Combat Issues

[jarulf]

I may have read Loz's reply wrong, but I took it that an Evade as the first defensive roll (instead of a parry) in not an opposed roll. But one made because of a CM is opposed.

So, as long as you succed with your evade in response to the attack roll, and it is at least of the same success level, you get out of harm's way. The downside of this is that you cannot attack on your next CA.

If you evade because of a Close Distance (or whatever it is called) CM however it is an opposed roll, but you do not loose the attack on your next CA.

 

[Grimolde]

Thanks DamonJynx, I think my later examples pretty much concur with your explanations.

About the only thing I have to remember now, is an evade prevents an combatant from attacking on his next CA.

Thanks again.

 

[Grimolde]

Just to clarify, the fumble/failure/success/critical rules are also used as well with 'Attack v Evade'?

Yes.

I'm trying to wrap my head around a successful Evader having a CM or two when he's basically jumping away from the attacker in order to avoid a blow.

Does anyone else feel it's wrong?

 

[DamonJynx]

Thanks DamonJynx, I think my later examples pretty much concur with your explanations.

About the only thing I have to remember now, is an evade prevents an combatant from attacking on his next CA.

Thanks again.

No problem, I think we were both typing at the same time.

With regard to Evade;

Evasion attempts are always treated as Opposed Tests, pitting the
relevant attack skill against the Evade skill of the Defender. If the
Attacker wins then infl ict damage as normal. If the Defender wins
damage is completely avoided. Whatever the result, the evasive
gambit momentarily places the Defender at a disadvantage as he
regains his balance, preventing him from performing an attack with
the CA available on their next Strike Rank.

Bear in mind, Evade is meant to be used against charge, missile and magical attacks. Strictly speaking it is not designed for general melee combat. However, sometimes that is the only viable option.

The only CM I would allow a defender that 'evades' an attack is "Regain Footing", which if you are a generous GM, may negate the unable to attack on your next CA penalty for evading. If they have 2, then it's really up to the GM to decide what is 'allowable' dependent on the circumstances.

 

[Loz]

What I meant regarding Evade is that, even though its an opposed roll, your Evade will need to beat the attacker's success level. So if he crits, you have to Evade with a better crit. If he succeeds then your Evade has to have a better success.

If you screw-up your Evade then your attacker legitimately gains a CM from the result. I don't see any reason why it shouldn't work the other way around although, as DamonJynx points out, the CM a successful Evade could generate should be limited to the circumstances involved. If you're evading missile fire, for instance, you won't be able to overextend or blind your opponent.

 

[Grimolde]

What I meant regarding Evade is that, even though its an opposed roll, your Evade will need to beat the attacker's success level. So if he crits, you have to Evade with a better crit. If he succeeds then your Evade has to have a better success.

So equalling the attacker's success level is not enough to avoid an attack? I'm unsure what you mean:

Attacker rolls a 60, this is a normal success
Defender has to roll a 61+ or get a critical?

If you screw-up your Evade then your attacker legitimately gains a CM from the result.

Do you mean the attacker gains a CM if he gets a better success level than his opponent?

 

[Greg Smith]

The only CM I would allow a defender that 'evades' an attack is "Regain Footing", which if you are a generous GM, may negate the unable to attack on your next CA penalty for evading.

That is pretty good.

I would also suggest Change Range is also a good one, to allow an unarmed combatant to either get out of the fight or to get up close and personal in order to hamper an armed opponent, while using fists against him.

 

[DamonJynx]

Grimolde,

What Loz is saying, is that to successfully evade you have to beat your attackers roll in an opposed test. Some examples below:

Attacker (A) 70%, Defenders Evade (D) 60%

If A rolls 45, D needs 46-60 to Evade - No CM unless D fails ( A gets a CM only if D rolls 61 or higher) or rolls 6 or less (D rolls a critical gaining 1 CM).

If A rolls 61-70, D must roll a Crit (6 or lower) to succeed and gains a CM. If D rolls between 7-60 he takes damage normally. A does not get a CM unless D rolls over 61.

If A rolls a 7, D cannot win and suffers damage normally. To avoid A getting a CM, D needs to roll 6 or less, otherwise provided D rolls 60 or less A gets 1 CM, if he rolls over 60 A gets 2 CM's.

If A rolls 5 or less, D needs to roll higher than A, but 6 or less to evade. If he manages that no-one gets a CM, otherwise provided D rolls 60 or less A gets 1 CM, if he rolls over 60 A gets 2 CM's.

