charging

gran_orco

Mongoose
I have a few questions about charging:
  • -It seems that a charge can only be evaded, but example on page 98 states that it can be parried. Are both options valid?
    -If a player charges, then he and his mount (if he is mounted) and the defender will have only one combat action during that round. I suppose that this is only valid with a flyby attack that ends movement disengaged, not for a character ending charge adjacent to another foe. Is not it?
    - The rule indicates that the recipient can do an opposed evading test versus athletics or riding attacker skill. But, again, the example on page 98 do not do this. So I will suppose that this is only for creatures trampling. Is not it?
    -If a quadruped creature charges its damage modifier is improved 2 steps. So, if a Dragon or a bear charges, which will be the final D12 damage modifier? D40? D100?
    -Finally, suposing that there is enough space, could do a foot warrior one charge each CA?
Could you explain these questions with a few examples? Thank you.
 
It seems that a charge can only be evaded, but example on page 98 states that it can be parried. Are both options valid?

Its page 99, and the trollkin doesn't attempt to parry; neither does the example say that it can. I think you're not reading the example correctly.

-If a player charges, then he and his mount (if he is mounted) and the defender will have only one combat action during that round. I suppose that this is only valid with a flyby attack that ends movement disengaged, not for a character ending charge adjacent to another foe. Is not it?

No, its true for all charges.

- The rule indicates that the recipient can do an opposed evading test versus athletics or riding attacker skill. But, again, the example on page 98 do not do this. So I will suppose that this is only for creatures trampling. Is not it?

Again, you've misread the example. The trollkin fails its Evade roll whilst Thrace succeeds. It is an opposed roll, but as the trollkin failed, there's no need for further explanation - although it could have been made clearer that an opposed contest is what would be entered into here.

-If a quadruped creature charges its damage modifier is improved 2 steps. So, if a Dragon or a bear charges, which will be the final D12 damage modifier? D40? D100?

No idea where you get D40 and D100 from... a charging dragon would be +5D12. A bear +2D8. The steps refer to the Damage Modifier chart on page 9. Find the charger's Damage Modifier and move 2 steps up from that. So if a human charger has 0 Damage Modifier it would get +1D2 (as its 1 step for a biped).

-Finally, suposing that there is enough space, could do a foot warrior one charge each CA?

In theory, yes. However, GMs will need to determine the distance available. If there's enough room but not so much room that a charger will expend its full movement allowance, then yes, it could happen every CA. I think the likelihood, in most close combats, is that that won't happen.
 
Thank you for your answers. It helped me a lot. However, there is something I am not sure about.
Loz said:
It seems that a charge can only be evaded, but example on page 98 states that it can be parried. Are both options valid?

Loz said:
Its page 99, and the trollkin doesn't attempt to parry; neither does the example say that it can. I think you're not reading the example correctly.
I readed "The trollkin knowing its buckler cannot stop all the damage from the longspear, uses his last CA in an attempt to dive clear using evade" and so I presumed that it was possible.

-If a player charges, then he and his mount (if he is mounted) and the defender will have only one combat action during that round. I suppose that this is only valid with a flyby attack that ends movement disengaged, not for a character ending charge adjacent to another foe. Is not it?
No, its true for all charges.
-Finally, suposing that there is enough space, could do a foot warrior one charge each CA?
Loz said:
In theory, yes. However, GMs will need to determine the distance available. If there's enough room but not so much room that a charger will expend its full movement allowance, then yes, it could happen every CA. I think the likelihood, in most close combats, is that that won't happen.
Do you mean that a charger and his recipient will have one combat action between them, but the charger and the recipient can attack another different opponents same round? I thought that "they will have only one combat action during that round" was that they could not do nothing more.

- The rule indicates that the recipient can do an opposed evading test versus athletics or riding attacker skill. But, again, the example on page 98 do not do this. So I will suppose that this is only for creatures trampling. Is not it?
Loz said:
Again, you've misread the example. The trollkin fails its Evade roll whilst Thrace succeeds. It is an opposed roll, but as the trollkin failed, there's no need for further explanation - although it could have been made clearer that an opposed contest is what would be entered into here.
I do not understand. Does this mean that the athletics roll is replaced by the attack roll? In which case should I use Athletics?

-If a quadruped creature charges its damage modifier is improved 2 steps. So, if a Dragon or a bear charges, which will be the final D12 damage modifier? D40? D100?
Loz said:
No idea where you get D40 and D100 from... a charging dragon would be +5D12. A bear +2D8. The steps refer to the Damage Modifier chart on page 9. Find the charger's Damage Modifier and move 2 steps up from that. So if a human charger has 0 Damage Modifier it would get +1D2 (as its 1 step for a biped).
Aaaaaaaahhhh. I thought that it was a dice step (D4-D6-D8 ). Now I understand.

Another 3 questions regarding charges:
  • -Do you spend one CA to charge and another one to attack, or just one CA for both actions.
    -If a short weapon user charges against a long weapon user, can the defender use a CA to attack the charger before receiving the impact? Should the defender declare it during his turn?
    -Movement is measured per round, not per CA. So, if two characters are separated 20 metres between them, and both have spears and want to charge each other, for exemple, how do you treat this round? A move x metres, B move x metres... What must I do if A has 3 CA and B only 2? Who should charge first? In which CA? :roll:

The trollkin facing Liliana attacks her with a short sword (reach short) while she is armed with a longsword (reach long) without spending an action before to closing on her. Are the rules of closing and disengaging ignored in the exemple, or have I misread it again?

