Free Attack + Riposte

[Anonymous]

I did search and found nothing to help me so....

It states on page 52 that a riposte is a free attack BUT you must have an action to spend. Does this mean you HAVE to spend an action to riposte or just be in posession of an action to riposte not losing any of your actions?

Thanks in advance....

 

[gamesmeister]

I did search and found nothing to help me so....

It states on page 52 that a riposte is a free attack BUT you must have an action to spend. Does this mean you HAVE to spend an action to riposte or just be in posession of an action to riposte not losing any of your actions?

You must spend a Reaction (not an action) in order to perform a Riposte.

 

[Anonymous]

Thank-you!

I must have read that before but could not remember!

 

[dazzah]

page 52 is about Skill improvements. In the CM section on p89 its states you have to spend an additional CA to make an immediate counter attack with defending weapon.

My question is can the attacker parry or evade this? and if so...
as most weapons used to parry eg shield would be low damage, surely is a waste of a CA, as it would do little damage to most modestly armoured attackers. How can it be better than simply waiting to use your CA to attack with your main weapon.

Thanks

 

[Mongoose Pete]

My question is can the attacker parry or evade this? and if so...
as most weapons used to parry eg shield would be low damage, surely is a waste of a CA, as it would do little damage to most modestly armoured attackers. How can it be better than simply waiting to use your CA to attack with your main weapon.

As you rightly pointed out, this partially depends on the weapon and how well protected the opponent is. However, your assuptions on the prevalence of types of weapon and armour may be very different than what is used in other campaigns or settings. A pirate adventure may consist of rapier wielding sailors fencing in silk shirts for example. In addition a repost with a shield may be less about inflicting damage, than trying to inflict another CM, such as disarm or bash.

Secondly, the defender can indeed attempt to parry the repost. The primary objective of reposting (in MRQ2) comes from the fact that you can effectively attack twice in a row, which is a significant advantage. I.e. you get a repost attack on the opponents turn, then you get to attack as normal on your turn - forcing him to use up more of his actions on defensive fighting.

 

[dazzah]

Thanks Mongoose Pete!
I appreciate people helping clear up all these questions us previous Ed runequest oldies have in our heads.

I appreciate your first comment, however all our player characters are effectively magicians or armoured fighters, so riposte doesn`t look too useful.

Id like to debate your second point only as from my understanding its costs the defender 1CA to do the parry to get the riposte CM against the attack, a second CA to attack riposte with shield, (for weapon and shield really only granting a potential CM, as damage would be negligable, if the attacker chooses not to also use a CA to parry) and then would need a third CA to attack again that round on their own SR.
I really dont see how it gives the defender a great advantage, in fact if the attacker has the same or more CA than the defender, the defender choosing to use Riposte is incredibly foolish, as he will effectively leave himself open to an attack he cannot parry due to having no CA left and that attack would be with the attackers main weapon!

If you could riposte with your main weapon but spend a CA I can see how that offers an advantage, or if it was a free attack with the defending weapon, that would also be clearly useful - I guess im just suprised that it was play tested and found to be effective, because we just can`t get it to incur any benefit. I guess i thought it might have been an errata.







MRQ and previous RQ seemed to always state riposte was a free attack, and this obviously offers a clear benefit.

 

[Mongoose Pete]

I really dont see how it gives the defender a great advantage, in fact if the attacker has the same or more CA than the defender, the defender choosing to use Riposte is incredibly foolish, as he will effectively leave himself open to an attack he cannot parry due to having no CA left and that attack would be with the attackers main weapon!

Leaving maximum numbers of available CAs aside, which is a different issue, how about this as an example.

Both I and my opponent have 3 CA each. I am using a greatsword, he is using a short sword and buckler. He gets an initiative of 22, I get an initiative of 15, so he goes first.

SR 22 - He attacks, I parry, and gain a CM. We both burn our first CA.

I choose Repost.

I repost, he parries. We both burn our 2nd CA. I damage him since I have a bigger weapon.

SR 15 - I attack, he parries. We both burn our 3rd CA. I damage him again because of my bigger weapon.

