly relevant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveZilla Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Re: EGO Rolls and PRE Attacks (2) My problem with the current system is that it is unnecessary to use either PRE or EGO - we are better off picking just one. I agree -- EGO. Specifically PRE attacks are not necessarily 'fear' they can be all kinds of manipulation or emotions. True, not all PRE attacks are attempting to motivate though fear -- or intimidation. But IMO it's one of the most frequent uses of the PRE Attack. Having a high EGO doesn't necessarily mean you are not going to be taken in by trickery. IMO, in the absence of a WIS Characteristic, it can easily mean that. Sure' date=' I can see a direct 'attack' being resisted by EGO, but if you are not aware that you are under attack - if, for instance, the PRE attack is based on the 'attacker' being apparently innocent and harmless, encouraging you to calm down and stop attacking, I do not see EGO as particularly relevant.[/quote'] Given that description, I don't see how *any* stat would be relevant to resist that (apparently) NND PRE Attack. The thing is, I don't buy the idea of High PRE and Low EGO. To me, a person who has a high PRE will very likely have a strong will (EGO) because to me PRE is mainly the external expression *of* that strong will. Show me a character/person who has a low EGO and I'd be willing to bet they also don't excel in the PRE arena. IMO it is possible to have a high EGO and a low PRE -- the character simply chooses not to express their willfulness. Donald Trump: Strong Will, Strong PRE Steve Urkel: Low Will, Low PRE (I am not sure about this one because I'm not real familiar with the character.) Kwai Chang Caine: Strong Will, Low PRE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Waters Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 Re: EGO Rolls and PRE Attacks (2) ................. Given that description, I don't see how *any* stat would be relevant to resist that (apparently) NND PRE Attack. Why not PRE? PRE is the characteristic that deals with how we are perceived by others and how we perceive others, at least in 'social' terms. Someone who is good at social skills would likely see through a 'trust me I'm harmless' scam, just as they would be used to dealing with people trying to intimidate them. The thing is, I don't buy the idea of High PRE and Low EGO. To me, a person who has a high PRE will very likely have a strong will (EGO) because to me PRE is mainly the external expression *of* that strong will. Show me a character/person who has a low EGO and I'd be willing to bet they also don't excel in the PRE arena. IMO it is possible to have a high EGO and a low PRE -- the character simply chooses not to express their willfulness. Donald Trump: Strong Will, Strong PRE Steve Urkel: Low Will, Low PRE (I am not sure about this one because I'm not real familiar with the character.) Kwai Chang Caine: Strong Will, Low PRE What about the boys from Jackass? Plenty of bravery there, of a certain sort, but where is the EGO (in Hero terms)? I don't see them resisting much. I'd say low EGO, high PRE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Neilson Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 Re: EGO Rolls and PRE Attacks (2) Part of the problem is that we don't really have a "wisdom" stat. We have psychological limitations that indicate a lack of wisdom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Waters Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 Re: EGO Rolls and PRE Attacks (2) Part of the problem is that we don't really have a "wisdom" stat. We have psychological limitations that indicate a lack of wisdom. I don't see that as a problem - a wisdom stat is a catch all anyway. We have EGO, we have PRE and we have INT too, and we have skills that can be used to detect falsehood and manipulation. Unfortunately we also have PRE attacks which simply ignore all that good stuff. We may be looking at the problem from completely the wrong angle. I mean, PRE attacks don't exist in comics, do they? Batman terrifies crooks because of his reputation. Captain America gets respect from soldiers and certain civilians because of who he is and what he has done for his Country. Galactus is huge and terrifying because he eats planets. None of this requires PRE attacks, just decent role playing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.