I am overwhelming you with so many questions :oops:
 
The charging doesn't make any sense to me either.

Charging only lets you take 1 CA but then you talk later about charging multiple opponents.

In the example the player charges on his last combat action giving him a full 3.

As for the longsword aren't they only reach M when wielded 1 handed?
 
AxeMurder said:
The charging doesn't make any sense to me either.
Okay, first off, there's an error on p90, bullet point 4. It should say "Evading the charge permits the recipient to make an Opposed Test of his Evade skill versus the opponent's attack skill". The combat example is correct.

gran_orco said:
Do you spend one CA to charge and another one to attack, or just one CA for both actions?
The combined movement and attack of a charge only takes 1 CA.

gran_orco said:
Movement is measured per round, not per CA. So, if two characters are separated 20 metres between them, and both have spears and want to charge each other, for exemple, how do you treat this round?
The amount of distance you need to move for a charge has deliberately been left nebulous. The rules are designed for abstract play. It depends on the scene and what the GM thinks is reasonable.

gran_orco said:
If a short weapon user charges against a long weapon user, can the defender use a CA to attack the charger before receiving the impact? Should the defender declare it during his turn?
Yes, its mentioned on p90, bullet point 3. During a charge, whomever has the longer reach weapon should strike first. If they are both the same length, the just rely on initiative.

AxeMurder said:
Charging only lets you take 1 CA but then you talk later about charging multiple opponents. In the example the player charges on his last combat action giving him a full 3.
I'm not sure what you are getting at here? Formations of defenders is mentioned, but only as an example of where a charge may be staggered or hindered.

Being restricted to 1 CA in a round is for situations where the charger can do a ride by attack, i.e. you don't stop and therefor contact is inherently brief. If however you charge into contact with the express desire to remain embroiled, then don't use the rules mentioned in the final two bullet points. :wink:

As for the longsword aren't they only reach M when wielded 1 handed?
You are correct, they are M when wielded one handed.
 
If you declare a movement action to reach an opponent, and later you do an attack, could you move in the 3rd AC to another combat without declaring another movement action because you can move 8 metres during the round? Or should be the correct system: 1-move, 2-attack, 3-move, 4-attack?
 
Which one should be correct?
OPTION A
-1st CA: move to engage an enemy
-2nd CA: attack
-3rd CA: move to another enemy (maximum of 8m per round)
-4th CA: attack

OPTION B
-1st CA: move and attack
-2nd CA: move and attack

OPTION C
-1st CA: move (or 1st and 2nd CA at a time)
-2nd CA: attack
-3rd CA: move (movement included with 1st action) and attack

OPTION D
-1st and 2nd CA (spending 2 CA at a time): move and atack
-3rd and 4th CA: move and attack

I have read it ten times and I still have no idea. I think it is option C, but I would like to know which was the original idea, the first intention when the rule was created.
 
I've been playing it as B
that moving its self is not an action but is included with other actions to a maximum of 8m per round
 
AxeMurder said:
I've been playing it as B
that moving its self is not an action but is included with other actions to a maximum of 8m per round
The original intent was that you can walk about freely, up to your total of 8m in a round, in combination with whatever else you are doing. Normal walking doesn't interfere with spellcasting, attacking etc.

The Move action was there for situations when a character was out of reach of his next (melee) target, or when they want to start running about at higher speeds than just walking.

Should a move CA be used or not? Well, its up to you to decide, you're the GM. Does it fit your sense of verisimilitude?

Remember that RQII is deliberately designed to be abstract... its not a game of Squad Leader. The spells, missile weapons, etc all have ranges well beyond the scale of a battlemat and the game itself is intended for play without physical accouterments. Of course you can and should play it with miniatures if that adds to your game, but you don't need them. :)
 
Orlav
Nomad Warrior
Characteristics: STR14, CON14, DEX16, SIZ12, INT14, POW9, CHA12
CA 3, DM +1d2, SR +13 (armour penalty included), Move 8m, MP: 9
Skills: Athletics 60, Brawn 40, Culture (Orlanthi) 58, Dance 28, Drive 30, Evade 50, Evaluate 26, First Aid 40, Influence 40, Insight 30, Language (Theyalan) 76, Lore (Hendrikiland) 64, Lore (Tactics) 30, Perception 40, Persistence 40, Resilience 70, Ride 65, Sing 21, Sleight 28, Stealth 40, Survival 33, Swim 30, Track 30, Unarmed 40
Atk:
Dagger 40 (Dagger, 1d4+1+1d2; S, S, Bleed, Impale, 6/ 8 ),
Bow 70 (Recurve Bow, 1d8+1d2, 175m, Load 1, H, Impale, 4/ 8 ),
Spear & Shield 70 (Shortspear, 1d8+1+1d2, M/L, Impale, 4/5 & Heater Shield 1d4+1d2, L/S, 6/12)
Hit Points: 6 / 6 / 7 / 8 / 5 / 5 / 6
Armour: Hard Leather Helm, Ringmail Hauberk, Soft Leather Sleeves; 2 AP on Head, 1 AP on each arm, 3 AP on Chest and Abdomen, Armour Penalty -2
Common Magic (60): Bladesharp 3, Heal 1, Multimissile 2,
Equipment: Dagger, Shortspear, Heater Shield, Recurve Bow, 20 Arrows (bodkin), Horse (combat trained)

