About grappling combatants

[gran_orco]

I have a couple of doubts. If I am grappled with an opponent, could I dodge or defend another attack, or am I helpless?

If I want to break free, with the new rules, it seems very easy! -with the previous ones it was easy, too-. To break free the attacker must fail, but If the attacker has succeded, the defender must fail. If the success levels are equal, the higher Success roll wins and the lower roll is demoted by one level, so the result compared with the Unarmed combat table shows that the defender has succeeded in breaking free, ever!
If I have 5% with Unarmed skill, 95% to break free.
If I have 95% with the skill, 50% to break free.

It does not seems all right. The character should not designate himself as the defender. It has not sens for me. :?:

I hope that you could understand me.

 

[gran_orco]

Nobody can help me?

 

[Mage]

I am not very knowledgable with the runequest rules, but most forum members would not be on the net tonight as it is a bank hodliday weekend here in Ireland, not sure about the UK, but I think there is one there too.

Just bump your thread tomorrow if nobody answers it, but someone will. I am new to runequest and so would not be able to provide a fair, accurate or productive answer.

 

[Zipp Dementia]

I'm not sure I understand the question...

 

[Halfbat]

If I am grappled with an opponent, could I dodge or defend another attack, or am I helpless?

You can only Dodge the initial grapple attack intending to put the combatants into a grapple. Once grappled, both are limited in what they can do (p59).

If I want to break free, with the new rules, it seems very easy! -with the previous ones it was easy, too-. To break free the attacker must fail, but If the attacker has succeded, the defender must fail. [...]It does not seems all right. The character should not designate himself as the defender. It has not sens for me.

Not sure what you are saying here, but it might be that you've overlooked the fact that Break Free is a special Combat Action, taken on the defender's turn. It forces a grapple response by the attacker, limited by what he can do when in a grapple. Neither knows whether the attacker continues to succeed at this point as the attacker _has_ to reroll as per a normal grapple attack.

The purpose of the "defender" designating himself as such is to ensure a re-use of the table rather than inserting another table (or line into the table) which says "or attacker breaks free if trying to do so".

As to the percentage results, these are the same as any other version of combat, whether demote rules are being used or not. I suspect the percentages given alter given the explanation above.

Hope this helps.

 

[gran_orco]

What I do not understand is the sentence "the character makes a grapple attempt, designating himself as the defender". Later it says "a result of grapple fails means that the character has succed in breaking free".

With this rule, and the new rules of opposed rolls, it´s very easy the "grapple fails" result.
I hope that you could understand me now.

 

[Rurik]

What I do not understand is the sentence "the character makes a grapple attempt, designating himself as the defender". Later it says "a result of grapple fails means that the character has succed in breaking free".

With this rule, and the new rules of opposed rolls, it´s very easy the "grapple fails" result.
I hope that you could understand me now.

The grapple tables did not get a reworking in the players update as did parry and dodge. I see the success/success result has grapple fails as the result, so the table is stacked against the 'attacker'. Though I think using the opposed roles actually fixes the problem you describe if I understand you correctly.

Before, if both parties rolled a simple success, the grapple failed (or the defender breaks free) - very hard to grapple and hold.

Now, if both succeed, but the attacker rolls better than the defender, the defenders result is downgraded to a failure, so you use the Attacker Succeeds/Defender Fails Column.

So in short now if both succeed whoever rolls better wins.

Much better than if both succeed the defender automatically wins IMHO.

Does that make sense?

 

[gran_orco]

I understand you, but you do not understand me. I am frustrated because of my poor english
I will use an example:
Beron has Unarmed 60%
Anya has Unarmed 20%

1) Beron fights with Anya. He spends 1 Combat Action and rolls 50. Good.
2) Now he opposes his 60% with the 20% of Anya. He rolls 59 and Anya 19, so Anya's result is downgraded to a failure. OK. The grapple succeds.

A) The turn of Anya. She spends a Combat Action to try to break free. She makes a grapple attempt, designating herself as the defender, so she must make an opposed test with her 20% Unarmed skill versus herself (20% vs 20%) A result of "grapple fails" means the character has succed in breaking free. THIS is what I do not understand, because the possible results could be:

• Succes vs succes) She rolls 20 (attacking) and 19 (defending),for example: The second result is downgraded to a fail: Grapple succeds -----> She does not break free. Although there is a chance of 50% to break free, too.

• Failure vs failure) She rolls 21 or more and 21 or more: Grapple fails -----> She breaks free! THIS is what has no sense for me!

• Failure vs Anything) She rolls 21 or more and any other roll (for example 10): Grapple fails again -----> She breaks free, again!!

Do you understand now why I am saying that it is very easy to break free?
I am sure that I am missing something.

 

[Rurik]

Ahh, I think I see the confusion. Anya does not oppose Anya, Anya opposes Beron.

The bit about Anya Designating herself the defender means that even though Anya initiated the break free attempt, it is resolved on the table as if Anya is the defender and Beron is the attacker.

Does that make sense?

 

[gran_orco]

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH!!!!

THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU
:wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: