Halcyon Question

This is just a continuation of the "Dalthid Question" Topics, although with a new title Feel free to ask away on any ACC-related

I may just be stupid, but I can't find the rules for the Piloting Championship What are the TO time limits?

On the rules section ( http://www.darkjedibrotherhood.com/dbjedi/acc/rules.asp ) there is a sub-section concerning "ACC Standards" which also include the CHL and PCHL rules. That would be why they're not listed specifically on the hall as these are the same rules throughout these ladders. Anyways, for your question, it's a 72-hour post limit

Thanks for that.

Hi! Question. I am currently engaged in a long battle. I need to update my CS to conform with the new rules, but can't while I am engaged. What to do?

thanks, mac

If there's a way to update it without affecting anything within the battle itself, that'd be best. If you *have* to change some stats that directly conflict with something in the battle already, send me an e-mail with the link to the battle you're in, plus the stats that changed. I can make a comment at the top stating what the "original" stats were for the battle. This isn't something that would ever be normally done, but due to these changes that were introduced, it can be done this time. But again, only if it affects a stat(s) that conflict with something already done in the battle

Are there any strict rules concerning the placement of Force notations (the ones with the square brackets)? Since they've come into play, I've mainly been writing them in at the end of the sentence, but I've also seen other people use them directly after the description of the Force use. Any thoughts or need for clarification?

Thanks! I'll get on that.

In response to Revenge: There is no hard or fast rule on exactly where you annotate. At the very least it has to be at the end of the sentence it was used. However, as you said, you can also put them in the middle of a sentence, after you have "used" the power. I do that myself fairly often. Neither is the right or wrong way. Either/or is fine, so long as the annotation is there

Two questions: Can you do piloting battles in the ACC outside of PCHLs? If so, are there any venues that you can choose from?

You can have a piloting battle at any time. It is one of the many "different" engagement formats: http://www.darkjedibrotherhood.com/dbjedi/...p?Part=10#pilot

There are no space-only venues. The reason being the lack of general participation outside of the PCHL. However, as with all other battles, you can create your own venue. Just be sure to put in a detailed description in your original challenge so the judge has something to work with

assuming i ever get anymore points to worry about this what is the better choice using them for duel handedness on weapons or the strong hand/off hand stuff that was in the last CM report?

The old dual-handedness system is no longer in use. The "new" system involves the strong/off-hand things and must be used (even if you only go with one hand). You were "given" 4 extra points to be used, along with anything else you'd like to give it. Check the CS guide for more information

Q1: What an AWESOME sig you have. Who made it?

Q2 (seriously): I'm qualified, yet I want to do some training battles. For some reason I can't seem to request a training match. Er, why?

Training battles are only for those who haven't as of yet qualified for the ACC. That being said, a big reason we have Clan halls are to allow members of a Clan to have a place to "Train" as well. Wins and losses aren't counted in these halls, and as such are a good place to practice without worrying about your record.

But the training hall description says, or has said before, "For pre and post qualification training." I remember seeing somewhere that Qualified people could train, just against trainers in the training hall. Correct me if I'm wrong.

You're wrong? We don't have the staff to do both pre-training and post. We can only do so much, and I hope that Clans would take up some of the slack and lend a hand in helping out their members.

Thanks for clarifying.

The "hardcore option" says melee weapons only. Is lightsaber considered a melee weapon for purposes of the "hardcore option?"

Thanks for your answer.

A lightsaber would be considered as such, yes

Two more questions: could an Initiate face someone qualified in a Clan hall as a pseudo-training match? If so, could someone in a different clan who is not qualified face somoene in a different clan in their clan's hall?

1) Yes
2) There is the general non-affiliated "Clan Hall" section for cross-Clan battles

Since you have made it pretty clear that there will be no vendetta rank for the GJW, will there be a period of increased activity on the part of the trainers to speed up the qualification process, so that more can participate?

I would just like to remind people, no GJW rank for ACC events is ridiculous. All events are supposed to be open to anyone. You want to write? Open up word. You want to game? Go buy the game. You want to ACC? Oh, I'm sorry. You should've thought about that and tried to qualify beforehand.

So here's my question, since I know someone will say "you didn't ask a question." Why the hell are we still utilizing the whole "now GJW rank" rule?

We're utilizing it because in everything else in the ACC, you must be qualified to participate. There was always this exception for the GJW, but not any longer. The rank itself no longer even exists. It was previously deleted. This isn't "new" either, as the RoS was also open only to those who were qualified. As such, nothing was suddenly sprung on anyone.

