Keeping track of CA's - for players and GMs

[Antalon]

So, what methods have people used to keep the number of CA's straight? Especially those cases where the types of CA that can be made have been limited in some fashion (for example 'can't attack' from a fumble result)?

Antalon

 

[Harshlax]

In one of the other threads people have been talking about using coloured glass stones or poker chips. With different colours for CAs from basic stats and from equipment such as shields.

 

[Deleriad]

In one of the other threads people have been talking about using coloured glass stones or poker chips. With different colours for CAs from basic stats and from equipment such as shields.

That's exactly what I do. Works a treat. Technically the rules don't require you to differentiate between extra actions from combat styles and normal CAs but I do.

 

[Denalor]

I wonder... do you allow your shield (or 2nd weapon for that matter) bonus CA to be used for
Evade,
breaking free from a Grip,
withdrawing your weapons after a successful Impale,
freeing your weapon after a Pin,
Riposte,
Trip after a successful Entangle or
adjusting the duration of a Stun
or not ?

 

[Antalon]

Thanks - how do you manage as a GM, running multiple foes? Any tricks for managing the book-keeping, especially for effects that cut across rounds?

It seems to me that the first thing you need to know would be the total number of CAs available from any combant - which sets the flow for each combat round as you cycle through initiative points.

Antalon.

 

[Loz]

I wonder... do you allow your shield (or 2nd weapon for that matter) bonus CA to be used for
Evade,
breaking free from a Grip,
withdrawing your weapons after a successful Impale,
freeing your weapon after a Pin,
Riposte,
Trip after a successful Entangle or
adjusting the duration of a Stun
or not ?

There's no special treatment for bonus CA derived from two weapons styles. You can use them in exactly the same way and for the same things, as your base CA.

Of course, if people want to restrict the utility of these CA somehow, then that's all part of your RQ; however the rules don't make this level of distinction simply to keep things as simple as possible. I think that restricting bonus CA just adds a layer of unnecessary book keeping.

 

[Ssendam]

I think having the extra CA is such an advantage it's a nice idea to track it's use, which if you use a different colour poker chip is easy to do.

If you fight with 2 weapons how do you currently decide which one you are striking with? (no rule book here at work).

 

[Deleriad]

I think having the extra CA is such an advantage it's a nice idea to track it's use, which if you use a different colour poker chip is easy to do.

If you fight with 2 weapons how do you currently decide which one you are striking with? (no rule book here at work).

You just say "I attack the trollkin with my sword" and off you go.

 

[Ssendam]

I think having the extra CA is such an advantage it's a nice idea to track it's use, which if you use a different colour poker chip is easy to do.

If you fight with 2 weapons how do you currently decide which one you are striking with? (no rule book here at work).

You just say "I attack the trollkin with my sword" and off you go.

So if you are wielding 2 weapons you will just always use the best one to Parry or Attack? Seems a good reason to have the extra CA as a different "named" action to me.

 

[Loz]

So if you are wielding 2 weapons you will just always use the best one to Parry or Attack? Seems a good reason to have the extra CA as a different "named" action to me.

You have to remember that this is an abstraction, which has been deliberately designed to be open and flexible - just like the Combat Style the character is using to wield both weapons simultaneously. In a fight you may use the 'extra' CA to parry, take an opportunistic attack, or use the threat of an attack (or additional defensive coverage) to do something completely different, like cast a spell.

There are many reasons why an off-hand weapon might not be used in a particular round, yet still legitimately offer an additional CA. The system allows GMs to adjust it according to their sense of verisimilitude.

If you want to restrict the extra CA to be used for doing something with that off-hand weapon then feel free. Most people will prefer to keep it simple.

 

[Deleriad]

I think having the extra CA is such an advantage it's a nice idea to track it's use, which if you use a different colour poker chip is easy to do.

If you fight with 2 weapons how do you currently decide which one you are striking with? (no rule book here at work).

You just say "I attack the trollkin with my sword" and off you go.

So if you are wielding 2 weapons you will just always use the best one to Parry or Attack? Seems a good reason to have the extra CA as a different "named" action to me.

I just call it a style token and can be used for anything that requires using the style skill. So if you have a sword and shield style you could use the style token for a sword attack, shield attack, sword parry or shield parry but not for casting a spell.

Generally if you're dual wielding you would use the weapons for what they're best at but sometimes you might swap around. e.g. a shield is usually a size larger than a sword so it can be worthwhile shield-bashing someone who is using a smaller weapon than a shield. Heck, a round shield can impale which can give someone a shock...

 

[Ssendam]

I think there is something in making the use of the extra CA clear that aids the story telling part of role playing. I don't think it's complex to track if you use counters for CA's and I do.

Cheers for all the comments

 

[Denalor]

e.g. a shield is usually a size larger than a sword so it can be worthwhile shield-bashing someone who is using a smaller weapon than a shield

Huh ? Am I missing something ? As far as I know there is no effect whatsoever - or in this case Knockback or Bash Opponent depending on the weapon size (apart from the capability to parry damage).

 

[Deleriad]

e.g. a shield is usually a size larger than a sword so it can be worthwhile shield-bashing someone who is using a smaller weapon than a shield

Huh ? Am I missing something ? As far as I know there is no effect whatsoever - or in this case Knockback or Bash Opponent depending on the weapon size (apart from the capability to parry damage).

What I mean is that you have a H shield doing 1D4 damage being parried by a M or L weapon then it'll do more damage than a M sword doing 1D8 damage. As you say, it makes no difference to the bash manoeuvre. Conversely, one of the minor failings of the current CMs is that you can bash someone further with a spear than a shield, which is not exactly what you expect.