Combat Reflexes - Revision history

GORT: Reverted edits by 213.165.86.131 (Talk); changed back to last version by 82.158.146.219

2008-12-19T14:07:20Z

Reverted edits by 213.165.86.131 (Talk); changed back to last version by 82.158.146.219

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:07, 19 December 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~domgetdarr~~
	[[Advantages_and_Disadvantages\|(return to Advantages and Disadvantages)]]		[[Advantages_and_Disadvantages\|(return to Advantages and Disadvantages)]]

Line 26:		Line 25:


	''Erm... we have Quick (cost +3) that grants +1k1 to Initiative rolls; then we have this CR (cost +3) that grants +5 to Initiative rolls. ~~Â¿Redundancy~~, anyone?''		''Erm... we have Quick (cost +3) that grants +1k1 to Initiative rolls; then we have this CR (cost +3) that grants +5 to Initiative rolls. ¿Redundancy, anyone?''
	''I'd either rule it as some kind of upgrade for Quick, something like this:''		''I'd either rule it as some kind of upgrade for Quick, something like this:''
	:'''Combat Reflexes (6 points)'''		:'''Combat Reflexes (6 points)'''
	::This Advantage grants a +1k1 to Initiative rolls. Also, on Tides of Battle you get a +1k0 to your rolls.		::This Advantage grants a +1k1 to Initiative rolls. Also, on Tides of Battle you get a +1k0 to your rolls.
	::Combat Reflexes overrides Quick, and its cost is reduced to 3 points when replacing that Advantage.		::Combat Reflexes overrides Quick, and its cost is reduced to 3 points when replacing that Advantage.
	''~~Â¿Do~~ you think it sounds reasonable?'' --[[User:Mirumoto Ookami\|Ookami, the White Wolf]]		''¿Do you think it sounds reasonable?'' --[[User:Mirumoto Ookami\|Ookami, the White Wolf]]

213.165.86.131: elracmonliel

2008-12-19T10:43:43Z

elracmonliel

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:43, 19 December 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
			domgetdarr
	[[Advantages_and_Disadvantages\|(return to Advantages and Disadvantages)]]		[[Advantages_and_Disadvantages\|(return to Advantages and Disadvantages)]]

Line 25:		Line 26:


	''Erm... we have Quick (cost +3) that grants +1k1 to Initiative rolls; then we have this CR (cost +3) that grants +5 to Initiative rolls. ~~¿Redundancy~~, anyone?''		''Erm... we have Quick (cost +3) that grants +1k1 to Initiative rolls; then we have this CR (cost +3) that grants +5 to Initiative rolls. Â¿Redundancy, anyone?''
	''I'd either rule it as some kind of upgrade for Quick, something like this:''		''I'd either rule it as some kind of upgrade for Quick, something like this:''
	:'''Combat Reflexes (6 points)'''		:'''Combat Reflexes (6 points)'''
	::This Advantage grants a +1k1 to Initiative rolls. Also, on Tides of Battle you get a +1k0 to your rolls.		::This Advantage grants a +1k1 to Initiative rolls. Also, on Tides of Battle you get a +1k0 to your rolls.
	::Combat Reflexes overrides Quick, and its cost is reduced to 3 points when replacing that Advantage.		::Combat Reflexes overrides Quick, and its cost is reduced to 3 points when replacing that Advantage.
	''~~¿Do~~ you think it sounds reasonable?'' --[[User:Mirumoto Ookami\|Ookami, the White Wolf]]		''Â¿Do you think it sounds reasonable?'' --[[User:Mirumoto Ookami\|Ookami, the White Wolf]]

82.158.146.219: Minor fix, replace "Swift" with Quick

2006-06-18T16:33:35Z

Minor fix, replace "Swift" with Quick

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:33, 18 June 2006
Line 25:		Line 25:


	''Erm... we have ~~Swift~~ (cost +3) that grants +1k1 to Initiative rolls; then we have this CR (cost +3) that grants +5 to Initiative rolls. ¿Redundancy, anyone?''		''Erm... we have Quick (cost +3) that grants +1k1 to Initiative rolls; then we have this CR (cost +3) that grants +5 to Initiative rolls. ¿Redundancy, anyone?''
	''I'd either rule it as some kind of upgrade for ~~Swift~~, something like this:''		''I'd either rule it as some kind of upgrade for Quick, something like this:''
	:'''Combat Reflexes (6 points)'''		:'''Combat Reflexes (6 points)'''
	::This Advantage grants a +1k1 to Initiative rolls. Also, on Tides of Battle you get a +1k0 to your rolls.		::This Advantage grants a +1k1 to Initiative rolls. Also, on Tides of Battle you get a +1k0 to your rolls.
	::Combat Reflexes overrides ~~Swift~~, and its cost is reduced to 3 points when replacing that Advantage.		::Combat Reflexes overrides Quick, and its cost is reduced to 3 points when replacing that Advantage.
	''¿Do you think it sounds reasonable?'' --[[User:Mirumoto Ookami\|Ookami, the White Wolf]]		''¿Do you think it sounds reasonable?'' --[[User:Mirumoto Ookami\|Ookami, the White Wolf]]

Mirumoto Ookami: /* Discussion */

2005-12-10T14:32:33Z

Discussion

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:32, 10 December 2005
Line 23:		Line 23:

	: ''Consistency? Hmm....true. Changed.'' --Mortaneus		: ''Consistency? Hmm....true. Changed.'' --Mortaneus


			''Erm... we have Swift (cost +3) that grants +1k1 to Initiative rolls; then we have this CR (cost +3) that grants +5 to Initiative rolls. ¿Redundancy, anyone?''
			''I'd either rule it as some kind of upgrade for Swift, something like this:''
			:'''Combat Reflexes (6 points)'''
			::This Advantage grants a +1k1 to Initiative rolls. Also, on Tides of Battle you get a +1k0 to your rolls.
			::Combat Reflexes overrides Swift, and its cost is reduced to 3 points when replacing that Advantage.
			''¿Do you think it sounds reasonable?'' --[[User:Mirumoto Ookami\|Ookami, the White Wolf]]

Mortaneus at 16:42, 17 July 2005

2005-07-17T16:42:13Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:42, 17 July 2005
Line 8:		Line 8:
	'''Combat Reflexes (3 points)'''		'''Combat Reflexes (3 points)'''

	: This advantage grants ~~a free raise~~ on all initiative rolls.		: This advantage grants +5 to the total on all initiative rolls.


