1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hemos actualizado nuestra Política de Privacidad acorde con la nueva RGPD. +Info // We've updated our Privacy Policy to comply with the GDPR. +Info
    Dismiss Notice

Berserk vs i-Kohl - Example contradicts rules

Discussion in 'Rules' started by paraelix, May 10, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. psychoticstorm

    psychoticstorm Aleph's rogue child
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2017
    Messages:
    3,079
    Likes Received:
    5,879
    If we are to discuss how the rules should have been written feel free, if we are to discuss if we are to discuss how dodge actually works regardless of what rules write.

    Dodge in the reactive turn is a normal roll that allows the model to move 2" (plus relevant skills) towards a predetermined direction regardless of the models state (prone or not) in addition if the model is the target of an (non hacking) attack then the roll is a face to face roll that prevents damage.

    The trigger for the dodge is to have LoF to the active model doing something.

    Berserk stops the face to face interaction and nullifies the "prevent damage" part of the dodge.

    The main issue is dodge is written as an active and a reactive skill that behaves differently and it must be taken into account.
     
  2. Arkhos94

    Arkhos94 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    1,439
    Likes Received:
    1,373
    You are mixing things up. Berserk as no direct action on dodge effect.

    Berserk « Turns the Face to Face Roll into a Normal Roll. Both troopers make a Normal Roll, instead of the usual Face to Face Roll»

    Because the rolls nature changed, some dodge effect are nullified (because they state a face to face roll as a condition), other are not (because they state only a sucess as a condition)

    The template argument has been explained already : the exception is here to allow you to avoid damage without face to face roll. This exception is not necessary for the 2“ movement effect as it lnly required success of the roll (wich can be opposed or normal, you have no argument to prove otherwhise except “belief”)

    Nope « ITS roll ». Quote rule if you can but nowhere in dodges rules does it say it’s a face to face only skill.

    Some effect are limited to face to face situation but others only need success so they work with both normal and face to face roll.

    FAQ even confirm it : dodge is perfectly ok if there are no attack (normal roll situation).

    Other situation where dodge allow to move without face to face roll : dodge vs an hacking or com attack (with lof on the attacker)

    Sorry but you are making things up. There are no RAW or RAI backing this
     
    toadchild and A Mão Esquerda like this.
  3. Ginrei

    Ginrei Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    427
    I kind of agree with your distinction here.

    The one with success as a condition actually has the same condition as the other two, plus one more condition. Because the term 'successful Dodge' is a pointer to a FTF roll as well as adding a new condition, success. So it must be a FTF roll and you must successfully pass.

    A jump is different than a successful jump. The first is simply the act of jumping and says nothing about it's success or failure. The second is the act of jumping and now we also know it was successful. What was the criteria for success? We need to look elsewhere, just like in the rules.

    So changing the nature of the FTF roll has the same effect on all three effects because they all are FTF rolls.
    You can't have it both ways. If Dodge is not a FTF only skill, than the evade effect works on a normal roll too.

    The FAQ has no connection to how Dodge functions as a Normal roll. I've proven this already.

    I'm not making things up. We've just reached a point where I can no longer discuss this with you.
    Thanks for letting me know how you think/know it was intended to play.

    As far as RAW goes, we don't need to discuss anything. All i ask is for you to please tell me if you think the RAW (Beserk+Dodge) only leads to the intended conclusion you stated? I just want to know where you stand. PM works too.
     
    #203 Ginrei, May 20, 2019
    Last edited: May 20, 2019
  4. Sabin76

    Sabin76 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,295
    Likes Received:
    1,607
    I just don't see how your argument that:
    • Allows the user to make a Face to Face Roll to evade one or more simultaneous enemy Attacks.
    • This Face to Face Roll pits the user's PH Attribute against whichever Attribute the attacker uses (BS, CC, PH, WIP...).
    are requirements for a successful dodge holds any water. They are effects. They are also taken together. The first tells you that it is possible to avoid attacks if the roll is F2F (something that would not be possible without this clause due to how F2F rolls are structured), and the second tells you how you would do that.

