Combat Issues

[Loz]

I'm beginning to think that MRQ2 is a little too involved for me, and the group. I'm getting the feeling that it's too much to wrap my head around. It's just one little thing too many to understand. It may even be easy, but I think I just failed a POW roll.

Thanks anyway

I can see what you're saying Grimolde, but am I right in thinking you still haven't played a session yet? If so, I'd recommend that before deciding if its too involved or not, play a couple of games. You'll find that the rules in real-time play work a lot more effectively than you interpret them simply through reading.

Its certainly an involved game and I can understand you feeling a little overwhelmed, but give it a shot in real play and then see how you feel.

 

[Grimolde]

I'm beginning to think that MRQ2 is a little too involved for me, and the group. I'm getting the feeling that it's too much to wrap my head around. It's just one little thing too many to understand. It may even be easy, but I think I just failed a POW roll.

Thanks anyway

I can see what you're saying Grimolde, but am I right in thinking you still haven't played a session yet? If so, I'd recommend that before deciding if its too involved or not, play a couple of games. You'll find that the rules in real-time play work a lot more effectively than you interpret them simply through reading.

Its certainly an involved game and I can understand you feeling a little overwhelmed, but give it a shot in real play and then see how you feel.

I've played quite a few mock combats between two fighter type opponents. I have the feel of combat, I know what the design is trying to accomplish, and I'm pretty sure it will be even easier when I'm not controlling two opponents mano a mano.

Taken bit by bit, no rule is overwhelming, but put all together, I am beginning to think it's a bit too much. It's a bit like, as soon as I get my head wrapped around one issue, another comes up. It doesn't help that there are a few terms to remember as well, such as Strike Ranks, Combat Manouevres, Combat Actions, Success Levels etc.

Don't get me wrong, when I say MRQ2 is one of the best systems I've come across, I mean it. But when I get down to the nitty gritty, it may not be exactly what I want in a game.

If that makes sense

 

[Grimolde]

Isn't it really saying 'loses next attack action'? So you could parry next CA but not attack? Even if you parry the next CA, you lose your next attack action?

No. It's just saying exactly what it is saying. Which is to say that on the character's next action, he cannot attack. He can do over things but he's too out of position to be able to mount an attack. It doesn't say "next time you attack you automatically fail."

There is an issue with some missing terminology which can make things confusing. I use the following terms.

Combat Round: a sequence of 1 or more Action Cycles. An action cycle only if at least one character has at least 1 Combat Action left. Each character with any Combat Actions left gets 1 Turn per Action Cycle. A character's turn normally happens on their Strike Rank though a character can choose to delay their turn until later in the cycle. When a character takes their turn they must spend 1 Combat Action on any allowable action even if that is the "do nothing" action. The character whose turn it is is the acting character all other characters are reacting characters. The only actions that reacting characters can take are reactions such as Parry, Evade and counter-cast spell.

Using those terms, what over-extend would say is "you cannot attack on your next turn."

Hope that clarifies things.

Surely it must be saying you cannot attack on your next available CA. I cannot see how it can mean anything else. Otherwise if you can attack on your next CA there's no penalty.

 

[Grimolde]

Strike Rank
How frequently an Adventurer acts in combat is defined by Combat Actions. How quickly he acts is defined by Strike Rank. [T]he higher an Adventurer’s Strike Rank the quicker he acts in a Combat Round.

A: has Strike Rank 12 and 3 CAs
B: has Strike Rank 11 and 3 CAs

Strike Rank 12
A: attacks for 1 CA
B: defends for 1 CA and A is overextended and cannot attack on his next Strike Rank.

B: attacks for 2 CA
A: defends for 2 CA

A: can't attack even though he has a CA left. He can defend.

 

[Deleriad]

Strike Rank
How frequently an Adventurer acts in combat is defined by Combat Actions. How quickly he acts is defined by Strike Rank. [T]he higher an Adventurer’s Strike Rank the quicker he acts in a Combat Round.

A: has Strike Rank 12 and 3 CAs
B: has Strike Rank 11 and 3 CAs

Strike Rank 12
A: attacks for 1 CA
B: defends for 1 CA and A is overextended and cannot attack on his next Strike Rank.

B: attacks for 2 CA
A: defends for 2 CA

A: can't attack even though he has a CA left. He can defend.

That's exactly right.

 

[Grimolde]

Strike Rank
How frequently an Adventurer acts in combat is defined by Combat Actions. How quickly he acts is defined by Strike Rank. [T]he higher an Adventurer’s Strike Rank the quicker he acts in a Combat Round.

A: has Strike Rank 12 and 3 CAs
B: has Strike Rank 11 and 3 CAs

Strike Rank 12
A: attacks for 1 CA
B: defends for 1 CA and A is overextended and cannot attack on his next Strike Rank.

B: attacks for 2 CA
A: defends for 2 CA

A: can't attack even though he has a CA left. He can defend.

That's exactly right.

To make absolutely sure I have it clear in my mind, it's a case of, the next time the overxtended character might have chosen an ‘attack’ action – he can’t?

 

[jarulf]

Not quite. The next time it's his turn to act, he can't attack physically. He is still free to do other things though, move, cast a spell and so on.

EDIT: Never mind, misread the post above.

 

[Deleriad]

To make absolutely sure I have it clear in my mind, it's a case of, the next time the overxtended character might have chosen an ‘attack’ action – he can’t?

Correct. That's really all there is to it.

