Post originally by Oliver at 2004-03-26 13:07:07
Converted from Phorums BB System



Polaris wrote:
------------------------------
No I won't. First off you only get to toss dice equal to my PER score and I assure you that it will be lower than my WIT.

Secondly there is a HARD LIMIT to the amount you can adjust my target number....that hard limit is YOUR WIT.

CONGRATULATIONS! At best you have improved your chances of winning initiative all up to the fantasic margin of 60/40 against.

For that you are now committed to an attack that will probably not penetrate my defense (I have armor too you know).

Before you go off like this, I suggest you read the rules.
----------------------------------

I suggest YOU do. You will find NO RULE WHATSOEVER indicating that Per is inferior to Wit. Nor that you WILL have armor.

As such, your argument is a straw that merely underscores that your claim is FAR from universally applicable.

It would help you more to admit it is constructed on premises that may or may not be given.

-----------------------------------
For that you are commited to an attack that will likely not penetrate my toughness. That is why buying initiative is generally a piss poor idea.
----------------------------------

No, it is why your understanding of the rules is piss poor. In order for the attack being unlikely to penetrate your toughness, your toughness has to be higher than weapons damage, i.e. your toughness needs to be seriously superior to his STN.

------------------------------------
In addition you are ceding the main point: Such a move requires a lot of PLAYER SKILL to know when to buy init and when not to (same with Countering).
------------------------------------

Not at all. It was already shown to you that your argument is based on circumstances that will never, EVER be given in a game. It was also be shown to you that there are plenty of circumstances to win the situation, such as keeping only a few dice for the second exchange.

You simply ignore any and all rebuttals and repeat your own argument ad nauseam, ever backpedaling on even more specific circumstances under which your claims may or may not be given.

Fact is that your claims are in defiance of practically all experience with the game. And that is what counts. If the theory doesn't match the data, it is bogus. And so is yours.