    Taking this at face value, you cannot avoid attacks if the roll is not F2F. That's why there are exceptions written into the template weapon rules.

    No such exception exists in the Berserk rules. Therefore, you cannot avoid a Berserk attack.


    As for how I would rewrite the rules to make this 100% clear... I would use sub-bullets (several rules could be made much clearer if this was done). Bullets 2-4 would be sub-bullets of 1, and bullets 6 and 7 would be sub-bullets of 5. I would then add a bullet right at the top that simply states that it is PH as the attribute to roll against.

    That said, there are rules that are written far worse (*cough* Sixth Sense *cough*), and I don't count this one as necessarily needing a rewrite in order to function as intended.
     
    Robock, toadchild and A Mão Esquerda like this.
  5. psychoticstorm

    psychoticstorm Aleph's rogue child
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2017
    Messages:
    3,079
    Likes Received:
    5,879
    Please remember this rule has a duality in active reactive and the rule is written from the perspective of the active player using it, that confuses a lot of things.
     
    A Mão Esquerda likes this.
  6. Ginrei

    Ginrei Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    427
    You did give me one thing to think about. The second bullet possibly only referring to the first. I've been reading 'This FTF' as referring to the Dodge skill rather than the evade effect.

    But taking them together doesn't change anything does it? The effect containing the term a 'Successful Dodge' still has no rules explaining how to achieve this. None are found within that bullet. Nor are any found elsewhere, bar one exception. That exception is the second bullet you've quoted. And in that bullet it's a FTF roll requirement. You can't perform a Dodge roll without going to that bullet effect for instructions.

    So how are you arguing that a successful Dodge doesn't require a FTF roll? Which bullet states to make a normal roll (Or whatever roll is required?) against your PH attribute?

    This community is making some creative interpretations to ensure Dodge works as intended. It may not have caused problems before, but with respect to Berserk Attack, it does.
    Can you remove that confusion via RAW and not RAI?
     
  7. Ginrei

    Ginrei Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    427
    Thinking about this more, doesn't treating them as one effect only strengthen my argument? It would mean they can't be separated so any 'Successful Dodge' now includes passing the Dodge roll to evade attacks. I like it.
     
  8. Sabin76

    Sabin76 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,295
    Likes Received:
    1,607
    I mean, I see where you are coming from, but I think that's a reading that ignores how skills work, in general. Successful outcomes are core mechanics of the game and don't, necessarily, need to be spelled out in each skill (where is a "success" called out in the BS/CC attack skills?). This is, I believe, where your hangup is. You read the first two bullets as giving the criteria for a successful dodge, and everyone else is reading it as one of the effects of a successful dodge (given that it's face to face), whose criterion for success is a core function of the game with regards to skills. Nowhere in those lines does it say anything to the effect of, "a successful dodge is only achieved by..."

    The only thing I will concede is that PH is not explicitly called out as the attribute for any and all cases, just all cases with a specific mention (which I would argue is enough, given how all skills work).
     
  9. Ginrei

    Ginrei Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    427
    You could be right. I just can't stomach a system that functions like that. I think Infinity has far too many exceptions and lacks the structure to apply general assumptions or tolerate rules that are not spelled out. Even if I could look past this, I don't think subjecting new players to this is acceptable. How long does it take for a new player to 'know' CB well enough to make all the right assumptions about the rules?

    Infinity skills are rather funny because they don't have a base function to work from. Dodge being a great example. It's a list of effects and requirements that to be honest, don't follow any recognized structure. Why not have Dodge, BS attack, etc all start off as a rule explaining how they function as a normal roll from start to finish. Isn't that the most basic use of a skill? It's from there that outside factors can change things. In situations that result in a FTF the substitutions to make within the Dodge rule would be under the FTF rules.

    Exceptions will of course exist and can be explained within their relevant rules. Dodge would evade attacks as a normal and FTF roll. So the exception that disallows it's ability to evade dmg... would actually be in the Berserk skill. This convoluted word and effect ballet we have now needs to disappear yesterday.