Orlav’s horse
STR25, CON17, DEX10, SIZ25, INT4, POW11, CHA –
CA 2, DM +1d10, SR +7, Move 16m, MP 11
Athletics 75, Brawn 60, Persistence 43, Resilience 61, Survival 20
Kick 40 (1d6+1d10, M/M)
Hit Points: 9 / 9 / 10 / 10 / 9 / 9 / 9
Armour: Skin 2AP


Robasart the Black
Barbarian Warrior
Characteristics: STR13, CON10, DEX14, SIZ15, INT15, POW9, CHA10
CA 3, DM +1d2, SR +11 (armour penalty included), Move 8m, MP9
Skills: Athletics 60, Brawn 70, Craft (Weaponsmith) 40, Culture (Orlanthi) 60, Dance 24, Drive 40, Evade 50, Evaluate 25, First Aid 30, Influence 20, Insight 30, Language (Theyalan) 75, Lore (Hendrikiland) 60, Lore (Tactics) 30, Perception 30, Persistence 32, Resilience 75, Ride 35, Sing 19, Sleight 24, Stealth 40, Survival 30, Swim 30, Unarmed 50
Atk:
Dagger 30 (Dagger, 1d4+1+1d2; S, S, Bleed, Impale, 6/ 8 ),
Axe and Shield 77 (Battleaxe 1d6+1+1d2, M/M, Bleed, 4/ 8 & Heater Shield 1d4+1d2, L/S, 6/12),
2H Axe 75 (Battleaxe 1d8+1+1d2, M/M, Bleed, Sunder, 4/ 8 )
Bow 40 (Longbow, 1d8+1d2, 175m, Load 1, H, Impale, 4/7)
Hit Points: 5 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 4 / 4 / 5
Armour: Scale Mail Hauberk, Hard Leather Vambraces, Hard leather Greaves, Scale Mail Helm (4 AP on Head, Abdomen and Chest, 2 AP on legs and arms, -4 armour penalty)
Common Magic 55: Bladesharp 2, Fanaticism, Strength 2
Equipment: Dagger, Battleaxe, Heater Shield, Longbow, 10 Arrows (bodkin)

Robasart the Black, a warrior of the Burning Men clan, is chasing a group of raiders, who stole several cows of his clan. Longbow in hand he jogs up a steep hill and falls down on all four when he reaches the top, so he can see but not be seen himself. He creeps the last couple of feet and observes a lone rider in the small valley below (Perception roll 33, but the GM rules that it is actually easy to spot the rider at about 150m distance in the otherwise empty valley).
Orlav, a nomadic raider of the Running Deer clan, sits astride his horse with his recurve bow in his hands in the valley below. His brothers in arms have already continued with the stolen cows and he stayed behind to watch out for potential followers. His Perception roll is 37 (opposed by Robasart’s Stealth roll of 92). Orlav can see the Burning Men warrior and combat initiates.

Both warriors roll for initiative. Orlav gets 22, Robasart gets 13.

First Combat Round
Despite a strong wind blowing (-10% to ranged attacks), Orlav readies an arrow (1stCA).
Robasart stands up (1stCA).
Orlav tries to cast Multimissile 1 (2ndCA). He rolls 74 and fails, deducting 1 MP

At this point the nomad has an arrow ready in his bow. Do you need to have a hand free to cast common magic ? I think only sorcery needs free hands.

Robasart readies an arrow (2ndCA).
Orlav lets loose his arrow, Robasart doesn’t flinch (does not declare an evade). Orlav rolls 89 (3rdCA) and misses.
Robasart shoots at the nomad’s horse (3rdCA, he’s at +10% due to the horse’s size) and rolls 18 and hits the horse’s chest (the GM had determined that the horse will not evade by itself and that Orlav was too busy with his own shot). Robasart may select a combat manoeuvre and selects impale. He rolls 9 and 6 for damage and so does 7 damage to the nomad’s horse. It has 3 HP remaining but an arrow is imbedded in its chest, so it suffers -10% to all skills.

Second Combat Round
Orlav spurs his horse forward (it moves 16m) and tries again to cast Multimissile 1 (1stCA). The GM asks for a ride test to see how steady Orlav controls his horse in order to determine whether the difficulty of casting should be modified. Orlav’s ride roll is 59, a success, so no modification to the casting roll. Orlav rolls 16 and succeeds in casting Multimissile 1. He deducts 1 from his remaining MP.

As Orlav has no arrow in hand, it is assumed that Multimissile can also be cast on the bow

Robasart moves 8m down the hill and readies another arrow (1stCA).
Orlav readies an arrow (2ndCA).
Robasart shoots at the horse (2ndCA). His total modifier is -10 (strong wind) +10 (horse’s size) -10 (horse moved 16m since his last CA).

Actually, that is a bit weird. The horse moves 16m during the whole combat round and not really since the last CA of Robasart. I think I’d rule something more like “since your last attack” or something like that rather than “since your last CA”

The GM now allows Orlav to evade, if he wishes to. Orlav decides to use his ride skill to allow his horse to evade. His riding roll is 45, so his horse may use his riding skill for evasion rather than its own basic value (2x DEX, i.e. 20%). This costs Orlav’s 3rd CA.

