If I am reading the combat rules correctly, any time the attacker succeeds in his attack and the defender fails his parry, the attacker can choose the hit location using a combat maneuver. Is this correct? And if it is, that seems awfully powerful. It almost mandates full armor. Otherwise the unprotected location is going to be hit almost every time.
CMs and Hit Location
- Thread starter Redstone
- Start date
Loz
Mongoose
Yes, its correct.
As I'm sure Pete will confirm, any skilled fighter will aim for the the most vulnerable location so that you can incapacitate your foe as swiftly as possible.
I'd recommend reading Bernard Cornwell's 'Warlord' chronicles which have some absolutely terrific combat descriptions where this happens time and again. Fighters locked in combat aiming specifically for legs and arms to incapacitate because that gives them a solid edge in the melee. Strikes to the head are frequent, but so too are strikes to unarmoured legs and ankles just so the opponent can be dropped and dropped quickly. Quite often the warriors in Cornwell's books don't go for an instant kill because putting your foe down and moving to the next, or ensuring a kill (because your foe loses CAs or is prone or defenceless) rather than simply risking a kill, is an effective method of keeping moving and minimising risk to yourself.
As I'm sure Pete will confirm, any skilled fighter will aim for the the most vulnerable location so that you can incapacitate your foe as swiftly as possible.
I'd recommend reading Bernard Cornwell's 'Warlord' chronicles which have some absolutely terrific combat descriptions where this happens time and again. Fighters locked in combat aiming specifically for legs and arms to incapacitate because that gives them a solid edge in the melee. Strikes to the head are frequent, but so too are strikes to unarmoured legs and ankles just so the opponent can be dropped and dropped quickly. Quite often the warriors in Cornwell's books don't go for an instant kill because putting your foe down and moving to the next, or ensuring a kill (because your foe loses CAs or is prone or defenceless) rather than simply risking a kill, is an effective method of keeping moving and minimising risk to yourself.
Well, from a gameplay perspective I'm not sure I like it being that easy. Essentially giving the attacker a called shot on every successful attack does not add to the gameplay. If you are going to make unarmored areas so easy to hit that wearing full armor is now a must, I might as well dust off the ole d20 rules and just use their armor class concept.
Fortunately this is an easy 'fix' with house rules. I am either going to have a crit be required to select it, or have it cost 2 combat maneuvers.
Fortunately this is an easy 'fix' with house rules. I am either going to have a crit be required to select it, or have it cost 2 combat maneuvers.
Loz
Mongoose
Consider it this way. Generating a CM means you have to have a level of success better than your opponent. That indicates that your attack has taken advantage of an opponent's blunder or, if you crit and the defender succeeds, you've still penetrated a decent defence to gain an advantage.
This is what I would suggest if you're uncomfortable with the CM as it stands. Another solution would be to leave it as a 1 CM manoeuvre and have the attack inflict either half or minimum damage to the called location.
The combat rules in RQ have always aimed for realism and when designing RQII's combat system we went through many different versions of CMs, at many different levels, all playtested thoroughly (and over the course of a good two years and many, many play sessions). Pete Nash, the system's main architect, is a skilled real-weapons fighter and made the design choices based on how fights play-out in real-life.
But, you must make RQ your game, and as you say, this is an easy house-rule fix and we'd encourage you to do what best suits your style of play and campaign.
Mongoose Pete
Mongoose
As Loz has pointed out its not every successful attack, but every successful attack where you do better than your opponent. So whilst CMs are regular, they are not guaranteed occurrences with every blow.Redstone said:
Something else you should bear in mind is that Choose Location is not always a particularly optimal CM to select, depending on the tactical situation there will often be superior manoeuvres. Secondly, if a PC is always choosing to hit the same location, you can slap the Repeated CM penalty on them.
The rules were specifically modelled to reflect real life fighting, where trained fighters consistently aim for specific locations - which if unarmoured - are injured or incapacitated with just a single blow. History has shown that being armoured has always been the preferred manner of fighting wars, at least before the advent of massed firearms. It also reflects the prevalence of helmets (the most ubiquitous armour) since the head is the primary target in melee.
Fights with weapons, especially against skilled opponents, are short and brutal. It might help to try and disentangle the concept of 'losing' with that of 'killing', a pitfall many people new to MRQ2 stumble on.
Its your game. If turning it into a Crit CM works better for you then go for it!
:wink:Mongoose Pete
Mongoose
That's a bit sad. The CMs are capable of so much more.PhilHibbs said:
Deleriad
Mongoose
Well I just ran my third session of Pavis Rises last night and of the four fights that happened.
One was an alleyway mugging of 3 npcs vs the pc. During the fight he chose trip, grip, stun location, disarm and slip free. (It was pretty impressive actually: he was supposed to give up but turned into the goddam Batman)
In the next fight the PC chose impale as his one cm.