    After careful study of the rules a new player should be able to come to the same conclusions as the vets. A great set of rules should mean a computer program will also come to those same conclusions.

    Speaking of, i'd love to see the AlphaZero, or whatever the newest and best AI is, read the Infinity rulebook and try to play. I think that would be comical.
     
  10. Ginrei

    Ginrei Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    427
    I don't think that's accurate. Dodge doesn't have the same level of explanation as BS Attack. Which interestingly goes well outside it's skill rules to explain how it works. I assume this is because BS/CC attacks use weapons with their own rules in addition.

    Ballistic Skills Subsections
    BS Attack Results
    N3 Wiki > Main Sections > Combat > Ballistic Skills > BS Attack Results
    For each successful BS Attack Roll, the target must make an ARM/BTS Roll (see Damage).​

    Here's^ the mention of successful rolls.

    Where it's spelled out what a success is, it does this in the same place as Dodge does. In it's own skill.
    • The user employs his BS Attribute (or that specified by the weapon) to fire upon one or more enemies.
    But notice how it doesn't mention normal or FTF roll? Yet Dodge does.

    CC attack:
    • The user employs his CC Attribute to fight in Close Combat (CC).
    Again, no mention of Normal or FTF rolls. It seems more and more likely the FTF roll is a requirement of Dodge.
     
    #210 Ginrei, May 21, 2019
    Last edited: May 21, 2019
  11. psychoticstorm

    psychoticstorm Aleph's rogue child
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2017
    Messages:
    3,079
    Likes Received:
    5,879
    It is mostly because of the skills duality and special nature of dodge, I can accept it can be written better and even, maybe, branched to two different skills of dodge active and reactive for better clarity, but it is not a decision I can take.

    In any way while the writing of the skill can be improved the, functionality of the skill is the above.

    The FAQ (along with the mine example) essentially patches the issue of dodge as a normal roll, berserk adds a further exception, or clarification stating anybody declaring an attack and succeeding will cause damage.

    Could all of it be done better? yes, but this is what it is for the moment.
     
  12. Sabin76

    Sabin76 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,295
    Likes Received:
    1,607
    There's no mention because ALL effects are contingent on a success, no matter what kind of roll created it.
    That's where dodge is different. It not only has to call out F2F because the normal mechanics of the game would otherwise not allow you to interact with a F2F roll when dodging, but also because those effects where it is called out are only available if the roll was a F2F. All other effects have their own conditions written in when necessary (reactive turn, etc.). If anything were ONLY contingent on a successful roll, it would be text without any conditions, like BS/CC attack.

    If anything, following your logic would lead me to believe that dodge does nothing against Berserk; no evade, no move. If F2F is required for any of the effects to be applied (as you seem to be arguing), then rolling normally against Berserk gives no effects as the condition is not met.
     
  13. Ginrei

    Ginrei Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    427
    That's fair and I wouldn't argue against that interpretation. That's the other outcome that comes closest to the RAW. I can see the rules either reading as the FTF rolls turn into Normal rolls and function or they turn into normal rolls and don't function.

    But I've done enough imagining how the rules work if they were written in a way that actually functions. They don't and I'm tired. I only wanted to argue against those saying the rules are clear and obvious. Many rules only work based on assumptions and knowledge of what was intended.
     
  14. Sabin76

    Sabin76 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,295
    Likes Received:
    1,607
    That's just it, RAW doesn't say they are both contingent on a F2F roll. The effects of any skill that requires a roll are only contingent on a "successful roll", leaving the criteria for said success up to the core mechanics (F2F if the skills of the two models interact, normal if they don't).

    Dodge adds a criterion for evading attacks (that the roll be F2F). The next 3 bullets spell out how that might work. The word "allows" is to provide an exception to the core mechanics: since dodge doesn't affect the shooting trooper, it shouldn't be a F2F. The first bullet rectifies that.

    Dodge then adds a different criterion for Movement (that the roll be made in the reactive turn). The next 2 bullets give certain restrictions on that movement.