The text says that the the rider may use his ride skill or combat style to defend his horse, but that makes really only sense in close combat. Or a shield combat style. In this case, however, the shield or Orlav is not ready, so instead, I sort of allow the use of evasion. But finding an argument why the rider’s evade skill should be allowed makes no sense to me either. That’s why I decided to use ride for an evasion. The rider is yanking at the reins to makes his horse evade the arrow.

Robasart rolls 89 and misses. As Orlav gets no advantage from a successful evade (i.e. no combat manoeuvre will give an advantage, since it’s still only ranged combat), he skips his horse’s evasion roll.
Robasart succeeds with a perception roll and thus clearly sees the magical missile readied on the bow of the nomad and thus decides to run 40m down the hill (3rdCA – sprint)

The perception is clearly house-ruling here. Effects are supposed to be immediately noticeable within Magnitude meters range. Even so, surely a second arrow can be noticed

Third Combat Round
The combatants are now roughly 85m distant from each other.
Orlav shoots at Robasart who decides to evade. His total modifier is -10 (strong wind) -20 (Robasart sprinted 40m) = -30. Orlav rolls 10 (for the normal arrow) and 18 (for the magical arrow). Robasart makes only a single evasion roll and gets 16. He thus dodges the magical arrow, but the normal arrow hits him in the abdomen for a total of 2 damage (both succeed with a normal success so no combat manoeuvre gained, damage roll of 6 minus 4AP due to Robasart’s scalemail hauberk).

I wonder about that multimissile. Is it actually an arrow, i.e. does it get the same combat manoeuvre options as the original weapon ? Would a multimissiled arrow be capable to impale and need to be removed or otherwise cause -10% skill penalty ?

Robasart drops his bow and tries to cast Bladesharp 2 on the battleaxe at his side (2ndCA, his first was used for the evasion).
Orlav drops his bow and readies his shortspear (2ndCA), his horse moves 16m.
Robasart uses his last CA to complete the casting and rolls 30, success. He deducts 2 MP and will be at +10% and +2 damage with his battleaxe.
Orlav charges Robasart, the GM rules that he will reach the Burning Men warrior next combat round and additionally allows Orlav to ready his shield… the horse does all the movement after all (3rdCA).

Fourth Combat Round
Robasart is still unarmed when the nomad reaches him, so he naturally selects to evade.
A shortspear has a longer reach, so Orlav attacks Robasart with a roll of 19. Robasart’s evasion roll is 13. Both succeed normally, so neither gains a combat manoeuvre, but since evasion is an opposed roll, the attack hits. Orlav’s damage modifier is increased by one step due to his charge (i.e. +1d4). But since he was able to brace the spear he may choose his horse’s damage modifier (i.e. +1d10).

Or do you actually apply the charging damage modifier of the horse? That would be a whopping +2d6 !

He hits Robasart’s left arm (remember, he rolls 1d10+10 not 1d20 !) for a total of 6 damage (roll of 1 for the shortspear and 6 for the damage modifier minus Robasart’s 2 AP due to his hard leather vambraces). Robasart is at -2 in his left arm, a serious wound. For the next 2 CAs (rolled a 2 on 1d3) he may not attack and he must make an opposed resilience test versus Orlav’s original attack roll of 19. With a roll of 56 he succeeds, so he may still use the arm. Also, since the damage roll of 8 is less than his size there is no knock-back.
Then it’s the horse’s turn as medium reach of its kick attack is better than Robasart’s touch reach from his unarmed combat. The GM rules that the same evade roll is used, since it’s really a combined attack. So Robasart’s evade roll stays at 19. The damage modifier of a horse increases to +2d6 upon a charge (two steps). Orlav rolls for the kick attack, applying the -10% due to the arrow in his horse’s chest and rolls 11. Robasart wins the opposed roll and jumps out of the way and the horse continues its sprint for another 10m.
Since this was a charge, the combat round actually ends as all participants were only allowed to use a single combat action.

That “single CA during a charge” for all participants is a bit hard to grasp. The main issue I have with this is, that the charger could have used his previous CAs of this combat round for other things and then charge. Of course, you could rule that the charge always happens in the next round. Still, I do see the point why the defendant can only act once versus the charger, but it appears a bit awkward that he can do nothing else. A single CA for the defender is really not much use. It must be noted that standing firm implies that the defender may not even parry (if he wants to strike at the charger), since that would use his ingle available CA. In this particular case, I guess I would rule that Robasart was able to act before the impact, for example like drawing his axe… having that axe in hand, Robasart might have been better advised to strand his ground, especially when considering that his evade is far worse than his parrying skill ?
Also, for evasion I do not apply the -20% for defending against a mounted foe.
Also, I don’t know whether my interpretation of the application of the single evade versus both attacks is correct.


