Combat actions and parrying

[Ozymandias]

As a big RQ fan who has been waiting for ages for the local shop to get the MRQ rules in I'd like to ask a couple of things.

1. Combat Actions
This is going to be such an important stat for more than anything else. The 1 point difference between 12 & 13 DEX make such a difference to a character, far more it seems then a 1 point difference in any other stat. This is going to make having a high dex far more important than any other stat. The number of actions in a 5 second round seems very high.

2. Parrying
The AP of weapons seems and therefore the amount blocked by a parry seems very low. I used to do medieval reenactment and although I never remember parrying a 2H axe blow, you could easily parry a sword blow with a similar sword. Parrying thrusting weapons was done by knocking the blow sideways and again could easily be done by a sword. The rules rules seem to have made parrying with anything other than a shield far to weak.

 

[simonh]

1. Combat Actions

The fact that you only need DEX 13 IMHO makes this a non-issue because it's pretty easy for any player who wants a character with DEX 13 or more to have one (you allow players to swap values between stats). If the threshold were higher I'd be concerned as it would be an onerous requirement for all combat characters to effectively be required to have a high DEX to be effective, but DEX 13 is actualy about average.

2. Parrying

I think this is deliberate, the rules do suggest that dodge is the best defense. Whether this is sensible or not is a matter of taste, they seem to be going for a very freewheeling combat experience with dramatic tactics and lots of attractive options. Whether they can do that and still have a ballanced system without any overly egregious loopholes is the big question.

 

[Hoitsu]

Because of the DEX been too valuable attribute, i use INT+DEX/2 rounded up o determine combat actions. Not so easy to get 4 CA´s but it dont lower the amount of CA´s because average INT is higher that other attributes (like SIZ). INT is my choice because it is valued that you use your intelligence to determine when to hit. This way DEX is not a way better than other attributes

 

[Deleriad]

2. Parrying

I think this is deliberate, the rules do suggest that dodge is the best defense. Whether this is sensible or not is a matter of taste, they seem to be going for a very freewheeling combat experience with dramatic tactics and lots of attractive options.

Well the balance seems to be that parrying is best if you are using 1H weapon plus shield. If you are using a 2h weapon then looks like dodging is a better option than parrying. The balance is that 2H weapon skill includes both the attack and parry ability and therefore it takes twice as long, as it were, to get equally proficient.

Considering an average 2h weapon seems to have about 4APs then looking at the results of successfully dodging/parrying a successful attack.
Successful parry implies that you take 4 less damage
Successful dodge -> minimum damage
Assuming an average weapon damage of 1d8+1+1d4 then
average damage after parry equals 4
average damage after dodge equals 3
So the average is not that different but it adds up.

If you want to mini-max then 1H weapon plus shield seems to be the way to go. I would choose any 1h weapon which does 1dx+1 just to get that extra point of damage in dodger's face.

If you like to max out on damage then 2H Axe looks best. At 2d6+2+DB you should be looking at doing a minimum 5 damage even if someone dodges. Couple of points of Bladesharp and basically every hit does 7 damage minimum, enough to cripple any one foolish enough to try to dodge.

There is a balance to the system, ignoring precise attacks and the armor skill penalties, but it's not one that many people will be used to. Basically breaks down as:
Parrying with any weapon but shield: con - poor protection, pro - the skill comes free.
Shield: can parry with any 1H Weapon: con - extra skill to learn, pro - best protection
Dodge: can be used with any weapon: con - extra skill to learn, pro - most flexible form of defence, medium defence.

 

[Rurik]

Well I've been running a few combats lately and the choice of using weapon and sheild vs. two handed weapons is an important one. The two handed weapons have massive damage potential but are must weaker on defense. One solid unparried/undodged strike can drop a foe pretty easily.

I will say after going over the combat rules again and actually applying them I am pretty convinced the system was designed with the two roll system (attacker rolls a second time for the opposed parry/dodge). This makes both dodging and parrying more effective (until the attackers skill gets close to 100, in which case it is pretty much the same as the one roll system as described in the clarification pdf). Parrying 2xAP and dodges avoiding all damage become fairly common at middle skill results using two rolls.

Weapon and sheild has two big advantages. One is the bonus CA (which often never comes into play in a one on one duel, but a big plus vs. multiplr foes). The other is the ability to parry precise attacks. Ignore Armor Precise attacks bypass the 6 AP from Plate, but not the 10 AP from a Kite sheild. Which is Huge. The downside is the relatively lesser damage of the one handed weapon, which rarely drops an opponent in one shot.

