BCFs and Flurry

[Questions]

Why do we roll a second time when BCFs is used with Flurry if the first attack is successful?

FLURRY Give this character a close combat action. After the close combat attack resolves, it may make a second close combat attack as a free action. If this character loses Flurry before it makes the second attack, it can’t make the second attack.

BLADES/CLAWS/FANGS When this character is given a close combat action, you may roll a d6 after making a successful attack roll. The result replaces this character’s damage value, then that damage value is locked.

From p. 5 of the Blackest Night Rulebook:


LOCKING
Certain replacement values are referred to as “locked”. Locked combat values ignore all other replacement values and modifiers. Whenever a combat value is calculated and a locked replacement value is applied to it, the locked replacement value is the only replacement or modifier that can affect that combat value, and if a specific number is locked, that number is the only possible result of the calculation. Unless otherwise specified, locked values last until the end of the action that caused the locked value.

Flurry requires a close combat action that allows a second close combat attack as a free action after the first close combat attack resolves. BCF activates when you give the character a close combat action. Timing-wise BCF tells you to roll for a replacement damage value after making a successful attack roll. Assuming the first attack succeeds, the damage value becomes locked. And we know that a locked value stays locked until the end of the action that caused the locked value. So what action caused the value to be locked? Wouldn't it be the close combat action? Which isn't over until the second close combat attack as a free action resolves? So shouldn't the damage value stay locked during the second attack?

[normalview]

I am beginning to suspect that you are Harpua in disguise:

http://www.hcrealms.com/forum/showthread.php?t=280966

[lancelot]

Why do we roll a second time when BCFs is used with Flurry if the first attack is successful?
You *USED* to be able to do that. We cannot anymore. So, not sure what the "issue" here is.

[vlad3theimpaler]

I am beginning to suspect that you are Harpua in disguise:

http://www.hcrealms.com/forum/showthread.php?t=280966
We're actually ALL Harpua in disguise.

[Questions]

I am beginning to suspect that you are Harpua in disguise:

http://www.hcrealms.com/forum/showthread.php?t=280966

Wouldn't that be funny?

You *USED* to be able to do that. We cannot anymore. So, not sure what the "issue" here is.

Actually I'm not sure this is resolved. Looked through the other thread and I think Harpua (who I could be in disguise, but I'm not :) ) agrees with me while Normalview thinks that Flurry/BCF continues to work exactly as it always has. I could also be wrong about their positions.

[nbperp]

And I've got a note to clarify in the next PG that B/C/F locks the damage value for the attack.

[Ginormous]

So, you do roll BCF twice then, nbperp?

[normalview]

So, you do roll BCF twice then, nbperp?

If you want to get technical, not at the moment.



But that was not the intent: we've always rolled twice prior to BN and we will continue to roll twice. The PG entry will make that very clear.

Unless your judge wants to adhere strictly to the rules, even knowing the a errata is very soon to come, that's his business. I'll continue to let my players roll twice, though.

[Surfer13]

But Symbiote Blade will still only be a single roll with flurry, right?

Because if so, I have a new question here (http://www.hcrealms.com/forum/showthread.php?p=4813610#post4813610).

[Ginormous]

Symbiote Blade is only once, because you do it in response to the action, not the attack.

[Questions]

Symbiote Blade is only once, because you do it in response to the action, not the attack.

I think it depends on what the fix ends up being.

[normalview]

I think it depends on what the fix ends up being.

Symbiote Blade is not BCF. Whatever we do to BCF will have exactly zero impact on Symbiote Blade.


As noted, Symbote Blade is rolled when the combat action is used, so if used in conjunction with Flurry, it would be rolled once at the beginning of the action and Carnage would be stuck with the result until Flurry is completely resolved.

[sylnzz]

Let me get this straight. You can use flurry and blades twice using a flurry? I ask because someone had told you couldn't blade twice with flurry.

[normalview]

Let me get this straight. You can use flurry and blades twice using a flurry? I ask because someone had told you couldn't blade twice with flurry.

Ever since the combo first appeared waaaaaaaaaaaay back in Clobberin' Time, you've been able to use them together, yes. Whoever told you that you couldn't was mistaken.



The current wording is unfortunate, but it will be remedied before GenCon (next PG is due out in July so the GenCon players have time to read it over and adjust if needed). So, for the moment, it is technically correct to only roll once... but I don't think many would hold it against you if you played the old and soon to be current way.

[Questions]

Symbiote Blade is not BCF. Whatever we do to BCF will have exactly zero impact on Symbiote Blade.