Fifth Combat Round
Due to the charge the GM rules that a new initiative roll is required.
Orlav rolls 17, Robasart rolls 18 and the horse rolls 16
Orlav has 4 CAs available due to his shield.
As Robasart may not attack the next two CAs because of the serious wound suffered last round, he readies his battleaxe (1stCA) and grips it with both hands.
Orlav turns his horse and attacks his foe with the shortspear (1stCA), which Robasart tries to parry (though at -20% as his foe is mounted). Orlav rolls 92, a miss, and Robasart follows through with his parry (2ndCA) and rolls 40, thus gaining a combat manoeuvre. Since he received his serious wound, Robasart has used two CAs (readying his weapon and parrying), so he could actually riposte. But this would use his last CA and leave him open for the horse’s attack, so he strikes at the nomad’s spear, rolling a total of 11 damage (7 +1 from the two-handed battleaxe, 1 from his damage modifier and 2 from his bladesharp spell). Deducting the shortspear’s AP of 4, it takes 7 damage which is more than its 5 hit points. The spear is split in half by the warrior’s mighty blow.
The horse kicks at Robasart who opts to parry, thus using his last CA. The horse rolls 24 and hits, whereas Robasart rolls 40. Neither gains a manoeuvre and since both weapons are medium sized all damage (Orlav didn’t even roll for it) is blocked. Robasart has no CAs left, but Orlav has 3 CAs left and his horse 1 !

Actually Orlav no longer has two weapons in hand. Or, to be more precise, two effective weapons, since his spear is broken. As this is not very clear, I stick to allowing the bonus CA from the second weapon. Orlav coukld use the the broken shaft as an improvised weapon after all

Orlav strikes at his foe with his shield (2ndCA) and rolls 17, allowing him to hit the defenceless barbarian and even gain a manoeuvre. He chooses to strike Robasart’s left arm again and rolls for damage, a 3. Robasart’s left arm is down to -3 in his left arm.
The horse kicks again, but misses with a roll of 49.
Orlav strikes again with his shield (3rdCA), but misses with 83.
Orlav strikes again with his shield (4thCA), and hits with 63. Again, he gains a manoeuvre and chooses again the left arm, and rolls 5 damage, bringing his foe’s arm down to -5, utterly shattering his opponent’s arm. Robasart drops prone and as his opposed resilience roll versus 63 fails (he rolls 48 ), he faints.
 
You know folks... there were a couple of issues/questions I had in that thread above (now marked blue), which I had hoped would be answered/clarified/whatever.

Can no one help me there ?

Thanks & Cheers
 
Sorry for not being able to respond. It is a very helpful example.

My thoughts are below, although some 'official' views would be welcome :wink:


1) At this point the nomad has an arrow ready in his bow. Do you need to have a hand free to cast common magic ? I think only sorcery needs free hands.

I agree. Common magic seems easy to case - and should not require any free hands as you note. Its drawback is that it is obvious that a spell (and maybe the type of spell) has been cast.

2) As Orlav has no arrow in hand, it is assumed that Multimissile can also be cast on the bow

Strictly speaking, I think it is the arrow - but I don't see why in the process of loading (reaching into the quiver for the next arrow) he could not cast the spell as desired.

3) Actually, that is a bit weird. The horse moves 16m during the whole combat round and not really since the last CA of Robasart. I think I’d rule something more like “since your last attack” or something like that rather than “since your last CA”

I don't know. But, would rule it based on the dramatic situation - a horse heading straight toward the target would only get easier to hit, one charging / galloping across the attackers field of fire would be more difficult. As movement is by round, this may affect the GM's judgement of whether a penalty should apply too.

4) The text says that the the rider may use his ride skill or combat style to defend his horse, but that makes really only sense in close combat. Or a shield combat style. In this case, however, the shield or Orlav is not ready, so instead, I sort of allow the use of evasion. But finding an argument why the rider’s evade skill should be allowed makes no sense to me either. That’s why I decided to use ride for an evasion. The rider is yanking at the reins to makes his horse evade the arrow.

I agree with your ruling - it makes sense that the rider can pull the horse from harm's way due to superior skill.

5) The perception is clearly house-ruling here. Effects are supposed to be immediately noticeable within Magnitude meters range. Even so, surely a second arrow can be noticed

Again this seems reasonable - especially in a magic rich world. I think common magic is automatically casted with POW metres (or some such), but this does not preclude alert foes detecting casting from further away. It makes for dramatic tension!

6) I wonder about that multimissile. Is it actually an arrow, i.e. does it get the same combat manoeuvre options as the original weapon ? Would a multimissiled arrow be capable to impale and need to be removed or otherwise cause -10% skill penalty ?

I haven't my rule book at hand so can't comment.

7) Or do you actually apply the charging damage modifier of the horse? That would be a whopping +2d6 !

Yes, you apply the horse's damage modifier if charging with a braced weapon (with which you cannot then parry), and increase the mounts damage mod by one step. If the weapon is not braced (when using a battleaxe for example), you probably just increase your own DM.

8) That “single CA during a charge” for all participants is a bit hard to grasp. The main issue I have with this is, that the charger could have used his previous CAs of this combat round for other things and then charge. Of course, you could rule that the charge always happens in the next round. Still, I do see the point why the defendant can only act once versus the charger, but it appears a bit awkward that he can do nothing else. A single CA for the defender is really not much use. It must be noted that standing firm implies that the defender may not even parry (if he wants to strike at the charger), since that would use his ingle available CA. In this particular case, I guess I would rule that Robasart was able to act before the impact, for example like drawing his axe… having that axe in hand, Robasart might have been better advised to strand his ground, especially when considering that his evade is far worse than his parrying skill ?
Also, for evasion I do not apply the -20% for defending against a mounted foe.
Also, I don’t know whether my interpretation of the application of the single evade versus both attacks is correct.