As for the qualification matches and the trainers, they will work as quickly as possible, but nothing can be expedited. They have other responsibilities, and since this is a GJW and these are active members in their Clan, they're "needed" elsewhere. While I"ll stress they focus on qualification over say training and shorten the process as much as possible (without compromising the integrity), I will not force them to work faster on it.

Okay, Halc's report says this:
Remember that many powers that deal with the interaction with another character will not work on the Vong. Exceptions to this include Force Lightning and Telekinesis Strike
And the GJW7 website about the Yuuzhan Vong (http://www.darkjedibrotherhood.com/gjw/vong_information.asp?Part=1#force) says this:
Direct telekinetic attacks will not work against the Yuuzhan Vong. In order to take advantage of these powers, a Jedi must be creative in their employment. Whereas one cannot use the Force to knock down his foe directly, he may manipulate an object and hurl it into his foe.
If the GJW7 website is correct, I don't think Telekinetic Strike (TES) would work. Or is the site incorrect and Halc correct?

TES is "different" hence why it can be used. Direct [TE] can't. I put TES there on purpose. But for those who know the ACC, it probably won't help you much anyways against these Vong

Ok, I know you will say read the new guide to handedness and then try to fix it again, but I did. I read the guide at I couldn't make out what it was meant to say. I then asked someone else if they could help me with the handedness, they told me, then my CS was denied. How do I put the Handedness into my bio? Do I go to the custom weapons and type in strong hand and then off hand and allocate the points (even if you want '0' in your off hand)?

As I had mentioned in my denial, check our past CM reports as I had listed specific examples for how to do just that sort of thing. The same can also be found on the Compendium, and those links were also on the reports.

http://www.darkjedibrotherhood.com/dbjedi/...rt.asp?ID=10206

Check that report out for all the necessary links, examples and info

I know this is a Halcyon question topic…but I actually want to make a bunch of statements, if I may (if I may not, then just delete it or move it ). It concerns the “getting into the head…” and “writing thoughts of opponents…” that you might hear Judges harp on. Personally, I don’t recall ever explaining what we’re talking about with that, rather, I think I tried once but let it go…meh.

First, most know (or, at least, find out during training or qual) that the ACC battles are handled in 3rd person – but which one, gets a lot of folks stumped. I made it a personal goal to try and quell the grammar nazi’s a bit because it was getting too ridiculous. Sure, we still harp on sentence structure and tense, spelling and proofing – but that’s all basic creative writing and poor practices in those areas make for crappy posts; were not English professors. However, is seems that a mechanical ding (like writing an opponent’s thoughts) is actually related to a nit-picky grammar thing…the 3rd person narrative…and its about time that we just said f**k it and laid it out so you know.

I won’t attempt to dazzle anyone with crappy rhetoric, but try and give you a plain view of the narrative style that we expect in the ACC, what it looks like and what the limitations are. I’m going to skip the tenses because that’s too hard to get into without a volley of examples; frankly, I don’t have the time  Maybe someone else can hit that one up.

~//~

3rd person, in a nutshell, is writing from “outside”, as an observer – just to get that out of the way. Unless you’re addressing speech, there are no “I”’s, or “me”’s in 3rd person (unless its speech) – it’s all “he, she, him, her…”. Think of watching two people having a conversation, or watching two other players fight in JA/JO – you are playing a 3rd person role, an observer; the same can be said if you’re writing what you witness.

3rd person objective is when you can see all of the action (as stated above) but only have the knowledge of what can be plainly seen. You have no access to the characters’ thoughts, feelings or emotions unless the character displays or acknowledges them. If Joe and Steve are fighting, we are only privy to what we can see. We can see that Joe punched Steve, and we can even see that Steve stumbled backward – but we cannot tell, definitively, if Steve is actually hurt. We cannot tell what his thoughts are. Can a reasonable person assume that a punch hurts? No – not in our world here – all we can know for sure is what we can see, hear or is being displayed.

3rd person limited is when you have access to the thoughts of one of those characters, only one of them. This does not alternate either. If you have access to Joe, then Steve is off limits for the entirety (again, unless he plainly displays or acknowledges them). For instance, if Steve’s face grimaces or winces, depending on the circumstances, you can assume displeasure – but you cannot know the emotion or thought behind what his face is displaying; the display could be fraudulent.

3rd person omniscient is when you have access to the thoughts of all the characters, action, story events – to include those things that the characters may not even witness; like in 3rd person objective. In the omniscient, we can absolutely determine what Steve is thinking in the above example and we also have access to Joe’s thoughts. We can say, without a doubt, that he is in pain, hurt or frightened.

