User avatar
lupex
Posts: 544
Joined: Sun 08 Oct 2017, 13:16

Re: Path of the Shield clarification

Fri 12 Apr 2019, 12:03

... I would be a bit annoyed as it would negate my action.
Negate your action? The protected player would get a double chance of reducing the damage:
Damage = Damage - "Your parry" - "Victims parry / dodge" - "Armor rating"

assuming you both have average stats this could be 15 dice, giving a chance of
  • 94% of reducing 1 damage
  • 74% of reducing 2 damage
  • 47% of reducing 3 damage
  • 23% of reducing 4 damage
  • 9% of reducing 5 damage
If someone attacks a friend and I step in front to intercept the blow but it still hits them, then yes my action is negated. But again that is just my perception.

The main issue I have is why would you not rule in favour of what the player wants to achieve if it isn't unreasonable? This system is brutal enough as it is.
My Forbidden Lands Session Generator - https://perchance.org/fl-session-generator
(Legends, Villages, Castles, Dungeons and NPCs)

My Forbidden Lands Monster Generator - https://perchance.org/fl-monster-generator
 
User avatar
Valyar
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon 18 Feb 2019, 22:41

Re: Path of the Shield clarification

Sun 14 Apr 2019, 08:35

I would allow the PC to position itself between the attacked and the defender and take the damage if there are actions remaining to do so. The logic is that an ally is in NEAR range and the enemy already has engaged him at ARMS REACH, therefore to fully take the him, rather just to parry and hope to negate some successes, there should be some movement involved.

If the person with the shield is engaged with another one... there is excellent opportunity for his opponent to land a free attack as part of the move (as retreat action is not reaction).
 
Kjarl
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu 04 Apr 2019, 10:22

Re: Path of the Shield clarification

Thu 18 Apr 2019, 11:12

There seems to be a lot of disagreement on the rules surrounding this talent. As a player, I was surprised when I used my saved action to “parry “player 1’s” opponent for him and found myself taking the damage from the hit. I had pushed the roll to try to alleviate as much damage from the squishy as possible and then “wham” I took the non parried damage as well which left me totally broken

I agree with deep impact here. I would picture the turn here as; gm declares attack against “player 1” the fighter with path of the shield and either defender or a saved action says “wait a minute, I’m parrying for “player 1” and rolls for his parry. He fails to cancel all the damage despite his best efforts reaching out with his shield. “Player 1” seeing the hand axe is still coming for his head, uses his saved action to attempt to parry what the fighter was unable to. He is able to deflect more of the damage and with his gear die roll for armor only ends up taking 1 point of damage and some damage to his studded leather.

The system is brutal enough as it is eh?

Can we get some kind of official ruling on this?
 
User avatar
lupex
Posts: 544
Joined: Sun 08 Oct 2017, 13:16

Re: Path of the Shield clarification

Thu 18 Apr 2019, 17:04

But what if player 1 doesn't have any actions left, he then wouldn't be able to parry as well?
My Forbidden Lands Session Generator - https://perchance.org/fl-session-generator
(Legends, Villages, Castles, Dungeons and NPCs)

My Forbidden Lands Monster Generator - https://perchance.org/fl-monster-generator
 
User avatar
Eldhierta
Posts: 367
Joined: Thu 19 Feb 2015, 10:39

Re: Path of the Shield clarification

Thu 18 Apr 2019, 20:43

Not to be a dick here, but I'd argue that someone trying to parry for you would either take the hit themselves (since they throw themselves between the two combatants) or cancel the intended target's chance to parry, or at the very least making it more difficult since it makes it harder to see what your enemy is doing. I think the original idea of the talent is to make it possible to protect those who have already spent their actions or those too weak to protect themselves.
 
User avatar
lupex
Posts: 544
Joined: Sun 08 Oct 2017, 13:16

Re: Path of the Shield clarification

Thu 18 Apr 2019, 21:10

That is how I have ruled it, others disagree. But at the end of the day it's all down to interpretation and what is most fun for your game.
My Forbidden Lands Session Generator - https://perchance.org/fl-session-generator
(Legends, Villages, Castles, Dungeons and NPCs)

My Forbidden Lands Monster Generator - https://perchance.org/fl-monster-generator
 
User avatar
Gaddeborg
Posts: 146
Joined: Tue 18 Feb 2014, 17:40

Re: Path of the Shield clarification

Fri 19 Apr 2019, 20:54

I would rule everything in favour of the player that has invested in Path of the Shield and is spending WP. The player gets to decide whether the damage is absorbed by her/him or the original target, and I would also allow it as an "extra" parry if the original target already has failed a parry. Path of the Blade is extremely useful, so I think the defensive version should be as un-nerfed as possible. 

With houseruling, I would also extend Path of the Shield to be useful with dodging as well as parrying at the two higher levels. 
 
Derp_Stevenson
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri 11 Jan 2019, 20:19

Re: Path of the Shield clarification

Wed 24 Apr 2019, 16:31

Path of the Shield says you can parry the attack for the ally, not that you become the target of the attack. So RAW it seems pretty straightforward that it's just the parry, and any damage that gets through still applies to the original target.

That being said, having the Path of the Shield fighter get to intercept the attack is about the most harmless house rule there is, and for many tables i'm sure it would make the game more fun to have that "tank" investment pay off in a more powerful way. 
 
User avatar
Tomas
Site Admin
Posts: 4461
Joined: Fri 08 Apr 2011, 11:31

Re: Path of the Shield clarification

Fri 10 May 2019, 12:05

I find the rules for path of the shield a bit unclear. The way I envision it the gm is declaring his attack against a player. The fighter with path of the shield uses his saved action and wp to use path of the shield to “parry his attack for him”. I would think since the original attack was made against another player the fighters parry roll would cancel out damage against the original target, any pushing damage would be taken by the fighter and any uncancelled damage would go against the original target of the attack. Who does the non-parried damage go to, the original target of the attack or the fighter who is using his path of the shield to parry the attack made against another player? 

Please clarify,
The intention is that any unparried damage hits the intended target, not the fighter parrying (he can take pushing damage though).
Fria Ligan
 
User avatar
Valyar
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon 18 Feb 2019, 22:41

Re: Path of the Shield clarification

Fri 10 May 2019, 12:35

The intention is that any unparried damage hits the intended target, not the fighter parrying (he can take pushing damage though).
And the intended target - can parry as normal or suffers the damage automatically?
GZIP: Off