In the other one (two pcs vs a giant rat) one PC chose location head 3 tines, stun location once and the other chose "set alight" (he was wielding a lit torch).
(In the 4th fight the PCs all received major wounds before they got a chance to inflict any cms of their own).
So my experience is that players get better at applying them more functionally. Choose location tends to be useful only if an opponent is wearing mis-matched armour or has already taken damage to a particular location. I find the best way to educate players about CMs is to use them against them.
One was an alleyway mugging of 3 npcs vs the pc. During the fight he chose trip, grip, stun location, disarm and slip free. (It was pretty impressive actually: he was supposed to give up but turned into the goddam Batman)
In the next fight the PC chose impale as his one cm.
In the other one (two pcs vs a giant rat) one PC chose location head 3 tines, stun location once and the other chose "set alight" (he was wielding a lit torch).
(In the 4th fight the PCs all received major wounds before they got a chance to inflict any cms of their own).
So my experience is that players get better at applying them more functionally. Choose location tends to be useful only if an opponent is wearing mis-matched armour or has already taken damage to a particular location. I find the best way to educate players about CMs is to use them against them.
Jujitsudave
Mongoose
Ha Ha. Batman, I love it. That was hilarious.
I've A huge fan of Cornwell and Whyte as well. You just can't recreate gruesome, thrilling battle sequences like they have in those books like you can in MRQ. Combat Maneuvres are the beauty of the system and make even standard actions important tactical decisions.
I've A huge fan of Cornwell and Whyte as well. You just can't recreate gruesome, thrilling battle sequences like they have in those books like you can in MRQ. Combat Maneuvres are the beauty of the system and make even standard actions important tactical decisions.
Deleriad said:
I haven't played any of Pavis Rises as I am not a playtester but in my game the players have used impale in a few fights then had problems pulling the weapon out again. They soon realised that they probably should have spent more points in Brawn ... and resilience if they wanted to be the big brave fighter of the group.
You make me feel better - I've only taken one player to within a hp of a major wound - but the two bleed CMs were nasty. The player had no CAs left at all. The party also had no healers at that point (the person who could magically heal was away) so he had to be content with first aid to stabilise the wound.
BTW - this PC is a follower of Gustbran and has pyromaniac tendencies. It has become a running joke as he has failed to use his Ignite spell six or seven times now - but once one of the others starts a fire (using mundane means) he is very happy throwing more and more wood on to it.
Deleriad
Mongoose
andyl said:
Yup
Once PCs start to realise that an impale in close combat can be a double-edged sword (to mix metaphors and cms) then they discover that it's good to have a back-up weapon. That said, impale is my CM of choice for missile weapons. It's usually a better choice than a head-shot because you are far more likely to disable an opponent straight off unless they have a really obvious weak spot.When it comes to being a close combat specialist, there are a lot more useful skills than just the combat styles. Evade and Resilience are a must; unarmed for those times when things go wrong; Brawn & Athletics seem to get called for a lot too. That's not to mention magic skills in Glorantha. In a world where Bladesharp and Protection are common place, not being able to reliably cast your spells is a huge disadvantage in the combat arms race.
In my Third Age Pavis Campaign, I hit the PCs with the broo Mutation Gang in the Rubble. Old-time players will recognize this as quite a nasty broo gang, heavily armored and very strong. They hit the PCs hard and fast, putting down two of the three in the first round. Only a (literally in some ways) miraculous roll with the third PC's Heal Body spell that allowed it to be cast twice prevented a TPK. Realizing that the Mutations hit hard, my players seemed to realize that they needed to use their CMs to stop the PCs being hit. So they used trip, blind, disarm and all sorts of CMs to turn the combat round. Then they took the broos down mostly through magic. I think this was an excellent example of the variety of CMs against opponents to whom a simple unenhanced hit in the head does little.
BTW, I find that in MRQII my PCs don't use Bladesharp etc unless they have a chance to "buff" beforehand. Given how quickly combat moves, wasting two rounds to cast Bladesharp 4 is often not a sensible choice. As for the Lunar Rune Lord whose Allied Spirit had Bladesharp 10...shall we say, simply not a factor.
BTW, I find that in MRQII my PCs don't use Bladesharp etc unless they have a chance to "buff" beforehand. Given how quickly combat moves, wasting two rounds to cast Bladesharp 4 is often not a sensible choice. As for the Lunar Rune Lord whose Allied Spirit had Bladesharp 10...shall we say, simply not a factor.
Mikko Leho
Mongoose
Ultor said:
Have you considered using Haste modifiers for faster casting? I am not sure did you intend to write two actions instead of two rounds, as casting time for common magic is calculated using CAs.
Mikko Leho
Mongoose
Ultor said:
You could try using the Haste modifiers. For -40% characters could try to cast Bladesharp 4 in one CA.
