Move and attack

[gran_orco]

First of all, sorry for my english. I'm using the google translator

My question is: if I want to attack to someone between 2 and 4 meters, should i use an action to be adjacent to the enemy -he would do a reaction to attack- and wait for my next action, or might I do a charge although I do not obtain the bonus of 1D4?

And finally, at what distance is it possible to attack without moving?

 

[atgxtg]

First of all, sorry for my english. I'm using the google translator

My question is: if I want to attack to someone between 2 and 4 meters, should i use an action to be adjacent to the enemy -he would do a reaction to attack- and wait for my next action, or might I do a charge although I do not obtain the bonus of 1D4?

And finally, at what distance is it possible to attack without moving?

That's okay. I'm sorry for my English, I'm an American.

Tehncially, by the book you can't charge. However only those enedies adjacenet to you when you start you move action get the free reaction. The idea is to keep you from just ingoring an enemy.

What distance it is possible to attack without moving depends on the weapon. The rules don't really account for weapon reach, and just let you attack ajacent foes. But, it would be resoanble to let someone with a longspear hit someone father way than someone with a dagger. THis just isn't in the rules.

 

[gran_orco]

Tehncially, by the book you can't charge. However only those enedies adjacenet to you when you start you move action get the free reaction. The idea is to keep you from just ingoring an enemy.

where does the book say that?
I write, literally:
"(pag 52) FREE ATACKS: The following situations will grant a free attack: (...) If the enemy moves adjacent to the character without using the Charge Combat Action (which must be targeted at the character). This includes enemies who move through an adjacent area to the character en route to a further destination.

Therefore, if I aproach an enemy -using an action- he could attack me and and I should wait for one more action.

 

[Enpeze]

Tehncially, by the book you can't charge. However only those enedies adjacenet to you when you start you move action get the free reaction. The idea is to keep you from just ingoring an enemy.

where does the book say that?
I write, literally:
"(pag 52) FREE ATACKS: The following situations will grant a free attack: (...) If the enemy moves adjacent to the character without using the Charge Combat Action (which must be targeted at the character). This includes enemies who move through an adjacent area to the character en route to a further destination.

Therefore, if I aproach an enemy -using an action- he could attack me and and I should wait for one more action.

Yes I agree. This is that what I learn from the rules too.

So lets see:
Character A (SR15) approaches Charater B (SR17) with a move action.
B gets his free attack. (whack)
Then B chooses a flurry and attack 2 times again (cling, whack)
Then A gets his first attack (whack)

Poor A.

 

[Vadrus]

So technically, if a duck with a dagger charges a Great Troll with a 2-H Maul he can hit the Troll before it can react? :shock:

Or have I missed something obvious in the rules?


Vadrus

 

[Rurik]

So technically, if a duck with a dagger charges a Great Troll with a 2-H Maul he can hit the Troll before it can react? :shock:

Or have I missed something obvious in the rules?


Vadrus

If the troll anticipated the charge, and had a higher SR, he could delay his action and wait for the charge as per Delay under Combat actions. Then an opposed roll would take place to see who strikes first.

 

[gran_orco]

With flurry, could A move and attack (using 2 actions) before B does the same?

Could A do a flurry and: 1)move, 2)attack, 3)Fight retreat
And could I aim two times with flurry, and do a ranged attack later?

Again, sorry for my english, and thank you for the answers

 

[atgxtg]

Tehncially, by the book you can't charge. However only those enedies adjacenet to you when you start you move action get the free reaction. The idea is to keep you from just ingoring an enemy.

where does the book say that?
I write, literally:
"(pag 52) FREE ATACKS: The following situations will grant a free attack: (...) If the enemy moves adjacent to the character without using the Charge Combat Action (which must be targeted at the character). This includes enemies who move through an adjacent area to the character en route to a further destination.

Therefore, if I aproach an enemy -using an action- he could attack me and and I should wait for one more action.

It sais that on page 46 under the MOve action:

The character moves quickly, but not at a flat out run (that is not fleeing or charging). Any adjacent enemy may make a Reaction free attack in response to this action.

I took that to mean anyone who wasn't adjacent to you when you stated moving wasn't going tog et an attack. With a 4m move rate, characters are not going to far.

Still, the free attack rules do sort of suggest that charge is the only way to approach someone in combat without getting whacked.

I, for one, am in favor of a "one meter step" rule.

 

[Halfbat]

I, for one, am in favor of a "one meter step" rule.

Aaaargh! not the 5' step! Not in MRQ!



However, it does seem barmy that moving into to combat is way tricker than moving out of combat. The "adjacent" also catches those moving close by a character during a move (which is fine) which the "start of move" won't catch.

I suspect that what's actally missing is an "Advance into Combat" action in which a character :

"Advances slowly towards an opponent keeping his guard raised and ready for combat. He may move up to half his movement directly towards an enemy providing he finishes his move adjacent to that enemy."

 

[Rurik]

I, for one, am in favor of a "one meter step" rule.

Aaaargh! not the 5' step! Not in MRQ!



However, it does seem barmy that moving into to combat is way tricker than moving out of combat. The "adjacent" also catches those moving close by a character during a move (which is fine) which the "start of move" won't catch.