As noted, Symbote Blade is rolled when the combat action is used, so if used in conjunction with Flurry, it would be rolled once at the beginning of the action and Carnage would be stuck with the result until Flurry is completely resolved.

nbperp mentioned that the fix would be to indicate that BCF locks the damage value for the attack, but I'm not sure that actually fixes the problem. Without seeing more, I wasn't sure if this would be a more sweaping change to include Flurry and/or Locking which could indeed affect Symbiote Blade.

Here's the problem with just changing BCF...to activate Flurry you give a a close combat action that allows a second close combat attack as a free action after the first close combat attack resolves. BCF activates when you give that close combat action, but isn't rolled until after making a successful attack roll. Assuming the first attack succeeds, under the current suggested fix you'd roll the replacement the damage value and it would become locked for the attack. You'd then go on to the second close combat attack as a free action after the first close combat attack resolves. But what activates BCF for the second attack? You're giving a free action this time, not a close combat action. There is no second close combat action to activate BCF for a second time. Now I assume you'll argue that the original close combat action is enough to activate BCF a second time, but why? Normally a close combat action only activates an effect once. Here, we're going to be saying that that one close combat action can activate the effect twice. BCF is written like a tripwire, it activates when something happens. But that something only happens once, not twice. If the second flurry attack was a close combat action, I'd agree BCF would activate again...but that opens a whole different set of problems. Unfortunately I think the real fix to this problem is an explict exception to Flurry/BCF in the Player's Guide. (When BCF is used with Flurry the damage value only remains locked for the attack and the damage value of each attack is replaced by separate dice rolls.) Changing BCF the way nbperp has suggested shouldn't allow a second roll. Instead it should leave the normal damage as the damage value for the second attack.

[Questions]

That all said, an actual fix (which I think would fix it, but might also raise a bunch of questions that the orange tint don't want to deal with) is:

BLADES/CLAWS/FANGS When this character is given a close combat action, you may roll a d6 after making a successful attack roll for each attack during the close combat action. The result replaces this character’s damage value, then that damage value is locked until the end of the attack.

Whether that text has any implications for any other game effects...I can't tell you.

[normalview]

nbperp mentioned that the fix would be to indicate that BCF locks the damage value for the attack, but I'm not sure that actually fixes the problem. Without seeing more, I wasn't sure if this would be a more sweaping change to include Flurry and/or Locking which could indeed affect Symbiote Blade.

Here's the problem with just changing BCF...to activate Flurry you give a a close combat action that allows a second close combat attack as a free action after the first close combat attack resolves. BCF activates when you give that close combat action, but isn't rolled until after making a successful attack roll. Assuming the first attack succeeds, under the current suggested fix you'd roll the replacement the damage value and it would become locked for the attack. You'd then go on to the second close combat attack as a free action after the first close combat attack resolves. But what activates BCF for the second attack? You're giving a free action this time, not a close combat action. There is no second close combat action to activate BCF for a second time. Now I assume you'll argue that the original close combat action is enough to activate BCF a second time, but why? Normally a close combat action only activates an effect once. Here, we're going to be saying that that one close combat action can activate the effect twice. BCF is written like a tripwire, it activates when something happens. But that something only happens once, not twice. If the second flurry attack was a close combat action, I'd agree BCF would activate again...but that opens a whole different set of problems. Unfortunately I think the real fix to this problem is an explict exception to Flurry/BCF in the Player's Guide. (When BCF is used with Flurry the damage value only remains locked for the attack and the damage value of each attack is replaced by separate dice rolls.) Changing BCF the way nbperp has suggested shouldn't allow a second roll. Instead it should leave the normal damage as the damage value for the second attack.

You're assuming an awful lot there.

For example, you seem to be forgetting (or maybe think we're forgetting) that a combat value staying locked for the entire action is only a default; if the game effect in question says something different (e.g. this combat value is locked for this attack), then that something different is the way it is.


If we go and specifically call out Flurry and BCF, fine, that fixes that problem... but what about future game effects that might run on similar wording? Are we going to have to add errata for each and every one?

It will be fixed, and it will be fixed in such a way as to cause a minimum amount of revisions and rewriting. Relax and enjoy your game.

[Harpua]

nbperp mentioned that the fix would be to indicate that BCF locks the damage value for the attack, but I'm not sure that actually fixes the problem. Without seeing more, I wasn't sure if this would be a more sweaping change to include Flurry and/or Locking which could indeed affect Symbiote Blade.