Essentially, the 1 CA is there to reflect the passing charge - the fraction of a moment that rider and target come together to trade blows. I see no problem using any combat actions for other things in the round. I think the meaning is a single attack - rather than combat action alone - is allowed. So, the rider approaches at a charge - the person with the longest reach wins initiative, they may attack (the opponent defends, spending a CA), the opponent may then attack (and target defends using a CA), after that, the rider carries on past - no more CA's may be spent on attacking (at least with melee weapons against the target of the charge).


My views. Thanks for the detailed example - it shows that the combat system is quite exciting!

Antalon.
 
Denalor said:
Orlav rolls 16 and succeeds in casting Multimissile 1. He deducts 1 from his remaining MP.

As Orlav has no arrow in hand, it is assumed that Multimissile can also be cast on the bow

I think so. My general impression was always that MULTIMISSILE was cast on the bow and SPEEDART on the arrow. (though it's not hard and fast since one can MULTIMISSILE a thrown weapon...)

Denalor said:
Robasart shoots at the horse (2ndCA). His total modifier is -10 (strong wind) +10 (horse’s size) -10 (horse moved 16m since his last CA).

Actually, that is a bit weird. The horse moves 16m during the whole combat round and not really since the last CA of Robasart. I think I’d rule something more like “since your last attack” or something like that rather than “since your last CA”

or "in the current round"?

Denalor said:
His riding roll is 45, so his horse may use his riding skill for evasion rather than its own basic value (2x DEX, i.e. 20%). This costs Orlav’s 3rd CA.

The text says that the the rider may use his ride skill or combat style to defend his horse, but that makes really only sense in close combat. Or a shield combat style. In this case, however, the shield or Orlav is not ready, so instead, I sort of allow the use of evasion. But finding an argument why the rider’s evade skill should be allowed makes no sense to me either. That’s why I decided to use ride for an evasion. The rider is yanking at the reins to makes his horse evade the arrow.

Yes. You can either allow the horse to evade using it's own skill or use your Ride to direct it. If you had a shield ready, you could Shield Parry as well.

Denalor said:
Robasart succeeds with a perception roll and thus clearly sees the magical missile readied on the bow of the nomad and thus decides to run 40m down the hill (3rdCA – sprint)

The perception is clearly house-ruling here. Effects are supposed to be immediately noticeable within Magnitude meters range. Even so, surely a second arrow can be noticed
This partly depends on how physical the multimissile is...

Denalor said:
Orlav rolls 10 (for the normal arrow) and 18 (for the magical arrow). Robasart makes only a single evasion roll and gets 16. He thus dodges the magical arrow, but the normal arrow hits him in the abdomen for a total of 2 damage (both succeed with a normal success so no combat manoeuvre gained, damage roll of 6 minus 4AP due to Robasart’s scalemail hauberk).

I wonder about that multimissile. Is it actually an arrow, i.e. does it get the same combat manoeuvre options as the original weapon ? Would a multimissiled arrow be capable to impale and need to be removed or otherwise cause -10% skill penalty ?

I don't think it's a phyiscal arrow - if it were then you could use the spell to create a second arrow that you could elect to fire at a different target. I think it can get combat manouvers (in earlier editions, IIRC, Multimissile could critical). I'm less certain about it impaling and sticking in the wound.

Denalor said:
Orlav’s damage modifier is increased by one step due to his charge (i.e. +1d4). But since he was able to brace the spear he may choose his horse’s damage modifier (i.e. +1d10).

Or do you actually apply the charging damage modifier of the horse? That would be a whopping +2d6 !

I'd expect that charging on a horse would apply the horses charge modifier rather than your own - that's one of the big advantages of a mounted charge! (Subject to suitable saddle/stirrups etc)

Denalor said:
Since this was a charge, the combat round actually ends as all participants were only allowed to use a single combat action.

That “single CA during a charge” for all participants is a bit hard to grasp. The main issue I have with this is, that the charger could have used his previous CAs of this combat round for other things and then charge. Of course, you could rule that the charge always happens in the next round. Still, I do see the point why the defendant can only act once versus the charger, but it appears a bit awkward that he can do nothing else. A single CA for the defender is really not much use. It must be noted that standing firm implies that the defender may not even parry (if he wants to strike at the charger), since that would use his ingle available CA. In this particular case, I guess I would rule that Robasart was able to act before the impact, for example like drawing his axe… having that axe in hand, Robasart might have been better advised to strand his ground, especially when considering that his evade is far worse than his parrying skill ?
Also, for evasion I do not apply the -20% for defending against a mounted foe.
Also, I don’t know whether my interpretation of the application of the single evade versus both attacks is correct.

It is a tricky situation, and almost any ruling is open to abuse. The charge, and receiving the same should possibly end the round, and you don't want the situation where the cavelry charge and the infantry are able to attack with three combat actions before they get to act again. The principle, I think, should be that the attacker declares the charge, this costs all their remaining CA's (minimum of 1!). The Defender can spend CA's to prepare, or make a ranged attack on the incoming troops, or to counter-charge. They can not spend more CA's than they have left when the charge is declared, and the GM may limit the number of actions available depending on the distance/speed of the charge. If the defenders have no combat actions left when the charge arrives they will be unable to parry or evade!