    The two are not related other than they are both effects of using the skill dodge under certain circumstances. This is why my "fix" would be to use sub-bullets, as I've said.

    The only other addition I would advocate for is the following at the very top:
    • The user employs his PH Attribute to move deftly, evading attacks and/or moving to a better position.
    But this is really more of a description than an effect because the actual effects are contingent on other things which are already spelled out. There's also the fact that if you follow the link to the attributes page, it literally calls out "dodging" as one of the things you use PH for.
     
    #214 Sabin76, May 21, 2019
    Last edited: May 21, 2019
  15. Arkhos94

    Arkhos94 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    1,439
    Likes Received:
    1,373

    The way I understood the rule from my first reading :
    - I never had any problem with declaring a dodge with or without being the target of an attack (because being targeted is not a requirement, no FAQ really needed)
    - Some effects mention face to face and other don't, so I applied the effect that mentioned face to face only in face to face situation and the other to normal and face to face situation => to me that's very clear
    - some very specific exception to the point above are mentionned (like template) and they are well worded, so no problem
    - berserk change face to face roll into a normal roll. That negate dodge effect that specifically word "face to face" (avoid damage) but not the other (move 2") => that also was always very clear to me

    You want us to admit something is not clear when we read it and understood both RAW and RAI it correctly without problem. That's very unlikely to happen.
     
    Zewrath, Section9 and A Mão Esquerda like this.
  16. Ginrei

    Ginrei Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    427
    Oh I know you're not likely to admit it's not clear. But I can state my arguments for others to read.

    How you interpret the rules, how others interpret the rules, and what the rules actually say are not always the same thing. While it's great that you and others read it the way you do... does that somehow invalidate the way I've read it? No it doesn't. We've discussed how it's written to determine if either of us are in error, we disagree. This is a product of rules without clearly defined terminology and structure.
    The attributes page does call out dodging as one of the things it's used for. But you can't read more into it than that. How the PH attribute is used falls entirely within the scope of the Dodge rule.

    I feel like we're on the same page here @Sabin76 . I agree the "effects of any skill that requires a roll are only contingent on a "successful roll", leaving the criteria for said success up to the core mechanics (F2F if the skills of the two models interact, normal if they don't)."

    I agree when you say, "Dodge adds a criterion for evading attacks (that the roll be F2F)." I agree how it uses the word 'allow' to show the exception to the typical FTF roll.

    Then we come to the added criterion for the 2" move. The problem seems to be as we've pointed out already, that the Dodge rule doesn't provide a base function. It doesn't do what many other skills tell us to do. Which is to state in a separate bullet to roll against our PH stat. If it did, we probably wouldn't be having the same discussion. But as much as you want to believe a 'successful Dodge' refers to that basic roll against your PH, the Dodge rule simply does not allow for that outcome. All the belief in the world of what it was meant to say or do, doesn't change what it is. The basic functionality of the skill as written is a FTF roll, (not normal or FTF based on situation).

    I don't know how to emphasis a whole paragraph but if I did, I'd want to mark this next one as important.

    That belief that a rule 'clearly/obviously' functions a certain way is strong in this community. But if we consider the kinds of rulings we've experienced in the past and how some things currently function... I wouldn't fault a single person for not wanting to make assumptions about the rules. So in my case, I follow the RAW rather than try to guess the writers intent. The RAW is the common denominator for everyone, where as interpretation can vary person to person. Remember, there are communities out there that don't operate with the same knowledge as this forum community.

    As I said before, I think skills need to be written with a basic function and outcome first. Exceptions or special cases like a FTF roll only to evade attacks can be added to the base functionality. I'd probably fix the Dodge skill in a different way than you, but at that stage it's more about design choice. Having it work clearly to arrive at only one outcome, the intended outcome, is paramount. And I'm sure your suggestion will do that as well.

    In Dodge's case, what's the base function that works in all cases? Evade only working on a FTF would not be it. However, I'd probably change the Dodge rule completely and include evading attacks as the base function so we can remove the Dodge rules under templates. Either way, I agree sub bullets would be a big improvement.
     
