Advancing into combat

[Halfbat]

Reading the RAW there appears to be no way to advance into combat without a Charge, which means a character must be 5+ meters away. If he is closer he can Move into contact with the enemy but cannot attack and the rules state that "any adjacent enemy may make a Reaction free attack in response".

This means that a character moving into combat invites a Reaction free attack from his opponent, then gets clobbered by his opponent on his turn in the action cycle BEFORE he gets any chance to reply. There is no way to advance and attack without a charge, even at a shortened distance. There are no exceptions.

This leads to a variety of in-game anomalies and oddities, especially in small area situations (5m or less - more than enough room for combat). Any suggestions? Does adjacent mean 'excluding enemy you contact at the end of your move'? Should the 'Close Combat Attack' CA also include a move of up to 1 or 2m to stay in contact?

I know there have been suggestions such as the free 1m step, but is the above interpretation flawed? What should it be or how should it be fixed (if at all)?

Again, if you're around MS some clarification would be useful (and possibly one for the player's guide, too).

Thanks

 

[Vatras]

My interpretation of the text is, that "adjacent enemy" means every other enemy except the one I am advancing on.

 

[GoingDown]

My interpretation of the text is, that "adjacent enemy" means every other enemy except the one I am advancing on.

Yes, this will do nicely.

I will also give "free 1m move" before attack.

 

[Mac V]

One thing WoTC did right with 3.5 was to truly clarify attack of oppertunity. I'd like to see something like that for "free" attacks in RQ.

 

[Halfbat]

My interpretation of the text is, that "adjacent enemy" means every other enemy except the one I am advancing on.

A decent assumption. The bolder character still gets hammered before he can attack.

I will also give "free 1m move" before attack.

That's how I play it, too - a free 1m to 2m move into attack providing no other opponents are adjacent (so no switching between one combat and the next).

That's not what it says, though, and it seems that I'm not running things RAW.

 

[soltakss]

If you make Movement a Combat Action and have different types of movement actions, you get this sort of silly effects.

I've never treated Movement in such a rigid fashion and hope never to do so.

I've always treated movement as something that, if treated sensibly, works itself out quite nicely.

 

[Deleriad]

If you make Movement a Combat Action and have different types of movement actions, you get this sort of silly effects.

I've never treated Movement in such a rigid fashion and hope never to do so.

I've always treated movement as something that, if treated sensibly, works itself out quite nicely.

Playing RAW. Want to move into combat and engage an opponent who is waiting for you? He will get a chance to hit you first but what do you expect? If you want to try and take the initiative and attack someone then you've got to take a risk. The best way to do it? Well if you have a higher SR, move into combat, hope you can defend yourself against the attack and then rely on your higher SR to attack. The worst thing is if your opponent has a higher SR and you have to face two attacks in a row. Of course your opponent may try a flurry when you step in so better hope you have enough CAs to defend them all.

You could always take the coward's option and delay your action in the hope that he comes to you first. That way a Mexican stand off happens. Seems to me that MRQ models some of the problems of trying to move into combat rather well.

 

[Halfbat]

Playing RAW. Want to move into combat and engage an opponent who is waiting for you? He will get a chance to hit you first but what do you expect? If you want to try and take the initiative and attack someone then you've got to take a risk. The best way to do it? Well if you have a higher SR, move into combat, hope you can defend yourself against the attack and then rely on your higher SR to attack. The worst thing is if your opponent has a higher SR and you have to face two attacks in a row. Of course your opponent may try a flurry when you step in so better hope you have enough CAs to defend them all.

That's not quite right playing RAW - irrespective of higher or lower SR your enemy gets two attacks against you (try running it through). One attack comes in response to your move as a Reaction. The second comes on his SR, if lower than you then in the same cycle OR if higher than you then in the next cycle (or round).

Me = SR 15, It = SR 21
===============
21 - It moves about 4m away
15 - Me Move adjacent to It
*** It gets Reaction free attack (1st attack)
--
21 - It has Me next to it, so attacks (2nd attack) or flurries (+++ attacks)
15 - Me finally gets to attack It.

Or Me = SR21 It = SR 15
================
21 - Me Move adjacent to It
*** It gets Reaction free attack (1st attack)
15 - It has Me next to it, so attacks (2nd attack) or flurries (+++ attacks)
--
21 - Me finally gets to attack It.

An approach against another combatant should not automatically invoke a Free Attack if the character is specifically attacking his target and is on guard against it (hence the need for a non-charge move into Combat). A charge can, in some situations, be a disaster (against a set spear I'm tempted to think the additional charge damage bonus should be inflicted on ht echarger if he doesn't strike first!).

 

[Deleriad]

That's not quite right playing RAW - irrespective of higher or lower SR your enemy gets two attacks against you (try running it through). One attack comes in response to your move as a Reaction. The second comes on his SR, if lower than you then in the same cycle OR if higher than you then in the next cycle (or round).

Ok my bad. I forgot that. Assuming for convenience sake that both parties have 3 CAs then the mover gets 2 attacks, 1 move and 3 reactions, the receiver gets 3 attacks, 1 reaction attack and has two defenses left. This is too much of a drawback. It might be a not unreasonable simulation of the advantages of a prepared defence but that's another issue. It's probably too harsh to be 'fun' in a game.

I must admit that I have been busy overhauling MRQ into my own version of the game and one of the things I've done is to give combat actions categories (generally: attack, defence, maneuver, move and a couple of others). One of the combat actions I added is Engage (maneuver). It basically lets you move and engage an enemy in combat. I generally let an opponent oppose a maneuver with a weapon skill, dodge or athletics if they spend a reaction. Doing maneuvers does, not, though open you up to free attacks from the target of the maneuver. So, an opponent could try and prevent then engagement (gets out of the way) or accept it on the basis he'll still get an attack in first in most cases.

I will say that there's a lot of good ideas in MRQ but they do seem awfully "beta" at times.

(edited to change the misplaced quote author)

 

[simonh]

Personaly, I'd expect the person advancing into combat to have the advantage. Psychologicaly they are in controll of the situation. Also they chose the pace of their advance, they have the advantage of momentum, and determine exactly when they come into striking distance with the enemy, who is psychologicaly and physicaly in defensive mode.

 

[Richard]

Maybe this will help. This is a manouevre/action I added to my MRQ fixes package. It's part of a broader rewrite of the core rules but hopefully the idea is useful. It's a handy Action probably likely to result in a lot of manouvering, stumbling over tables, swinging from chandeliers...

New Combat Manouevre – Step Inside
This move can only be used against wielders of very long weapons and pole arms (Not against those using a quarterstaff or rapier) and never on open ground. When fighting in a confined space, a small crowded room or narrow corridor for instance, lengthy weapons are less effective, see above. An opponent wielding a weapon two categories or more shorter than a polearm or very long weapon (Quarterstaff and rapier are not counted as very long for this purpose) can attempt to ‘step inside’ their normal range of usage. This costs one combat action and if successful the longer weapon’s confined space and strike rank penalties are doubled and it can do no more than clubbing, 1d6, damage on a successful hit. Quarterstaff and rapier wielders can attempt to step inside polearms. Step Inside requires a successful Dodge roll to accomplish. This roll is separate from any combat reaction rolls made by the character. e.g. A nimble thief finds himself under attack by a halberd wielding guard in the small snug booth of his favourite bar. Coming before the guard (-3 SR penalty for polearm) in the combat order he opts to step inside the huge weapon. He makes a successful dodge roll and manages it. It is now the guards action but he is at –40% to hit and can only inflict 1d6. He now has the option of accepting the penalties or executing a fighting retreat to more open ground.

This is an excerpt from my fixes booklet (10 or so pages). However I'm an obsessive gamer but a complete luddite. I don't have a web page and 'wiki wiki' to me is just the noise that bloody robot from Buck Rogers in the 25th Century used to make. The whole package will be e-mailed to anyone contacting richardgorman@blueyonder.co.uk And if you could 'stick it on the wiki', post it to Dead Blue Clown and otherwse make it generally available I'd be grateful 'cause I don't know how. Then I can get back to reworking my GURPs Traveller campaign...

 

[Deleriad]

Personaly, I'd expect the person advancing into combat to have the advantage. Psychologicaly they are in controll of the situation. Also they chose the pace of their advance, they have the advantage of momentum, and determine exactly when they come into striking distance with the enemy, who is psychologicaly and physicaly in defensive mode.