The whole point of the test combats I ran was to determine how effective Precise attacks were at high skill levels. The answer is very. Armor becomes, as suspected, basically useless with a big skill penalty. Now a Kite sheild on the other hand protects for 10 and has no skill penalty involved and can't be bypassed.

The biggest revealation was the effectiveness of the Fighting Retreat. This move is awesome as long as you have room to retreat. You withdraw with an action, opponent closes and you free attack. On your next action withdraw again.Assuming the same CA's he will never get an attack in, and you can use your reactions to attack him. If he backs up set up a charge you can either charge him in response or close to less than charge distance. Works great.

 

[atgxtg]

As a big RQ fan who has been waiting for ages for the local shop to get the MRQ rules in I'd like to ask a couple of things.

1. Combat Actions
This is going to be such an important stat for more than anything else. The 1 point difference between 12 & 13 DEX make such a difference to a character, far more it seems then a 1 point difference in any other stat. This is going to make having a high dex far more important than any other stat. The number of actions in a 5 second round seems very high.

2. Parrying
The AP of weapons seems and therefore the amount blocked by a parry seems very low. I used to do medieval reenactment and although I never remember parrying a 2H axe blow, you could easily parry a sword blow with a similar sword. Parrying thrusting weapons was done by knocking the blow sideways and again could easily be done by a sword. The rules rules seem to have made parrying with anything other than a shield far to weak.

These are both issues that have been brought up, and are a point on contention. Some long term RQ fans prefer tossing out CA's and using weapon HP as APs to get a more traditional RQ feel.

THe problem I see with the parry rules is that the new parry is nothing more that tossing your weapon in front of you to take the hit. Not at all like trying to turn or deflect an attack.

 

[Lord Twig]

The biggest revealation was the effectiveness of the Fighting Retreat. This move is awesome as long as you have room to retreat. You withdraw with an action, opponent closes and you free attack. On your next action withdraw again.Assuming the same CA's he will never get an attack in, and you can use your reactions to attack him. If he backs up set up a charge you can either charge him in response or close to less than charge distance. Works great.

Awesome is one word. Lame is another. Why would anybody every move up to an opponent? Seems to me that everyone would just stand around waiting for the other guy to to come to them.

I personally added an "advance" maneuver which is basically identical to the fighting retreat maneuver in reverse and you get to make an attack at the end. So if you can not charge and attack you can advance and attack. That should get the action going without every one standing around waiting for the other guy to move.

 

[atgxtg]

Actually fighting reatreat isn't that hot. Just let the opponent back away and then charge. For some inane reason charging doen't proke an AoO/give a free attack.

Personaly, I think the game needs a "one meter" step or "two meter step" rule to make sense. Or at least a "counterattack" option.

 

[Hoitsu]

The reason why charge is not considered to give free attacks is because it is kinda impressed looking attack maneuver and i dont even dream to think anything else that parrying/dodgeing that kind of an attack. Free attacks a made against opponents who do something not offensive but something so "stupid" that it surely provokes attack from opponents side, and why not? you have nothing to lose when u do that attack. You hit, good work. You miss, so what?

 

[Lord Twig]

Actually fighting reatreat isn't that hot. Just let the opponent back away and then charge. For some inane reason charging doen't proke an AoO/give a free attack.

Personaly, I think the game needs a "one meter" step or "two meter step" rule to make sense. Or at least a "counterattack" option.

So I am 3m away from you. What do you do? If you move up to me I get a free attack. If you move back to 5m I charge you and get +1d4 to my damage.

So the only way for you to attack me is if you are next to me or you are between 5m and 8m away.

As I said, I added an Advance option that allows you to move up to half your movement and still attack. I am not sure what Mongoose was thinking on this one. They are more than welcome to clarify!

 

[Rurik]

Actually fighting reatreat isn't that hot. Just let the opponent back away and then charge. For some inane reason charging doen't proke an AoO/give a free attack.

Personaly, I think the game needs a "one meter" step or "two meter step" rule to make sense. Or at least a "counterattack" option.

Doesn't work that way. Charge takes at least 5 meters. If I withdraw 2 meters you have to spend an action withdrawing to set up the charge. I can then either 1) Charge you instead or 2) Close to less than 5 meters.

Your only hope to set up would be to not have initiative one round, withdraw to charge distance as the last action of the round, and then win initiative the next round.