~//~

So what do we hope for in the ACC? In a perfect world we’d hope for a bit of 3rd person objective and limited – save 3rd person omniscient for your fiction writing outside of the ACC. 3rd limited is used where your personal character is concerned and objective where the environment of the battle is concerned. That is, I know Dalthid’s thoughts, because I am writing him. I can write that he feels scared, or hurt or angry. I know his environment, because I am writing him there, I know his actions and his point of view. I also know things he doesn’t – I know that if he backpedals too far he’s going to trip over that log, but Dalthid doesn’t know that (3rd p obj). My opponent can only know those things about Dalthid that I give him to know.

In a battle against Halcyon, however, I don’t know that much about Halc. I can write what his face is showing, I can write the actions he’s performing and even the things he’s saying – to a point – but I cannot know what he is thinking or feeling – that is 3rd person objective. I can see that Halcyon is also going to trip over that log – but I cannot know if he knows its there…confused yet?

In the objective, I can see all the action. In the limited, I can see, think, speak and feel for MY character – but what about my opponent? Well, the problem here is that speech is directly related to thought and the thoughts of my opponent are related to 3rd person omniscient. The 3rd person omniscient is unfair in the ACC because most ACC writers don’t do enough research to adequately or correctly portray the thoughts of their opponents. Some folks in the DB have touched on that in other topics, where we see APP’s standing up to GM’s. That is unlikely in the SW universe. There is a reverence and respect given to Masters – even fear in our cases, but JH Joe Bob rolls up on DJM Snuffy like he’s new on the block? Its just unrealistic – unless Joe Bob, as a character, is just that stupid.

The Omniscient point of view, when used in the ACC, is what you are being dinged on when we tell you “don’t write your opponent’s thoughts” or something of that nature. We tell you “you cannot know your opponent’s thoughts…” because we are saying ‘the most you can hope for, in this scenario as an author, is the ability of an author with 3rd Person Limited or Objective point of view’.

~//~

Okay, so what about the posts? Can an opponent know whatever has been previously written? For example, if I write that Dalthid is scared, but I don’t have him saying it – can my opponent know that to be true? The simple answer is Yes and No, LOL. Any combatant can “assume” anything based on the actions of their opponent – the problem comes when writers take too much or unrealistic liberty. It is a fact that, if I write Dalthid in thought – no opponent can know it, unless something like [LS] is used. However, if I write Dalthid’s actions in a way that can be reasonably assumed (like a cringing face, followed by a growl = angry) then its fair game. We see a lot of times when authors write ‘so and so was scared..’ or ‘the fear was evident…’ but they make absolutely no attempt to justify it, either by the action of the character or a sensing power; that’s no bueno.

In addition, there are speed-bumps that come with speech. As mentioned above, speech is directly related to thought, and thought [of an opponent] directly related to an omniscient author – which we are not, in the ACC. So what is reasonable speech? If a character could reasonably be seen/heard saying something, then its reasonable, LOL. For example, if someone wrote Dalthid saying “yer a piece of podo, boy…” then that can be reasonably assumed; but “Oh, JH Malarkey, you’re so great and strong…” cannot. Speech is a dangerous place to tread with ACC battles, specifically, the speech of your opponent. It is best to keep it at a minimum – or in line with what is written on a character sheet. Thoughts, however, should always be off limits.

Savy?

...

Savy?



Thanks for explaining all of that, Dal.

*Savvy. ;P

Nevermind I answered my own question reading in the ACC rules...

Is there any way to delete challenges I have made? I've got a list of challenges that are unanswered, one way or the other, some of them dating back to June, and a few for the GJW. I'd like to remove the older ones that are clearly being ignored.

Right now, no. Deleting challenges is a manual process that needs one of our coders to actually accomplish. So unless your opponent declines them, they'll be around for a bit

Quick question. Is anything else going to be done with the Creatures of the ACC?

Just interested I suppose.

Quejo

Something I'll have to look into. Work was/has been done on it, I just need to look into it all and see where to go with it

I dont know if this has been a recently asked question or not but what is to become of Echani what with the GMRG being more or less dead?

I'm a Sentinel II and pre-approved by the old CoG to use it, so if I were to add it to my sheet would it be denied?

Or did it just go back to being the way it used to be?

Just a random question...

Something I'll have to look into.  Work was/has been done on it, I just need to look into it all and see where to go with it



Yeah I remember making the Dossiers for them lol

I was thinking about it and it sparked my curiosity.