Well that's not generally how close combat works. Having to move 1-4m forward into combat is dangerous, tricky, unbalancing and prone to getting you killed if your foe is ready and waiting. Good tactics if you're faced with this prospect are:
* Use a big halberd and poke your enemy from a distance
* Very, very slowly sidle forward behind a really big shield
* go beserk, charge and try to the scare foe out of his wits
* use a magnum .44
* endlessly taunt him about his aunty's cheese until he charges you

Stepping forward with derring do and a heroically swishing sword will usually just get you minced.

 

[Halfbat]

* Very, very slowly sidle forward behind a really big shield

That's exactly what we're talking about, though a really big shield isn't strictly necessarily, just the caution. It's almost as dangerous as disengaging.

A half move into contact & attack seems a pretty useful representation: caution whilst limiting movement.

 

[Deleriad]

* Very, very slowly sidle forward behind a really big shield

That's exactly what we're talking about, though a really big shield isn't strictly necessarily, just the caution. It's almost as dangerous as disengaging.

A half move into contact & attack seems a pretty useful representation: caution whilst limiting movement.

Your opponent will still get to whack you first though, which is my point. If you allow a half move and attack in the same action then you're saying somehow that it is possible to move into contact with a ready opponent and hit him before he can hit you. That, IMHO, is wrong. You might be able to so terrify an opponent that he stands unnerved in front of you but the initiative is with the defender in this case. The answer is to move into combat with someone who is already otherwise engaged so that he can't afford to opportunity attack.

If you allow an engage maneuver which doesn't include an attack then your opponent can simply attack you with his regular action but would not be able to get an opportunity attack along with a regular attack. That IMHO is how it should be.

 

[Rurik]

Your opponent will still get to whack you first though, which is my point. If you allow a half move and attack in the same action then you're saying somehow that it is possible to move into contact with a ready opponent and hit him before he can hit you.

Actually, when two combatants are just out of reach and armed with weapons of similar reach, the step in is usually made as part of the attack, so it is the attacker who often strikes first. Reach of course changes this - but the MRQ rules do not model reach, so we should treat all weapons as equal in that regards.

But IMHO the free attack against advancing into combat mechanic is broken. Viddy this my droog:

You advance as an action, I free attack as a reaction.
I withdraw as my action.
You advance into range again, I take a free whack.
I withdraw.
You again advance. Whack.
I withdraw.
Wash, rinse, repeat.

Given the same number of combat actions it is almost impossible for you to ever get an attack in as long as I have room to withdraw.If you back up to set up a charge I can either charge you or just advance enough so that you don't have the 5 meters necessary to charge.

 

[Halfbat]

If you allow a half move and attack in the same action then you're saying somehow that it is possible to move into contact with a ready opponent and hit him before he can hit you. That, IMHO, is wrong.

But that's what the charge allows already - and that's potentially a far more dangerous action especially against a readied spear.

 

[Trifletraxor]

How come all this heavy rules on movement? They walk up and start bashing eachother, piece of cake. It good to have rules for when you want to disengage, but detailed movement within combat-rules kinda take the focus away from the killing.

SGL.

 

[canology]

How about this?

Allow up to half a move and an attack, but allow the opponent to take any reaction attack prior to the original attacker's attack. To rephrase that so it makes some sense, here is an example.

Fat-Pat and Tim are in a baseball bat duel.
*Tim has the higher strike rank so he decides to move and attack.
*Tim steps forward 2m.
** Fat-Pat interupts the action by taking his reaction swing.
*Tim uses a reaction and ducks under the feeble blow.
*Tim now completes his unfinished action and bats Fat-Pat.

I hope that made sense.

It just boils down to allowing reactions to interupt an ongoing action, and then allowing the original action to be completed after the reaction is resolved.

 

[Halfbat]

Allow up to half a move and an attack, but allow the opponent to take any reaction attack prior to the original attacker's attack. To rephrase that so it makes some sense, here is an example.

That's one way whilst allowing limited response and also potentially using up reactions - the attacker at least gets to hit.

It may be that such an Engage manoeuvre is better treated like a Delayed action and that both get a skill dice-off to decide who hits first: the Reaction Free Attack or the attacker's Close Combat Attack.