D cannot attack with his next CA on his strike rank, regardless. The above don't take into consideration fumbles.

Hope this helps.

 

[DamonJynx]

The only CM I would allow a defender that 'evades' an attack is "Regain Footing", which if you are a generous GM, may negate the unable to attack on your next CA penalty for evading.

I would also suggest Change Range is also a good one, to allow an unarmed combatant to either get out of the fight or to get up close and personal in order to hamper an armed opponent, while using fists against him.

Yes, that too. I missed that one, good pick up.

 

[Grimolde]

Grimolde,

What Loz is saying, is that to successfully evade you have to beat your attackers roll in an opposed test. Some examples below:

Awesome

Thank you

 

[DamonJynx]

Awesome

Thank you

You're welcome. I just hope I'm right and haven't led you astray. That's the way our group plays it.

 

[Grimolde]

I think you are right.

What threw me was having to beat the attacker to avoid damage. I think it is because most rpgs ask for a draw or a tie. Technically you are still drawing/tieing, with the same success level, but you'd also need (in the case of tied success levels at least) to get a higher dice roll than the attacker. That was the confusing part.

Amongst others of course

 

[Caustic Marinade]

After seeing this thread I re-read some of the rules in the book and noticed something. I can't find anywhere that indicates that evading an attack requires a CA. The first time I read it, I assumed it did. Can someone clarify this?

Does evading require 1 CA, in addition to not being able to attack on your next strike rank?

I think it makes more sense for evading to not require a CA (seeing as it's inferior to parrying, and also prevents you from attacking for one turn), and I may house rule it that way, but I'd like to know the official rules.

NOTE: I realize it's possible to spend a CA to evade during your turn, in anticipation of an attack. What's not clear to me is if it still costs a CA when you evade reflexively.

 

[Da Boss]

I think it has to otherwise you could use it when you run out of CA's in a round and thats a little dodgy...............especially if outnumbered.

 

[Loz]

To quote from page 83 of the rules:

Combat Actions (CA), calculated during Adventurer Creation, are used when attempting any kind of activity during a combat; for example, to attack, defend, change engagement distance, cast spells, and so forth.

So technically yes, evading does cost a CA when used during combat when it is an activity initiated during combat.

If you remove the CA cost, opponents could, theoretically, evade indefinitely whilst retaining their full complement of CAs. That's unrealistic, so, unless you believe specific circumstances for a particular situation warrant it, Evade should still have a CA cost attached to it.

 

[Caustic Marinade]

I think it has to otherwise you could use it when you run out of CA's in a round and thats a little dodgy...............especially if outnumbered.

:lol:

That's punny.

Is it really so bad to be able to evade when you're out of CA's? It's way less effective than parrying, because it's an opposed test, rather than a simple success/fail, and you'd still be unable to attack on your first turn next round.

It also makes certain spells more balanced. Spells that target evade are a lot better than those targeting resilience or persistence if a target needs to effectively waste 2 CA's to evade, or if a person is out of CA's the spell automatically succeeds.

 

[Loz]

Is it really so bad to be able to evade when you're out of CA's?

As I think I indicated in my previous post, any activity initiated during combat - be it using a skill, closing, changing weapon or evading costs a CA. It does so because you're making a conscious decision to act in the same way that you make a conscious decision to attack or parry.

If you remove the CA cost for Evade then you might as well remove it for all other actions save attack, parry and spell casting. This would lead to some hideous rule abuses and this is why we structured CA as a finite resource and made any significant, conscious action have a CA cost. It makes you think very carefully about your options and what's best in any given situation.

If you're out of CA and have an absolute need to defend yourself you can use Hero Points to create a new, last-ditch CA. That's also in the rules.

 

[Da Boss]

Depends - characters with low CR (say in good armour) and high evade will likely use their first CA to parry anyway - hence evading :lol: the iusse of loosing their first attack.........

Its very effective if they are using big weapons and your not and you have high evade?

Evade is a very important combat skill as its used for a numebr of things including closing and dodgin missile fire - helps stop you die!

but then again try it as you say, and report back - it might work out better?

 

[Caustic Marinade]

Ahh. Thank you for the clarification Loz, that makes sense.

Sorry I didn't see your reply the first time. We posted simultaneously, so I didn't see your reply when I responded to Da Boss.

 

[Grimolde]

Ok so...

I evade, and can't attack on my next CA.

I can't parry because I have no means to do so

What can I do when next my CA comes around

I'm assuming I can high tail it away, but what other combat options are open to me? Grip?