For Echani, only those who had them on their CS' previously can use them. Otherwise, it cannot be used by anyone else until the CS' are updated with the new Fighting Skills. In the near future, hopefully, it should act similar to how the lightsaber forms are currently done.

So now that we ditched Antei, whats gonna happen to the ACC?

My vote is for the WCC, Wang Combat Center... it flows off your tongue and into your pants.

Brief mention of the current "future" of the ACC in the DV...if you can find it More concrete write-ups will probably occur in the wiki later on

I've got a question about using Force shove, specifically does it fall under TE or TES? I think that if you're using the Force to move someone's whole body into a wall it falls under TE. Let's face it, for someone to use a Force punch (TES) to knock someone that far is impossible, because TES is equal to a character's strength.

TES is very specific. TE isn't. A "shove" however is much different than a "punch"

The reason I ask, and I'd like a definitive statement about my interpretation, is that during two of my battles during the GJW, the judge wrote that my attempted use at a Force shove was TES, with which I disagree. If I'm wrong I'd like to be set straight, and if I'm right it would be nice if all the ACC judges were on the same page.

It all depends on HOW it's written, and not how you wanted it to be written. If it appeared to be a "strike", that's TES. If it was clearly just a "shove", that's TE. We can only go by what is written, and not what ones intention was at the given time. If you want a more specific clarification, e-mail me, but all judges are on the "same page" concerning this

In regards to the Hand to Hand guide that was posted a few months back, When can we expect that to be brought into effect on our character Sheets and used in the ACC?

At some point down the line, yes. It will be similar to the Lightsaber system we have

cool thanks

Is there a general time frame that's being looked at for the integration of the H2H into the ACC?

Nope. It'll be done when it's done

Im just wondering here, as im trying to get into the ACC, what is the best thing to start me off???

There was a post concerning "Combat Help" that would be useful: http://www.darkjedibrotherhood.com/forum/i...?showtopic=4965

In all honesty, read the entire ACC Compendium. While it's a lot of information, it is extremely useful to anyone who wishes to do well. Last, I would suggest getting with someone in your Clan and having a training match with them to learn the basics before trying to qualify

Since Halcyon Rokir is the CM again, Ill post the question here.
In the Hand to Hand Combat Guide there is a box at the end of every art's description that, I presume, lists the moves that a practitioner of that art is able to execute. What I wanted to know was how much weight we have to put on this table in an ACC battle. If we do have to stick to it (i.e. we can only do those moves), then is there available a description of each move, so that there is no ambiguity in a battle?
If instead that box is just a general guide giving us ideas for possible moves, then the art's own description should already be enough.

Those would be moves specific to the form...one move wouldn't work in another form and so on. However, it's not the "only" thing you can do, and the form itself defines the general way you would fight and carry yourself in a h2h battle

This time I have a question about the "battlefield Objectives" GJW-IX event. In the Wiki description of the various forces of the Army of the Iron Throne it says that the soldiers are all equipped with Kraytskin armour system (e.g. 4th Recon Squadron). I have looked everywhere for a description of that armour, but I have not found one. For the ACC event, it would be quite useful to have a description of what your squad's armour looks like (and for the fiction "Recon" event as well, I suppose). Does such a description exist? Or was the name "Kraytskin armour" just invented without the description?

No idea...that would be a question you would have to ask someone like Raken as he designed all of the DB forces. Although if you look at it, my assumption is that it's armour made of Krayt-skin...or something similar So look-up Krayt's and see what they say

I'd imagine the Kraytskin armor is basically the Star Wars version of real-world Dragonskin armor.

Anyway... I know after GJW8 it was decided that PRT-JH would get access to Armory lightsabers for use. (Fictionwise, for use against the Vong. Personally, I still think the right answer there is massed blaster fire and/or carpet bombing. But that's just me.) Anyway, my question was this; how exactly does that translate to the ACC? The CS system doesn't grant points for lightsaber styles until DJK, insofar as I can determine.

I ask mainly because my stupid self decided to take on a couple of GJW ACC battles with a blaster rifle, and both my opponents are carrying lightsabers, neither of whom, IIRC, have points in any saber forms. And I figured going with the whole n00b-mistake "whoops, there goes your arm, pew pew, I win" route was not a valid tactic.

Basic answer is that Armory Lightsabers are "allowed", just because they entire reason they were introduced was to use in this very GJW.

That being said, in terms of skill, the Journeymen would all be "equal", but with a lot less skill than any DJK or above. They can handle it and swing it around, but not do much else. Enough to damage things without lopping off their own heads.