Strange Aeons Rules Questions

[styx]

I had some time to put some questions together we had about our two games last week:

1) P17, Psychology, it states that once a model passes a test, it need notmake another test unless the model is confronted with a new situation.

So here is our logic let us now if we are wrong:
If they pass fear for one monster, but another with fear moves within range they would test again, as it is "new". If the model is the last of it's faction it only tests once, then does not test again afterwards as they  have alread passed a test.

We was just trying to be clear what is a "new situation".

2) Can you premeasure, the rules are not clear, but should you declare before you measure or measure and declare?

any feedback would be good..thanks!

[obsidian3d]

You are correct on both points for #1, and you can measure anything want, anytime.

[Mathyoo]

For psychology a new situation for me represents everything that isn't same rule for one exact monster. So, if 2 blasphemous constructs move in and charge your agent one by one, that would be 4 tests - 2 hideous and 2 fears. Somebody on this forum explained that when your agent passes a test and overcomes his fear when he sees hideous BC, it is all another story if he finds out there are two of a kind out there.

As for measuring, it was already told, you just measure when you feel like it, during your or your opponents turn.

[styx]

Thanks guys,

Here is another from P13 with "It's a Draw", it stats at the end, At the start of each turn that models remain in a draw close combat is fought. This is done before nominations.

So, we had a draw last turn on the Lurker turn when I charged.
Threshold turn, before he nominates we would do a combat before he nominates.
Then, if the combat is still ongoing he could activate and declare charge actions to continue combat.

In theory the "start of turn" could free a model to act on their next round instead of being forced to use actions to end a combat correct?

Also, do you have to activate the model in close combat or can you choose not to activate it (if the start of the turn combat is still a draw) to avoid having some monster gobble you up at least for a turn? Perhaps either to stall to allow the others to withdraw or try to get close to help.

We had some seriously bad dice rolls the second game and it was like two girls slapping one another. We wanted to make sure we had this right.

[superflytnt]

Threshold turn, before he nominates we would do a combat before he nominates.
Then, if the combat is still ongoing he could activate and declare charge actions to continue combat.

My understanding is that before a player takes his turn, ALL models locked in CC perform one round of CC. But this isn't a "charge action" or any action required to be taken by the player, so in essence, it's a free round of CC.

The only problem I've had with this concept is that the rules for multiple combatants declare that only the ATTACKER gets a bonus for friendlies in base-to-base with the ATTACKED model, so we chose that if it's the T player's turn, they're considered the attacker for that purpose, and vice versa if it's on the L player's turn.

Also, do you have to activate the model in close combat or can you choose not to activate it (if the start of the turn combat is still a draw) to avoid having some monster gobble you up at least for a turn? Perhaps either to stall to allow the others to withdraw or try to get close to help.

Normal CC rules apply. The round of CC begins, the victor chooses to roll to wound or withdraw.

We had some seriously bad dice rolls the second game and it was like two girls slapping one another. We wanted to make sure we had this right.

Don't underestimate girls...I just saw one of the most brutal kickboxing matches ever and it was two girls!

[LidlessEye]

You're correct: there's no obligation to nominate a model already in close combat if you don't want to, and this can be an effective delaying tactic (particularly if you want to prevent your opponent's model from using Command).  The pre-nomination CC rounds are unavoidable though.

In the case of multiple models, I believe that both combatants would be considered an Attacker during the automatic CC round.  So if two models are fighting two opponents, the bonuses would cancel out.  Don't take that as gospel until we get a formal ruling from Mike though.

[Cherno]

Allow me to hijack this thread

I got the impression after a couple of games that close combat as a Lurker player is kinda difficult. Numerous times I have seen my Fishman charge an Agent only for him to "fail" his psychology test and either run away (meaning my Fishman stands in the open, waiting to be shot by all enemies next round) or go beserk and become almost impossible to beat in CC. Am I doing something wrong?

[superflytnt]

Allow me to hijack this thread

I got the impression after a couple of games that close combat as a Lurker player is kinda difficult. Numerous times I have seen my Fishman charge an Agent only for him to "fail" his psychology test and either run away (meaning my Fishman stands in the open, waiting to be shot by all enemies next round) or go beserk and become almost impossible to beat in CC. Am I doing something wrong?

