Out of Game Rules Clairification

Our KOTOR campaign.
Post Reply
User avatar
EvilGenius
Posts: 6716
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 1:09 pm
Location: Allentown, PA

Out of Game Rules Clairification

Post by EvilGenius »

Okay so we're not in the midst of a huge fight so let's take a moment to discuss the rules on "reactions". :)

I've looked through the core rules and I haven't found anyplace where it defines a reaction. Does anyone have a page #?

Here's my thinking:

If you can do something as a 'reaction', you should logically be able to react once to one action. For example, the Jedi talent of Deflect allows you a roll to deflect incoming blaster shots. The Talent explicitly states that you can do this multiple times per round with a successive penalty. But you cannot make more than one Deflect attempt on a particular attack. One attack, one deflect attempt.

Common sense also dictates that if you have multiple options for your 'reaction' to the blaster shot, you can't take them all. So you can't try to deflect and then if you fail, use the Force Power Negate Energy. That would be unreasonable. 1 action, 1 reaction.

IMO, common sense also dictates that if someone has the right feats or powers or whatever that they can take TWO blaster shots at you in a round, you should be able to use one reaction for EACH of them. Again, 1 action, 1 reaction. If the bad guy takes 2 actions, you get 2 reactions.

Now where it gets tricky, IMO, is when the bad guy gets to do multiple actions that are a different type. For example, last night the bad guy took two lightsaber attacks as a full round action, then used a force point to hit me with a Force Power. So what reactions should I get? The Block Talent explicitly allows you multiple block attempts so no problem there. But then what about the Force Power?

IMO, if the bad guy gets to take another 'action' then the player should get their 'reaction'. I have a Force Power, Rebuke, that is used as a reaction specifically against bad guys using the Force against me. If the bad guy uses one of his standard actions to Force Choke me, I get to use Rebuke. The fact that he hit me with his lightsaber twice first shouldn't alter that, IMO. If I was facing 3 opponents, all going successively, I could Block, Block and Rebuke with no problems. Even if they had all held their actions and attacked at the same time I could Block, Block and Rebuke with no problems. So if one guy is all uber and does all three attacks himself I think logically I should be able to Block, Block and Rebuke. :)

But wait, you say. The big bad guy has 'paid' for the ability to take these extra actions by taking feats and talents, so maybe he gets an exception? Well, the PC has also 'paid' feats and talents to be able to Block or Rebuke. I think that unless the Power the bad guy is invoking specifically says that it can't be countered or it doesn't allow for any reaction powers or doesn't count as an action, then 1 action still provokes 1 reaction.

What do you guys think?
Another daring escape for the intrepid Spaceman Spiff!
User avatar
NukeHavoc
Posts: 12106
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2005 1:07 pm
Location: Easton, PA
Contact:

Re: Out of Game Rules Clairification

Post by NukeHavoc »

Reactions are defined on page 144 of the core rule book:
Reaction: A reaction is an instantaneous response to someone else's action, and you can use a reaction even if it is not your turn. Examples of reactions include making a Perception check to notice a bounty hunter sneaking up behind you and instantly activating a Force power to absorb damage from an incoming blaster bolt.
The rules don't spell out how many you get in a turn, but I think KISS indicates you get one reaction per action targeted as you. As for last night ... thanks to your write-up I see where the confusion arose, as events didn't unfold quite as you described them.

When Apprentice Infernus attacked Thraddox, he did not use a Force power. He spent a Force point as part of his Assault feat, which allows him to make a full-round attack as a standard action. The attack that hit you was the second lightsaber blow that you failed to deflect, and IIRC, the action you were trying to take was Negate Energy.

If he *had* somehow managed to pull off a Force power attack in addition to his double attack, then yes, I think you would have been able to react.

To sum up ... like you, my thinking on reactions is that you get a single reaction to a provoking reaction. You could use that to Deflect a blaster bolt or to absorb it using Negate Energy, but not try and Deflect and then try to Negate Energy.

I'm sure there are some feats/talents that provide exceptions to this rule. For example, the Lightsaber talent Riposte allows you to make an immediate melee attack againt an attack you successfully avoided using Block.
"Oh, I'm so sorry. Forgive me. I'll try and be a tad more quiet as I desperately struggle to break free -- and save all creation!" -- Doctor Strange
User avatar
EvilGenius
Posts: 6716
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 1:09 pm
Location: Allentown, PA

Re: Out of Game Rules Clairification

Post by EvilGenius »

NukeHavoc wrote:When Apprentice Infernus attacked Thraddox, he did not use a Force power. He spent a Force point as part of his Assault feat, which allows him to make a full-round attack as a standard action. The attack that hit you was the second lightsaber blow that you failed to deflect, and IIRC, the action you were trying to take was Negate Energy.
Ahhh, that does clarify. So two attacks as one action, then a third attack as a second action. I think we completely agree, then. The attacker is taking two *actions* (which grants him three *attacks*), therefore it would provoke two *reactions*. :)
Another daring escape for the intrepid Spaceman Spiff!
User avatar
NukeHavoc
Posts: 12106
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2005 1:07 pm
Location: Easton, PA
Contact:

Re: Out of Game Rules Clairification

Post by NukeHavoc »

EvilGenius wrote:Ahhh, that does clarify. So two attacks as one action, then a third attack as a second action. I think we completely agree, then. The attacker is taking two *actions* (which grants him three *attacks*), therefore it would provoke two *reactions*. :)
I'm sorry if I miscommunicated this some how during the encounter (or lost track of something and rolled 3x), but Apprentice Infernus only made two attacks (via Double Attack feat). IIRC, in this exchange he closed (Move Action) then used Double Attack (normally a full-round action, treated as a standard action because of the Force Point for the Assault feat). Thraddox blocked the first hit, but missed the second. That's the one that hurt him.

Another time during the combat Infernus used the Double Attack-as-a-standard-action gambit again, but this time he was using Accelerated Strike (which is a different feat with a similar effect but is useable once per encounter and doesn't cost a Force point).

Now there was a Sith student there (not to be confused with Infernus), and he did use Wound (which Thraddox rebuked). I think he later closed and attacked again, which may be where the confusion came in.

All that having been said, if Infernus had used Triple Attack (allowing three separate attack roles) then yes, Thraddox would have been able block each of them in turn (albeit at successive -5s).
"Oh, I'm so sorry. Forgive me. I'll try and be a tad more quiet as I desperately struggle to break free -- and save all creation!" -- Doctor Strange
Post Reply