Here's the problem with just changing BCF...to activate Flurry you give a a close combat action that allows a second close combat attack as a free action after the first close combat attack resolves. BCF activates when you give that close combat action, but isn't rolled until after making a successful attack roll. Assuming the first attack succeeds, under the current suggested fix you'd roll the replacement the damage value and it would become locked for the attack. You'd then go on to the second close combat attack as a free action after the first close combat attack resolves. But what activates BCF for the second attack? You're giving a free action this time, not a close combat action. There is no second close combat action to activate BCF for a second time. Now I assume you'll argue that the original close combat action is enough to activate BCF a second time, but why? Normally a close combat action only activates an effect once. Here, we're going to be saying that that one close combat action can activate the effect twice. BCF is written like a tripwire, it activates when something happens. But that something only happens once, not twice. If the second flurry attack was a close combat action, I'd agree BCF would activate again...but that opens a whole different set of problems. Unfortunately I think the real fix to this problem is an explict exception to Flurry/BCF in the Player's Guide. (When BCF is used with Flurry the damage value only remains locked for the attack and the damage value of each attack is replaced by separate dice rolls.) Changing BCF the way nbperp has suggested shouldn't allow a second roll. Instead it should leave the normal damage as the damage value for the second attack.

Blades/Claws/Fangs
When this character is given a close combat action, you may roll a d6 after making a successful attack roll. The result replaces this character’s damage value, then that damage value is locked.


"When this character is given a close combat action..."
That happened. The first attack and the second attack all happen when you the character is given the close combat action.


"...you may roll a d6 after making a successful attack roll..."
It doesn't say "once" or anything. I see no reason why it would not occur on any attack occurring during said close combat action.

[nivlac713]

I don't get it. Seems to work the same as always and if we are getting an FAQ then theres really no issue. I would hate it is I only got to roll once. I can deal with it with Carnage cause hes one guy, but on everyone? Stinky...

[Harpua]

I don't get it. Seems to work the same as always and if we are getting an FAQ then theres really no issue. I would hate it is I only got to roll once. I can deal with it with Carnage cause hes one guy, but on everyone? Stinky...

It WILL work the same as before.

When you combine the definition of locking with the new wordings of BCF and Flurry, which is what we currently have, then you only get one roll. Hence the coming errata.

[Questions]

You're assuming an awful lot there.

I'm not assuming anything. I have no idea what the fix is that nbperp is suggesting. Discussed a number of different ideas because I have no idea what that fix might be.

For example, you seem to be forgetting (or maybe think we're forgetting) that a combat value staying locked for the entire action is only a default; if the game effect in question says something different (e.g. this combat value is locked for this attack), then that something different is the way it is.

Actually my post takes that into account. My argument is that changing it to attack won't change the outcome. (Although I also suggested that you would argue that it does. See Harpua's post below.)

If we go and specifically call out Flurry and BCF, fine, that fixes that problem... but what about future game effects that might run on similar wording? Are we going to have to add errata for each and every one?

It's going to be interesting to see how future game effects are written. We already see WK having a game effect that is similar, but different (Symbiote Blade).

It will be fixed, and it will be fixed in such a way as to cause a minimum amount of revisions and rewriting. Relax and enjoy your game.

Glad to hear that. Just would like to see the fix.

"When this character is given a close combat action..."
That happened. The first attack and the second attack all happen when you the character is given the close combat action.


"...you may roll a d6 after making a successful attack roll..."
It doesn't say "once" or anything. I see no reason why it would not occur on any attack occurring during said close combat action.

That is where we are going to have to agree to disagree. I see the "when" as a tripwire that only activates once. You see it as being able to activate the effect multiple times. (Which I anticipated as the response.) I actually haven't looked at enough other effects to see if there is a precedence for either interpretation or for whether either interpretation will have any effect outside of this issue.

[nbperp]

That is where we are going to have to agree to disagree. I see the "when" as a tripwire that only activates once. You see it as being able to activate the effect multiple times. (Which I anticipated as the response.) I actually haven't looked at enough other effects to see if there is a precedence for either interpretation or for whether either interpretation will have any effect outside of this issue.

Then why has BCF ever been allowed to be used on the second attack, in your opinion? It would still be once per action, according to you, no?

[Questions]

Then why has BCF ever been allowed to be used on the second attack, in your opinion? It would still be once per action, according to you, no?

Actually yes. I think this was something no one caught before. That and your time as rules arbitrator has been delineated by more of a strict adherence to the written word. I think under some of the past RAs Symbiote Blade would be a two roll power.

(Not complaining...just explaining why this hasn't really come up before.)

[Questions]

Did we get an errata to address this? I didn't see one in the new Player's Guide, but I could have easily missed it.

[nbperp]

This got missed in the July update. It will still be ruled appropriately at GenCon, we will announce accordingly.

I have made the change in my "next version" so it does not get forgotten again.

[Tarnish]

I am beginning to suspect that you are Harpua in disguise:

http://www.hcrealms.com/forum/showthread.php?t=280966

Of course he is!

http://www.hcrealms.com/forum/showpost.php?p=4750197&postcount=50

Tarnish