Next round, we reroll initiative. This time I win, go first and damage him a third time in a row...

There are a multitude of tactical situations where repost can come into its own and I've seen it used very effectively in play. Even one case where the player used his main blade to parry, rather than his shield, to take advantage of this particular CM.

Its by no means the greatest CM in the book, but it does have its time and place.

 

[dazzah]

Thanks again Pete.

The example helped, although did open up a follow through question!

As riposte is very much fencing, I didn`t even consider a 2H weapon could do it!

:wink:

 

[Mongoose Pete]

As riposte is very much fencing, I didn`t even consider a 2H weapon could do it!

Technically a riposte is a quick thrust with a weapon which has just parried. So as long as your 2H weapon has a sharp point, it should be capable of it.

I occasionally use them if fighting with longsword/greatsword, by ensuring the tip and length of my blade is pointed directly at my opponent's face as I parry. Then I step towards him, which acts as a thrust driven by my body weight. Its very quick because the blade does not change position much, save for the hilt end curving up and drilling forwards if I have to anticipate parrying a lower blow, a more common occurrence when facing an opponent with a shorter weapon.

Its a classic great weapon riposte, much described in historical fight manuals. Although admittedly the terminology changes with different authors and languages.

 

[Lord High Munchkin]

But bear in mind the "pure" 2H sword (and I mean specifically a dedicated two-handed weapon) was an exceedingly rare weapon in the Medieval period. It really only started to be used (and sporadically at that) in the last decades of the 15th century.

 

[Rurik]

Hmm. I have been allowing Riposte with the primary weapon in a weapon and shield style.

I understand what a fencing riposte is, but its use in games is usally interpreted pretty loosely, one can after all riposte with a mace, greathammer, axe, or flail according to the rules.

I've taken it to mean that your defense has created an opening you can exploit. In weapon and shield it does indeed seem limiting to have to riposte with the shield.

 

[dazzah]

Yup I guess there a few variants out there.

Im gonna try play it true riposte style, so riposte has to be done with the parrying weapon, and the attackers weapon used that caused the riposte cannot parry the riposte blow, after all deflecting the weapon away is how the defender opened up the thrust attack.. (but other weapon or evade could be used.) Plus the rules state that usually a weapon used in same SR cannot be used to both parry and attack at the same time so that is where the ripose CM rule give the player an advantage.

I figure Ill let 2H weapon use if they wish but as they don`t get an extra CA probably be less likely to be used readily.

 

[Raegenhere (Huscarl)]

As riposte is very much fencing, I didn`t even consider a 2H weapon could do it!

Technically a riposte is a quick thrust with a weapon which has just parried. So as long as your 2H weapon has a sharp point, it should be capable of it.

I occasionally use them if fighting with longsword/greatsword, by ensuring the tip and length of my blade is pointed directly at my opponent's face as I parry. Then I step towards him, which acts as a thrust driven by my body weight. Its very quick because the blade does not change position much, save for the hilt end curving up and drilling forwards if I have to anticipate parrying a lower blow, a more common occurrence when facing an opponent with a shorter weapon.

Its a classic great weapon riposte, much described in historical fight manuals. Although admittedly the terminology changes with different authors and languages.

Have a look at this video on You Tube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYwdE3f5fFQ&feature=related

 

[Denalor]

You must spend a Reaction (not an action) in order to perform a Riposte.

Methinks, you're confsuing MRQI andf MRQII here... that distinctions is no longer of importance.
You have 3CAs and need to spend them for both offence and defence, there's no longer 3 actions plus 3 reactions.

The most important thing to read in this thread is that the riposte can be parried or evaded by spending yetr another CA.
Quite a different ruling from the closing/disenganging rule, where the closer/disengager can not (!) parry the foe's attack... if the latter chooses to do exactly that.

However, for the riposte I would rule it as simultaneous (see page 83 as to the implication)

 

[Mikko Leho]

Quite a different ruling from the closing/disenganging rule, where the closer/disengager can not (!) parry the foe's attack... if the latter chooses to do exactly that.

But you still get an Evade roll to dodge the blow. You can't elegantly combine a parry to an Evade based action.