Do you add CA for two weapon / shield use?

[Antalon]

In addition: how do you keep track for multiple NPCs? Counters / poker chips are fine for players but what can the GM do?

Antalon.

 

[duncan_disorderly]

In addition: how do you keep track for multiple NPCs? Counters / poker chips are fine for players but what can the GM do?
Antalon.

If you use the RAW rather than insisting that the bonus CA must be a parry, then you can mark actions used with a tick or tally mark - since (most) NPC's are only used once this doesn't cause the problem it would if you had to keep rubbing out marks on a character sheet.

 

[Mugen]

Don't forget that if you remove the extra action, 2 handed weapons become incredibly good, as they deal more damage than 1 handed ones, and are as good as shields for parry due to their size.

 

[taxboy]

Don't forget that if you remove the extra action, 2 handed weapons become incredibly good, as they deal more damage than 1 handed ones, and are as good as shields for parry due to their size.

Logic dictates the extra CA stands but has to be used for a parry only, and i encourage my players to use a wepaon that fits with their characters not just min-max it...


..not that that always works..

 

[languagegeek]

I'm going to give it a go with some similar counters/markers, hopefully is will work.

Antalon.

The other thing we do is if someone loses CAs due to injury (or whatever), they get little flat glass beads which are placed on top of the chips to indicate that these CAs cannot be used to take offensive action.

I also toss out small cards/chips with stuff like "-10%", "impaled", "prone" (etc) on them, and these go beside the players' markers on the map. It is so easy to forget one bonus/penalty when there are fatigues and injuries flying all around. If everything is laid out in front of everyone, life gets much easier for players and GMs alike. In the beginning, I was taking this method a bit to far, and information overload followed, so we now only keep it as complex as it needs to be.

As for NPCs and the like, it depends on how overt your GMing style is. If you place the NPCs on a (battle) map, you can line up the CA chips etc. beside the NPCs just like the players: players and GM alike can keep track of combat complexities. If you're a more secretive type of GM I'd really like to hear what kinds of solutions you come up with!

 

[Mugen]

Don't forget that if you remove the extra action, 2 handed weapons become incredibly good, as they deal more damage than 1 handed ones, and are as good as shields for parry due to their size.

Logic dictates the extra CA stands but has to be used for a parry only, and i encourage my players to use a wepaon that fits with their characters not just min-max it...


..not that that always works..

You know, having a "free" parry means that in many cases you will have one more CA available for attacking. Plus, if the extra action comes from an off-hand weapon, logic dictates the extra CA may be an attack

Note that if you have problems with Combat Actions, you might try to completely remove them, replacing the extra action with another advantage.

 

[Da Boss]

To my understanding you can attack at whatever range you are, as long as the weapon is long enough. So even if he is within fist-fighting range, you can still hit him with your spear (albeit it would be awkvard). You just can't parry with your spear.

Of course, in completely ridiculous situations I would rule a penalty.

- Dan

I did wonder about this one myself as I would have thouhg you could use the haft of a spear (2HD) as a staff which would be of for parrying close up but not so easy to attack with. In the same way could use a axe shaft defensively?

However I no experience in the matter so happy to be corrected

The Combat Styles in RQII have thus far been the most complex issue for me - working out exactly what they cover:

Ie Spear and Shield - now I think it should cover:

1H and 2Hd Spear with and without Shield, and Staff (as noted above I would think the spear can be used as such when in close?) - perhaps also Thrown Spear - depending on the background?

Slightly derailed thread so will take elsewhere

 

[Deleriad]

I have occasionally wondered about this. I think you can remove the extra CA for dual wield styles if you do the following.

The riposte Combat Manoeuvre is changed to state that the attacking weapon must be different from the defending weapon. And the target of the riposte can't defend with the same weapon he just attacked with.

That way riposte becomes more useful in general and becomes most effective when dual wielding.

Note also that
Dual wield styles also allow you to pin with the parrying weapon while attacking with the offensive one.

Finally shields are the only things that allow you to parry missiles. I also personally allow PCs to use shields as 'mobile cover' or to keep them slung as incidental armour points.

Still and all, I don't find the extra CA to be that much of an issue. I do rule that it must be used for the combat style that provides it (attacking or parrying) but other than that I'm happy to play with the rules as written.

 

[Antalon]

I have occasionally wondered about this. I think you can remove the extra CA for dual wield styles if you do the following.

The riposte Combat Manoeuvre is changed to state that the attacking weapon must be different from the defending weapon. And the target of the riposte can't defend with the same weapon he just attacked with.

That way riposte becomes more useful in general and becomes most effective when dual wielding.

Note also that
Dual wield styles also allow you to pin with the parrying weapon while attacking with the offensive one.

Finally shields are the only things that allow you to parry missiles. I also personally allow PCs to use shields as 'mobile cover' or to keep them slung as incidental armour points.

Still and all, I don't find the extra CA to be that much of an issue. I do rule that it must be used for the combat style that provides it (attacking or parrying) but other than that I'm happy to play with the rules as written.

This is a very elegant solution - if you consider it a problem in the first place!

I'm noting this variation, and if I can't settle on additional CA I may well use this. Thanks

Antalon.

 

[Antalon]

I have attempted to resolve the problem of tracking CA by designing a tracker form, to be used with coins / counters. It can be found here: http://basicroleplaying.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=382

I'd be grateful for any feedback -I've not yet tested this with players!

Antalon.

 

[Ultor]

I have attempted to resolve the problem of tracking CA by designing a tracker form, to be used with coins / counters. It can be found here: http://basicroleplaying.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=382

I'd be grateful for any feedback -I've not yet tested this with players!

Antalon.

That looks great! I'll almost certainly use it in our game when it starts up again. Would be nice to have a GM version akin to the Squad Sheets of years gone by - wish I had the design skills to do one.

 

[Antalon]

Let me know how the sheet works with your players. The problem with a Squad sheet is that different affects effect NPCs at different times. But some sort of sheet that helps to organise how CAs are tracked may work. Clever people around here may even be able to build a spreadsheet based tracker for those who like a digital gaming experience! (I'm far too old skool for that!).

Antalon.

 

[doomedpc]

I tend to use a sheet with names down one side, then a column for CAs and SR - then empty columns in which I use five bar gate style note for each round's CAs. We used this format in our earlier C&C books. I always use this when running games, but realise that there are lots of different ways of achieving the same result.

I don't know if anyone else has had a go with that format and can provide feedback?

Peter Cakebread

Cakebread & Walton
Purveyors of Fine Imaginings