EDIT: Twig beat me to it!

 

[Rurik]

I am toying with the idea of an engage/disengage opposed roll. If I close we make a simple opposed roll (usually weapon skills, though maybe allow acrobatics if desired). If I win I close without being subject to a free attack, If I lose I am subject to a free attack.

Likewise if you disengage (via Fighting Retreat) we make a opposed roll. If you lose you are subject to a free attack.

I will have to try it. My only worry is might add a bit too much rolling.

 

[Hoitsu]

Sounds like we are soon playing d100 D&D here. Attack of oppotunities, tumbles with out provoking, legendary abilities become feats and so on. Sounds pretty dreadful...

 

[Rurik]

Sounds like we are soon playing d100 D&D here. Attack of oppotunities, tumbles with out provoking, legendary abilities become feats and so on. Sounds pretty dreadful...

That comparison has been made before.

Many of the changes seem in MRQ seem to make the system more D20 like.

One way of looking at it is to say it makes the game more accessible to D20 players. Which really is a good thing.

Another way of looking at it, particularly from a experienced RQ'er point of view, is, well, less flattering.

I will say that from the combats I have run I kind of like the 'flow' of combat with the MRQ system (using CA's and no Statement of intent). It has a pretty good feel, it is just different from traditional RQ. The problem is that it seems there are a lot of rough edges in the rules.

 

[Hoitsu]

Mostly i meant that every most improvements suggested here makes MRQ more like D&D3.5
I dont like it but if it works for others, i dont mind.

But because i dont want MRQ to be D&D, i dont get much from these "improvements".

gladly i can make my own house rules and still keeping the RQ style. thats why i like more "realistic" rules because D&D is nothing about realistic.

 

[Ozymandias]

As a big RQ fan who has been waiting for ages for the local shop to get the MRQ rules in I'd like to ask a couple of things.

1. Combat Actions
This is going to be such an important stat for more than anything else. The 1 point difference between 12 & 13 DEX make such a difference to a character, far more it seems then a 1 point difference in any other stat. This is going to make having a high dex far more important than any other stat. The number of actions in a 5 second round seems very high.

2. Parrying
The AP of weapons seems and therefore the amount blocked by a parry seems very low. I used to do medieval reenactment and although I never remember parrying a 2H axe blow, you could easily parry a sword blow with a similar sword. Parrying thrusting weapons was done by knocking the blow sideways and again could easily be done by a sword. The rules rules seem to have made parrying with anything other than a shield far to weak.

These are both issues that have been brought up, and are a point on contention. Some long term RQ fans prefer tossing out CA's and using weapon HP as APs to get a more traditional RQ feel.

I've got to say my inital thought was to do exactly that, but I'll do a play test first and see what my players think. One of them used to regulary win the sword fighting competition of the re-enactment group so he'll know better than I which system is more realistic.

 

[kustenjaeger]

Greetings

I've made the normal number of CAs in a round 2 via a formula involving DEX, 1/2 POW and a fraction of one's highest combat related skill.

As far as parries are concerned I'm looking carefully at weapon damage.

I wondered if some of the easier 'turning the blow' type parries could have been subsumed into a relatively lower % to hit than would be the case otherwise but I don't know the answer to this.

A War Sword in a strongish character's hands will do an average of 4.5 + 1.5 hits (6 in total). On average therefore a successful parry stops 4 of these (1 x AP). If we were using RQ3 weapon stats we would have a Broadsword doing an average of 5.5+2.5 (D8+1 and D4 damage bonus) = 8, while the sword had AP of 10.

If the MRQ AP were 6 then it would block an average blow. Of course without weapon damage on a normal attack it would go on doing that while in RQ3 an outmatched weapon reduces its AP by 1.

Time for some experiments I suspect.

Regards

 

[Hoitsu]

I think the reason for that lower AP is the possibility to get 2xAP result in Parry table. And still those weapon damages are low, i game tested those via 2-3 fights in Plate armor (which of course is rare) and armed with bastard sword and kite shield. Opponents had Great Axes and they even surprised me with the result of 3 point wound in the back. Then i killed them both
Because my house rule indicates that if you parry a precise attack in order to bypass the armor, it is considered normal attack and armor protects normally. And my Armor penalties are halved, with the possibility to wear leather underneath any other armor. Wearing that leather gives you full penalty from it and half penalty from the "main" armor.

My opinion, Not deadly as it used to be