 

[Dan True]

To make absolutely sure I have it clear in my mind, it's a case of, the next time the overxtended character might have chosen an ‘attack’ action – he can’t?

Correct. That's really all there is to it.

Except it's not "The next time the overextended character might have chosen"... It's only on the next CA.

- Dan

 

[Grimolde]

To make absolutely sure I have it clear in my mind, it's a case of, the next time the overxtended character might have chosen an ‘attack’ action – he can’t?

Correct. That's really all there is to it.

Except it's not "The next time the overextended character might have chosen"... It's only on the next CA.

- Dan

So we are back again to not being able to attack on his next CA? He basically loses his next attack action then.

 

[Deleriad]

I think there's some sort of misunderstanding here.

Over-extend stops the character from attacking on his next active SR. The character might not have planned to attack in which case, nothing changes. Grimolde has it exactly right.

A - SR 18, 3 CAs: B - SR 15, 3 CAs.

SR 18. A attacks, B parries. B gains an DoS and chooses Over extended. Both have 2 CAs left.

SR 12. B attacks. A parries, No doS. Both have 1 CA left.

SR 18. A's turn. A cannot attack but can do something else. He chooses to ready a parry so that B can't get a free swing. A no CAs left. B 1 CA left.

SR 12. B attacks. A uses his readied parry. No DoS. No CAs left for anyone.

 

[Grimolde]

I think there's some sort of misunderstanding here.

Over-extend stops the character from attacking on his next active SR. The character might not have planned to attack in which case, nothing changes. Grimolde has it exactly right.

A - SR 18, 3 CAs: B - SR 15, 3 CAs.

SR 18. A attacks, B parries. B gains an DoS and chooses Over extended. Both have 2 CAs left.

SR 12. B attacks. A parries, No doS. Both have 1 CA left.

SR 18. A's turn. A cannot attack but can do something else. He chooses to ready a parry so that B can't get a free swing. A no CAs left. B 1 CA left.

SR 12. B attacks. A uses his readied parry. No DoS. No CAs left for anyone.

This I fully understand, and I'm sure it's right.

 

[Dan True]

I think there's some sort of misunderstanding here.

Yep, we're saying the thing, the only issue was that technically what Grimolde said some posts back would apply to "the next time he wishes to attack, regardless of on what SR it is". I just wanted to make sure that this was not a misunderstanding... Now that I read it again, it might have been me misunderstanding what Grimolde meant he understood it as.
But I think we're all in agreement now

This I fully understand, and I'm sure it's right.

Yep, it is.

So, all in lovely agreement

- Dan

 

[Grimolde]

Awesome sauce is back on the menu!

 

[Grimolde]

A character takes damage to his leg, dropping him to -2. He makes an opposed Resilience test and passes. Later he takes 3 more damage in the same location, dropping him to -5. What else happens? He hasn't lost twice his starting Hit Points by the way.

 

[Dan True]

A character takes damage to his leg, dropping him to -2. He makes an opposed Resilience test and passes. Later he takes 3 more damage in the same location, dropping him to -5. What else happens? He hasn't lost twice his starting Hit Points by the way.

I think that RAW, you only suffer the major wound when you are brought below 0 HP or less, and thus you only take the test the first time.

Although, depending on the situation, I might call for additional tests.

- Dan

 

[languagegeek]

I think that RAW, you only suffer the major wound when you are brought below 0 HP or less, and thus you only take the test the first time.

An arm is broken, ouch, this might result in problems... roll the dice.
Someone breaks the same arm again. I can't see how the arm is any worse for it. No need to roll again IMO.

 

[Dan True]

I think that RAW, you only suffer the major wound when you are brought below 0 HP or less, and thus you only take the test the first time.

An arm is broken, ouch, this might result in problems... roll the dice.
Someone breaks the same arm again. I can't see how the arm is any worse for it. No need to roll again IMO.

Which is the same as what I said. This specific question however is more concerned with what happens if the victim passes the first test. So:
"Brought below 0 HP, ouch... Roll the dice - The arm did not break. Now hit another time - do I test again to see if the arms breaks this time or not?"

- Dan

 

[Deleriad]

A character takes damage to his leg, dropping him to -2. He makes an opposed Resilience test and passes. Later he takes 3 more damage in the same location, dropping him to -5. What else happens? He hasn't lost twice his starting Hit Points by the way.

at -2 Hit Points he suffers a serious wound. He is 'stunned' for 1d3 CAs and must make an opposed Resilience test. He succeeds so can continue using the location.

at -5 Hit Points he has suffered another serious wound to his leg. He is stunned for 1d3 CAs (again( and must make an opposed resilience test. If he succeeds he can carry on using the arm.

Basically, once a location is at 0 HPs any further injury is a serious wound each time it happens. Once the location has taken twice HP damage, every injury is a major wound.

 

[Grimolde]

A character takes damage to his leg, dropping him to -2. He makes an opposed Resilience test and passes. Later he takes 3 more damage in the same location, dropping him to -5. What else happens? He hasn't lost twice his starting Hit Points by the way.

at -2 Hit Points he suffers a serious wound. He is 'stunned' for 1d3 CAs and must make an opposed Resilience test. He succeeds so can continue using the location.

at -5 Hit Points he has suffered another serious wound to his leg. He is stunned for 1d3 CAs (again( and must make an opposed resilience test. If he succeeds he can carry on using the arm.

Basically, once a location is at 0 HPs any further injury is a serious wound each time it happens. Once the location has taken twice HP damage, every injury is a major wound.

Did you intend using arm then leg as an example?