Why would the Fishman need to roll psychology? Only humans are required to roll psychology except in very narrow circumstances.

[Cherno]

Of course I meant the human who rolls psychology!  

The bit

Numerous times I have seen my Fishman charge an Agent only for him to "fail" his psychology test

should read as ... only for the Agent to fail his psychology test

[styx]

Well, in theory they should be using the Characters Resolve if within range which can make him tougher....sounds like he just got the "best case rolls" in both times to run or to charge for extra umph. Our game had a charge but it flopped against a Mummy as he could not roll high enough to wound.

If he had failed and went face down (major injury if he is base to base with the fishman) or face up (easier to hit).

[Cherno]

I don't have the rulebook on front of me, but IIRC the the highest probability on the psych roll is actually to ge frenzy 

[styx]

I don't have the rulebook on front of me, but IIRC the the highest probability on the psych roll is actually to ge frenzy 

Tied with Revulsion...so I was wrong with my earlier statement (got my book out of my bag at lunch)

1-Catatonia
2- Stupefaction
3-4 Revulsion
5-6 Frenzy

So 1/3 of the time you will be laying down wetting yourself, 1/3 of the time you will be running like hell, 1/3 of the time you will freak out and turn to Michael Myers.

So, as a Lurker you have to anticipate running away to still have the range to reach your target. Frenzy there is little to do, but a Lurker with a high Con and Combat skills may not have many worries.

[superflytnt]

OK...sorry, I totally misread that. Yeah, it can be bad for Lurkers in CC. You have a 1/3 chance of FACE UP/DOWN only, and a 1/3 chance of allowing enemies to get away and 1/3 chance to buff them. Really, the odds are always against the Lurker unless it's a Terror roll that's been failed.

If you're an Agent attacking, it limits your options (or at least makes you weigh them)  because you know that attacking a fear-inducing creature would be tenuous...you could drop on the fly catatonic or stupefied with a bollocksed roll. For the Lurkers, though, it's also a deterrent to attack for the same reason. I think it's the only way the game could be balanced, though...if there was a 50/50 of catatonia/stupefaction it would basically make the Threshold strategy solely a ranged one since the odds would be too great that it would be suicidal. In a way, it's realistic...why would you charge a big nasty when you could gun it down at range with a .45 Thompson?

So far, I've had far less success with "open-field" attacks on the Lurker side, but if you can create a trap, with 2-3 Lurkers in a triangular pattern surrounding the baddie, you can either force the Threshold agent out of gun range with multiple RES tests, and with multiple rolls comes multiple chances of dropping the T-Agent on his back or face, which is, of course, the icing. Sort of the "ITS A TRAP" moments. The downside is that the odds are such that most of the time, he just runs and runs and runs, and you don't get to attack a downed Agent.

I think the "fix" if you had to have one is that if an agent is "revulsed" then it may not attack the following turn. That levels the playing field a bit. Or maybe just loses 1 action on the next turn if nominated. That would certainly allow for some penalty from running in stark, raving terror.

[styx]

I think one fix would be (if this is not already allowed), Lurker Charges, Threshold runs, Lurker if reached Base to base auto hits (if they get out of range) or catches them anyway (if enough movement is left.)

[superflytnt]

I think one fix would be (if this is not already allowed), Lurker Charges, Threshold runs, Lurker if reached Base to base auto hits (if they get out of range) or catches them anyway (if enough movement is left.)

No action can be interrupted. So, the Lurker has to move his full movement before the resolve test can occur. If the resolve test is failed and the T-Agent is revulsed, he would move towards his own start line, breaking CC per the rules for Revulsion. And the T-Agent would have to roll a RES test again as a new situation happened, although it was an identical situation to the last.

This is, unfortunately, the problem with being a Lurker. The only change you could make is that RES tests interrupt actions, which would allow the above scenario to exist, ie. allowing Lurkers to Charge 1", and if the RES test fails, the Lurker could pursue with remaining movement points.