I suspect that what's actally missing is an "Advance into Combat" action in which a character :

"Advances slowly towards an opponent keeping his guard raised and ready for combat. He may move up to half his movement directly towards an enemy providing he finishes his move adjacent to that enemy."

Yes, an Engage combat action might be in order, where a character can move 1/2 movement and attack, with an opposed roll to determine who strikes first (assuming the defender has reactions left) just as in the delay for charge scenario.

 

[Lord Twig]

First of all, sorry for my english. I'm using the google translator

My question is: if I want to attack to someone between 2 and 4 meters, should i use an action to be adjacent to the enemy -he would do a reaction to attack- and wait for my next action, or might I do a charge although I do not obtain the bonus of 1D4?

And finally, at what distance is it possible to attack without moving?

By the rules you would have to move then wait to attack, though the enemy does not get a free attack action.

Personally I would allow 1m of free movement with every action to give the game some movement. Otherwise everyone will just stand still and hit each other until they fall down.

 

[Lord Twig]

Just read the rest of the replys. I am pretty sure that the intent of the rules was to allow someone to approach an enemy without giving them a free attack. You just can't move away from or past an enemy.

I am really not going to worry too much about the exact wording of the rules and will just run them how I think they should be. This is what I had always done in the distant past, until D&D3 came out.

 

[Rurik]

I write, literally:
"(pag 52) FREE ATACKS: The following situations will grant a free attack: (...) If the enemy moves adjacent to the character without using the Charge Combat Action (which must be targeted at the character). This includes enemies who move through an adjacent area to the character en route to a further destination.

Therefore, if I aproach an enemy -using an action- he could attack me and and I should wait for one more action.

I think that is pretty definative on the intent of the rules. Charge or take a free attack. By all means do what you think is reasonable. That is what why we are all discussing alternatives here anyway.

 

[atgxtg]

I, for one, am in favor of a "one meter step" rule.

Aaaargh! not the 5' step! Not in MRQ!

Why not? It goes with all the other D&D 3+ rules that make up the combat chapter. We can even allow someone to "tumble" avoid the "free attack" by making a difficult (-20%) acrobatics check! :mrgreen:

However, it does seem barmy that moving into to combat is way tricker than moving out of combat. The "adjacent" also catches those moving close by a character during a move (which is fine) which the "start of move" won't catch.

I suspect that what's actally missing is an "Advance into Combat" action in which a character :

"Advances slowly towards an opponent keeping his guard raised and ready for combat. He may move up to half his movement directly towards an enemy providing he finishes his move adjacent to that enemy."

YEAH! The Advance/Close/Press/Engage or whatever. Basically the same thing as the "Fighting Reatreat" except you move forward. Or maybe an opposed roll to see if you leave an opening.

The problem is, without the free attack, the fighting retrat becomes fairly worthless. One guy retreats 2m, the other steps up and whacks. No chance of losing your foe.

I do think that with all the claims of mobility in combat the new rules actually make character much more static.

 

[halorix]

You also have to spend a reaction point to make the free attack, so you will have fever defences.
In my game I'll probably allow some sort of cautious advance action, i.e. move half move to engage without prompting a free attack.

 

[atgxtg]

You also have to spend a reaction point to make the free attack, so you will have fever defences.
In my game I'll probably allow some sort of cautious advance action, i.e. move half move to engage without prompting a free attack.

So each PC throws a javelin at the guard then they can dash right by him?

Or a group of roman soliders could all throw pilum at the enemy's front rank and then charge and get a bunch of undefended attacks.... :twisted:

 

[halorix]

Thats what the rulebook states (page 49). If the romans us 1 combat action to throw their pilums, the defenders could use 1 reaction to dodge or parry said volley and use the second reaction defending against the roman horde, that is if they would just stand still & wait for the charge. That is if all the combatants have 2 combat actions.

 

[atgxtg]

Thats what the rulebook states (page 49). If the romans us 1 combat action to throw their pilums, the defenders could use 1 reaction to dodge or parry said volley and use the second reaction defending against the roman horde, that is if they would just stand still & wait for the charge. That is if all the combatants have 2 combat actions.

No, I'm thinking meaner than that. If all the ranks of Romans threw thier pila/javelins at the first and only the first rank of defenders, then the front rank would either have to take the hits or use up thier reactions to parry (and possibly actions too?). THat would leave them vulnerable to the have 2-3 actions).ROman front rank (and maybe the front rank already threw pila and have two actions for attacking).

 

[gran_orco]

I repeat my question:

With flurry, could A move and attack (using 2 actions) before B does the same?

Could A do a flurry and: 1)move, 2)attack, 3)Fight retreat
And could I aim two times with flurry, and do a ranged attack later?

 

[Rurik]

I repeat my question:

With flurry, could A move and attack (using 2 actions) before B does the same?

Could A do a flurry and: 1)move, 2)attack, 3)Fight retreat
And could I aim two times with flurry, and do a ranged attack later?

That is actually a good question. I had assumed tat flurry applies to making attacks, but the rule states only that they may use all Combat Actions at once.

I am going to interpret it as meaning they must use the CA's for melee attacks only. Perhaps they thought that was implied by the name (flurry of attacks). Any of the scenarios you described seem unreasonable. (I drop my sword and ready my bow, knock an arrow, aim, and shoot as my flurry - no way I am allowing that).