    #216 Ginrei, May 21, 2019
    Last edited: May 21, 2019
  17. Sabin76

    Sabin76 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,295
    Likes Received:
    1,607
    There isn't one. That's why it's worded the way it is.

    If you're in the active turn, move, then dodge, but nothing AROs you, you have effectively idled as your second short skill (I would, of course, argue that you could make a dodge roll if you wanted and succeed/fail, but that would be a waste of time). The skill does nothing unless you are engaging in a F2F roll and/or using it on the reactive turn.
     
    Robock and A Mão Esquerda like this.
  18. Ginrei

    Ginrei Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    427
    That's why this interaction falls apart. If there is no base rule to work with, how do you apply effects like Berserk Attack? You can't apply it to Dodge's base skill because that doesn't exist. Isn't the next course of action to apply it to all the separate uses of that skill?

    But looking at each use of Dodge separately we have all kinds of problems. Does the evade FTF roll turn into a normal roll and work? WTF is a successful Dodge if there's no base skill to succeed rolling on.

    You're just making it up as you go along and claiming the RAW do not support other conclusions.
     
  19. Sabin76

    Sabin76 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,295
    Likes Received:
    1,607
    No, it doesn't fall apart. There is a base skill, but it does nothing if the stipulations of each of the effects is not met. So... yes, you do apply the Berserk's effect to all the separate uses in a way (because it changes how you would normally roll it), but you don't apply the effects to the EFFECTS of the dodge skill. There is no precedent for that and doesn't make any sense in the context of the rules as a whole. This is why we keep arguing that it's not a RAW vs RAI argument. We are arguing that your reading of the RAW is incorrect.

    There is no "evade roll". There is a dodge roll, and yes, it turns into a normal roll. Since the evade portion of the effects is contingent on a F2F, you ignore it. A successful dodge is defined by the core mechanics of the game (rolling against your PH).

    I'm not making anything up. You apply the effects of berserk attack by making your dodge a normal roll. Why would this change any of the EFFECTS of the dodge skill? Per the effects of dodge, normal rolls don't evade attacks (unless stipulated by the separate, but connected, template rules).

    If you somehow used dodge against Berserk in the active turn, dodge would do nothing. Normal roll dodges don't evade attacks natively, and since you aren't in the reactive turn, you don't move either. You could roll, if you like, but what's the point? This skill would only be "broken" if the intention was to have a normal roll dodge in the active turn do something. Doing nothing doesn't break the skill, because that's exactly what it's supposed to do. If there were some classified that could be achieved by successfully dodging, you could use this interaction to do it, but that's all you would gain from it.
     
    #219 Sabin76, May 21, 2019
    Last edited: May 21, 2019
    toadchild and A Mão Esquerda like this.
  20. Ginrei

    Ginrei Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    427
    Let me see if I understand correctly. Are you trying to say Berserk Attack's ability to turn a FTF roll into a normal roll doesn't directly work on any of the effects of the Dodge skill. Instead, it turns some higher level/base function of the Dodge skill into a normal roll. We then go through Dodge's effects and apply them to this higher level/base function normal roll. A roll Berserk Attack has created?

    You're making many leaps and assumptions. I don't know where to begin. Instead of me trying to figure out what this base function is, let's try this:

    Berserk Attack's effect instructs us to "Turns the Face to Face Roll into a Normal Roll."
    Dodge effects:
    • Allows the user to make a Face to Face Roll to evade one or more simultaneous enemy Attacks.
    • This Face to Face Roll pits the user's PH Attribute against whichever Attribute the attacker uses (BS, CC, PH, WIP...).
    Can you show me in the rules where it instructs us not to apply Berserk Attack's effect to turn these effects into normal rolls?
    Or show me where it instructs us how to apply Berserk Attack's effect so that it excludes us turning those effects into normal rolls?

    Because frankly, you can't just arbitrarily decide where and how effects are applied without some instruction on how to do so.
     
    #220 Ginrei, May 21, 2019
    Last edited: May 21, 2019
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.