Denalor said:
Deducting the shortspear’s AP of 4, it takes 7 damage which is more than its 5 hit points. The spear is split in half by the warrior’s mighty blow.
The horse kicks at Robasart who opts to parry, thus using his last CA. The horse rolls 24 and hits, whereas Robasart rolls 40. Neither gains a manoeuvre and since both weapons are medium sized all damage (Orlav didn’t even roll for it) is blocked. Robasart has no CAs left, but Orlav has 3 CAs left and his horse 1 !

Actually Orlav no longer has two weapons in hand. Or, to be more precise, two effective weapons, since his spear is broken. As this is not very clear, I stick to allowing the bonus CA from the second weapon. Orlav coukld use the the broken shaft as an improvised weapon after all
This is a bit unclear - it might depend on what Combat Styles Orlav knows - does he have "Improvised Weapon & Shield"? - You won't be using a broken stick in the same manner as a mounted spear. Would it make any difference if rather than breaking the spear, Robasart had been able to successfully disarm Orlav?
I think I'd only amend the number of combat actions at the start of the round, to avoid arguments about what actions have been used in cases like this.

I'm unsure if a mounted warrior should get a full set of combat actions for themselves and another full set for the mount. Maybe just a +1 action for being mounted, with actions being available to either the rider or the mount?
 
First of all: Thanks for the replies.
My impression was that the thread was far too big to be read at all and thus the questions had been overseen or not read at all.

As Orlav has no arrow in hand, it is assumed that Multimissile can also be cast on the bow
Notet hat I have re-read the book and thus saw that there is no mentioning that you need free hands to cast common magic. Indeed, only sorcery has that requirement.
In this particular case, however, the spell cast (Multimissile) has a Touch range, i.e. you need to touch the weapon to be multimissile'd. That's what causes my confusion: in order to be able to touch the arrow you'd need first to ready it, thus changing the chronology of the example above. Orlav is readiying the arrow after he casts the spell, thus he obviously had to touch his bow.

The wording of the spell, however does indeed suggest that the weapon to be propelled away needs to have the spell, so I suppose bows, crossbows, slings etc cannot receive the spell.
So... in that regard, the example is wrong...

or "in the current round"?
Incedibly obvious... so obvious that I didn't see it :lol: ! Thanks, very good point indeed, I'll take that !

The rider is yanking at the reins to makes his horse evade the arrow.
Okay, so if the rider spends one of his CAs, he may allow his horse to evade (which will use either its own Evade skill or the Ride skill value of the rider). Note that in the example, I had Orlav roll for his ride skill to see whether this may be allowed at all
His riding roll is 45, so his horse may use his riding skill for evasion rather than its own basic value (2x DEX, i.e. 20%).
but actually that's nowhere in the rules ! You do not need to make a successful Ride skill check, you only need to spend a CA !
In the case of melee combat on top of a horse, the rider can spend 1 CA to defend his horse, just as if he were parrying himself.
Question is: what if he does not use his combat style (i.e. parry) but his Ride skill (i.e. evade) ? Will he then also "suffer" the consequences of a normal Evade, i.e. "preventing him from performing an attack with the CA available on his next Strike Rank" (page 90) ?

Physical nature of a multimissile
Guess I'll have to raise that question in another separate thread...

Or do you actually apply the charging damage modifier of the horse? That would be a whopping +2d6 !
I probably wasn't clear enough.
On page 91 "Mounted Combat" it states that the rider may subsitute his own DM by the horse's, if he can brace a weapon (i.e. all sorts of spear-like weapons). The DM of a horse is 1D10, clearly better than anything a normal human can get, even if he is charging (which raises his DM by one step) - assuming, of course - he isn't under the effects of any SIZ or STR increasing spells. That +1D10 is already a big advantage.
However, if a being with four (or more) legs charges, its DM is increased by two steps rather than one.
So, does the rider profit from that increased-by-charging DM ? Thus we'd go from +1D10 to +2D6

does he have "Improvised Weapon & Shield"?
He could theoretically always use his basic close combat skill, i.e. STR + DEX...

I'm unsure if a mounted warrior should get a full set of combat actions for themselves and another full set for the mount. Maybe just a +1 action for being mounted, with actions being available to either the rider or the mount?
Very interesting point !
 
A couple of comments (for what little they're worth):

Denalor said:
Robasart succeeds with a perception roll and thus clearly sees the magical missile readied on the bow of the nomad and thus decides to run 40m down the hill (3rdCA – sprint)

The perception is clearly house-ruling here. Effects are supposed to be immediately noticeable within Magnitude meters range. Even so, surely a second arrow can be noticed

Well the wording of Multimissile actually says that the "spell is triggered when [the arrow] is fired" - so arguably at this point there isn't a second arrow to see. I guess it all depends on how you visualise the spell's immediate effect.


Denalor said:
or "in the current round"?
Incedibly obvious... so obvious that I didn't see it :lol: ! Thanks, very good point indeed, I'll take that !

This works well in your example - but what if the attack is being made as the very first CA of a round? In those circumstances, I can see why the rule is "since last attacker's CA". I think this another of those things where the GM will have to ask himself - does the penalty feel right?