Line 21:		Line 21:

	''Why not simply say +5 or +10 to TN then?'' --[[User:Daermon\|Daermon]] 23:13, 15 Jul 2005 (PDT)		''Why not simply say +5 or +10 to TN then?'' --[[User:Daermon\|Daermon]] 23:13, 15 Jul 2005 (PDT)

			: ''Consistency? Hmm....true. Changed.'' --Mortaneus

207.160.205.13 at 20:29, 16 July 2005

2005-07-16T20:29:19Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:29, 16 July 2005
Line 10:		Line 10:
	: This advantage grants a free raise on all initiative rolls.		: This advantage grants a free raise on all initiative rolls.


			==Discussion==
	''Just noting my opinion that I'm sick of hearing about Combat reflexes. ;)'' --[[User:Daermon\|Daermon]] 15:15, 15 Jul 2005 (PDT)		''Just noting my opinion that I'm sick of hearing about Combat reflexes. ;)'' --[[User:Daermon\|Daermon]] 15:15, 15 Jul 2005 (PDT)

Daermon: /* Combat Reflexes Modifications */

2005-07-16T06:13:11Z

Combat Reflexes Modifications

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:13, 16 July 2005
Line 17:		Line 17:

	: ''It's fine. :) A free raise on a roll simply grants a +5 to the total, in the absence of anything else, like a TN.'' --Mortaneus		: ''It's fine. :) A free raise on a roll simply grants a +5 to the total, in the absence of anything else, like a TN.'' --Mortaneus

			''Why not simply say +5 or +10 to TN then?'' --[[User:Daermon\|Daermon]] 23:13, 15 Jul 2005 (PDT)

Mortaneus at 06:05, 16 July 2005

2005-07-16T06:05:20Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:05, 16 July 2005
Line 15:		Line 15:

	''Sorry, my reply came off more hostile than I intended. I apologize for that. And, to be honest, this looks like one of the few reasonable changes I've yet to see. However, how could it grant a Free Raise when Initiative doesn't have a TN?'' --[[User:Daermon\|Daermon]] 19:18, 15 Jul 2005 (PDT)		''Sorry, my reply came off more hostile than I intended. I apologize for that. And, to be honest, this looks like one of the few reasonable changes I've yet to see. However, how could it grant a Free Raise when Initiative doesn't have a TN?'' --[[User:Daermon\|Daermon]] 19:18, 15 Jul 2005 (PDT)

			: ''It's fine. :) A free raise on a roll simply grants a +5 to the total, in the absence of anything else, like a TN.'' --Mortaneus

Daermon: /* Combat Reflexes Modifications */

2005-07-16T02:18:10Z

Combat Reflexes Modifications

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:18, 16 July 2005
Line 14:		Line 14:
	: ''Thus my reason for the change. It's simple, easily understood, makes the advantage still worth the points, and doesn't screw Kakita.'' --Mortaneus		: ''Thus my reason for the change. It's simple, easily understood, makes the advantage still worth the points, and doesn't screw Kakita.'' --Mortaneus

	''Sorry, my reply came off more hostile than I intended. I apologize for that. And, to be honest, this looks like one of the few reasonable changes I've yet to see. However, how could it grant a Free Raise when Initiative doesn't have a TN~~? Perhaps it grants a +10 to Initiative~~?'' --[[User:Daermon\|Daermon]] 19:17, 15 Jul 2005 (PDT)		''Sorry, my reply came off more hostile than I intended. I apologize for that. And, to be honest, this looks like one of the few reasonable changes I've yet to see. However, how could it grant a Free Raise when Initiative doesn't have a TN?'' --[[User:Daermon\|Daermon]] 19:18, 15 Jul 2005 (PDT)

Daermon: /* Combat Reflexes Modifications */

2005-07-16T02:17:28Z

Combat Reflexes Modifications

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:17, 16 July 2005
Line 14:		Line 14:
	: ''Thus my reason for the change. It's simple, easily understood, makes the advantage still worth the points, and doesn't screw Kakita.'' --Mortaneus		: ''Thus my reason for the change. It's simple, easily understood, makes the advantage still worth the points, and doesn't screw Kakita.'' --Mortaneus

	''Sorry, my reply came off more hostile than I intended. I apologize for that. And, to be honest, this looks like one of the few reasonable changes I've yet to see. However, how could it grant a Free Raise when Initiative doesn't have a TN? Perhaps it grants a +10 to Initiative~~, or maybe +5 per Insight Rank~~?'' --[[User:Daermon\|Daermon]] 19:17, 15 Jul 2005 (PDT)		''Sorry, my reply came off more hostile than I intended. I apologize for that. And, to be honest, this looks like one of the few reasonable changes I've yet to see. However, how could it grant a Free Raise when Initiative doesn't have a TN? Perhaps it grants a +10 to Initiative?'' --[[User:Daermon\|Daermon]] 19:17, 15 Jul 2005 (PDT)