Re: Groups vs one

From: Roderick and Ellen Robertson <rjremr_at_...>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 01:04:03 -0700


> The whole multiple opponents thing is a bit confusing because it really
concerns rolls,
> not numbers of opponents, in some ways.

It's based on the the number of "active" or "dramatically important" opponents. Followers are not "important" enough to cause MO penalties (that's why they are followers, not Heroes/Villains).

> > I think what you're asking is three attacks, and so three defensve die
> > rolls:
> > Player 1 defends aganist Lunar 1 with no penalty.
> > Player 1 defends against Lunar 2 with a -3 penalty
> > Player 1 defends against Lunar 3 with a -6 penalty
> >
>
> Exactly. So that's the "straight up numbers" way to do it. The other is
where Lunar 1 has
> been augmented by Lunars 2 and 3. As mentioned above, Lunar 1 gets bonuses
from
> the augmentation, and Player 1 rolls as normal. It is effectively a one on
one battle, with
> Lunars 2 and 3 tied to Lunar 1.

Yep, the extra lunars (2 & 3) are treated as followers of Lunar 1 (including getting one level worse damage if defeated).

> What is interesting to note is that if there were 3 players against the
three Lunars, you
> could still have Lunars 2 and 3 augmenting Lunar 1. And in this case, even
though
> Lunar 1 would be defending 3 times, he would get no MO penalties, because
Lunars 2
> and 3 would cancel the numerical advantage of the Players.
>
> (At least as I understand it all)

Correct. Each follower "blocks" one opponent from inflicting an MO penalty on both defence *and* attack. Lunar 1 (with 2&3 as followers) would be able to *attack* all three player heroes without the -6 MO penalty he would have without followers.

RR
It is by my order and for the good of the state that the bearer of this has done what he has done.
- Richelieu

Powered by hypermail