Question is: what if he does not use his combat style (i.e. parry) but his Ride skill (i.e. evade) ? Will he then also "suffer" the consequences of a normal Evade, i.e. "preventing him from performing an attack with the CA available on his next Strike Rank" (page 90) ?

I'd say yes.


I'm unsure if a mounted warrior should get a full set of combat actions for themselves and another full set for the mount. Maybe just a +1 action for being mounted, with actions being available to either the rider or the mount?
Very interesting point !

I wonder whether the rider should have to expend a CA to get the mount to attack? Though maybe this should depend on the nature and training of the mount.

I'm not sure I'd be happy with the idea of a horse rearing to strike with its hooves and the rider still getting all his CAs. Perhaps a ride skill check when the mount does something - fail and lose next CA; fumble and fall off?
 
Denalor said:
Note that in the example, I had Orlav roll for his ride skill to see whether this may be allowed at all
His riding roll is 45, so his horse may use his riding skill for evasion rather than its own basic value (2x DEX, i.e. 20%).
but actually that's nowhere in the rules ! You do not need to make a successful Ride skill check, you only need to spend a CA !
In the case of melee combat on top of a horse, the rider can spend 1 CA to defend his horse, just as if he were parrying himself.
Question is: what if he does not use his combat style (i.e. parry) but his Ride skill (i.e. evade) ? Will he then also "suffer" the consequences of a normal Evade, i.e. "preventing him from performing an attack with the CA available on his next Strike Rank" (page 90) ?

Ah, I'd missed that subtelty. I'd always let him make the evade (assuming he has a CA available) - I'd not make him make a dex roll to see if he could dodge! If you wanted to be nasty you could make him make a ride roll to stay on the horse if it uses it's native evade rather than his ride roll, as it is moving other than under his control - If he is dircting the evasion then its already covered by the ride.


Denalor said:
Or do you actually apply the charging damage modifier of the horse? That would be a whopping +2d6 !
I probably wasn't clear enough.
On page 91 "Mounted Combat" it states that the rider may subsitute his own DM by the horse's, if he can brace a weapon (i.e. all sorts of spear-like weapons). The DM of a horse is 1D10, clearly better than anything a normal human can get, even if he is charging (which raises his DM by one step) - assuming, of course - he isn't under the effects of any SIZ or STR increasing spells. That +1D10 is already a big advantage.
However, if a being with four (or more) legs charges, its DM is increased by two steps rather than one.
So, does the rider profit from that increased-by-charging DM ? Thus we'd go from +1D10 to +2D6

Still sounds good to me! I have no desire to get anywhere near the business end of a mounted charge!
 
HalfOrc HalfBiscuit said:
I'm unsure if a mounted warrior should get a full set of combat actions for themselves and another full set for the mount. Maybe just a +1 action for being mounted, with actions being available to either the rider or the mount?
Very interesting point !

I wonder whether the rider should have to expend a CA to get the mount to attack? Though maybe this should depend on the nature and training of the mount.

"Untrained" Mount (*)
- Rider must expend a CA and make a ride roll each round to stay on the back of the beast

"Normal Riding" Mount (not war trained) (**)
- Mount and rider treated as single entity with Riders Combat actions.
- Rider can use "Ride" roll to evade in place of Mounts evasion skill.
- Mount can not be used to attack

"Battle Trained" Mount (***)
- Mount and rider treated as single entity with Riders Combat actions +1 .
- Rider can use "Ride" roll to evade in place of Mounts evasion skill.
- Mount can attack (cost of 1 CA)

I'm not sure I'd be happy with the idea of a horse rearing to strike with its hooves and the rider still getting all his CAs. Perhaps a ride skill check when the mount does something - fail and lose next CA; fumble and fall off?

If the mount just adds 1 to the riders CA then attacking with the mount does cost him an action he could otherwise use to do something else.
I'd use the ride skill check where the mount uses it's own native evade, as it has just swerved (or stopped, or jumped, whatever) unexpectedly


Notes
(*) This is to cover things like heroes falling on to the back of a wild beast, or leaping on to the back of a charging bull and directing it towards the enemy. If the mount attacks the enemy the rider must make an additonal ride check to stay on the beast.

(**) eg a horse that is not a war-horse, or a "normal" praxian riding beast. "Exotic" creatures (Wyvern, Manticore, Giant Scorpion) will nearly always fall into one of the other 2 catagories.

(***) A war trained mount with additional attacks might give more than 1 CA
 
duncan_disorderly said:
"Untrained" Mount (*)
- Rider must expend a CA and make a ride roll each round to stay on the back of the beast

"Normal Riding" Mount (not war trained) (**)
- Mount and rider treated as single entity with Riders Combat actions.
- Rider can use "Ride" roll to evade in place of Mounts evasion skill.
- Mount can not be used to attack

"Battle Trained" Mount (***)
- Mount and rider treated as single entity with Riders Combat actions +1 .
- Rider can use "Ride" roll to evade in place of Mounts evasion skill.
- Mount can attack (cost of 1 CA)

That looks good to me. Is that somewhere in the rules that I've missed or your suggestion? Because if it's the latter, consider it nicked.
 
HalfOrc HalfBiscuit said:
That looks good to me. Is that somewhere in the rules that I've missed or your suggestion? Because if it's the latter, consider it nicked.

Mine (If I've nicked it from anywhere it's accidental), and feel free (that's why I posted it here....)
 
Back
Top