Outmaneuver question

[Jujitsudave]

Regardless of how many CAs one has, if one performs the outmaneuver action does he lose all other combat actions that round?

That is how I read the rules and I'd like to know if anyone sees it different.

 

[Dan True]

Regardless of how many CAs one has, if one performs the outmaneuver action does he lose all other combat actions that round?

That is how I read the rules and I'd like to know if anyone sees it different.

I see it as you use a CA, and then for the remainder of the round some of your foes might not be able to attack you. It doesn't say anything about it taking away your ability to parry or defend yourself.

- Dan

 

[Jujitsudave]

Could you still make attacks though?

 

[Dan True]

Could you still make attacks though?

I would rule yes. Seems like really bad trade-off if you could only stop some of your foes from attacking, not have a change of dwindling down their numbers. The idea of the manouvre is to allow competent characters to be total three-musketeers-like

- Dan

 

[Redcrow]

Could you still make attacks though?

I would rule yes. Seems like really bad trade-off if you could only stop some of your foes from attacking, not have a change of dwindling down their numbers. The idea of the manouvre is to allow competent characters to be total three-musketeers-like

- Dan

Thats how I imagined it working. The descriptive text mentions a swashbuckler whittling away at multiple opponents one-by-one, which wouldn't be possible if it cost all your CA's to perform the outmaneuver each round.

 

[Jujitsudave]

The rules do state, however, that "a Defender may expend a Combat Acton to outmanoeuvre his foes for the remainder of that round"

 

[Redcrow]

The rules do state, however, that "a Defender may expend a Combat Acton to outmanoeuvre his foes for the remainder of that round"

I take that to mean that it lasts for the remainder of that round rather than you spend the remainder of that round doing nothing else.

Maybe Loz will wander in here and give us an official ruling.

 

[Jujitsudave]

I can't imagine though, that you could use one move to avoid all your foes attacks and then return to attack them with no way for them to retaliate.

 

[Redcrow]

I can't imagine though, that you could use one move to avoid all your foes attacks and then return to attack them with no way for them to retaliate.

You can't reduce the number of foes to less than 1 unless you wish to Disengage entirely. So, at least 1 foe will be able to attack you.

 

[Jujitsudave]

So you would essentially reduce your multiple opponents to just one for that round? Your are spending one CA to face 1 foe instead of many?

 

[ThatGuy]

And if outmaneuver is basically an evade action, should a PC be able to attack with his next CA after evading an opponent?

If so, it would always make more sense to outmaneuver instead of evading.

I would rule that an outmaneuvering PC cannot attack if he has attempted to outmaneuver an opponent since his last CA. I would allow a parry AND a riposte, if a CM were earned.

 

[Redcrow]

So you would essentially reduce your multiple opponents to just one for that round? Your are spending one CA to face 1 foe instead of many?

Well, remember that it is an opposed Evade test. There is no guarantee that any of your opponents will fail, so you might end up spending a CA trying to peform an Outmaneuver to no avail. Then you would be facing all opponents with one less CA with which to defend yourself. And you would have to spend another CA at the beginning of each round if you wanted to make the attempt again.

You would reduce the number of opponents you are facing based on whether or not you succeed at the Evade test and how many of them fail, to a mininum of 1. Even if you fail the Evade test it would cost you a CA just for trying.

Combat Actions are a precious commodity, especially when facing multiple opponents.

 

[Redcrow]

And if outmaneuver is basically an evade action, should a PC be able to attack with his next CA after evading an opponent?

If so, it would always make more sense to outmaneuver instead of evading.

I would rule that an outmaneuvering PC cannot attack if he has attempted to outmaneuver an opponent since his last CA. I would allow a parry AND a riposte, if a CM were earned.

Outmaneuver wouldn't work against a single opponent because you can't use it to reduce your number of opponents to less than 1. However, against multiple opponents it would certainly make sense that any opponents that ARE outmaneuvered and unable to attack you, you are also unable to attack them back. That just seems like common sense.

 

[Jujitsudave]

Hm. I can agree with that. Is there not also a dodge action that may be used to avoid getting hit yet leaves you unable to make an attack on your next CA? I thought I read that.

 

[Redcrow]

Hm. I can agree with that. Is there not also a dodge action that may be used to avoid getting hit yet leaves you unable to make an attack on your next CA? I thought I read that.

Evade sort of takes the place of the Dodge skill. But yes, I believe that if you use Evade to "dodge" it leaves you unable to attack on your next CA.

Its on pg. 84 under Evade.

 

[Redcrow]

I did just think of something involving Outmaneuver that I'm not sure how it would work.

If, for example, you have 4 CA's and you are facing 3 opponents. You spend your 1st CA to perform an Outmaneuver and succeed in reducing the number of opponents faced to just 1 for the remainder of the round. Next you get a lucky shot and manage to kill that opponent with your 2nd CA.

Would you then have to spend an additional CA to re-engage with one of the remaining 2 opponents? or would it be automatic once the first opponent falls that another steps forward to take his place?

I'm still hoping to get some official clarification in this thread, as I could be completely mis-understanding the rules for how Outmaneuver is supposed to work.

 

[Dan True]

I did just think of something involving Outmaneuver that I'm not sure how it would work.

If, for example, you have 4 CA's and you are facing 3 opponents. You spend your 1st CA to perform an Outmaneuver and succeed in reducing the number of opponents faced to just 1 for the remainder of the round. Next you get a lucky shot and manage to kill that opponent with your 2nd CA.

Would you then have to spend an additional CA to re-engage with one of the remaining 2 opponents? or would it be automatic once the first opponent falls that another steps forward to take his place?

I'm still hoping to get some official clarification in this thread, as I could be completely mis-understanding the rules for how Outmaneuver is supposed to work.

I wouldn't say to. Succeding in outmanouvering them reflects that you've tipped over a barstool or something like that to ruined their chance at you. It doesn't mean that you can't jump forward and slash at them.

Although of course they should then have the chance of attacking you back, else it gets silly.

- Dan

 

[cerebro]

I like that rule. Is a chance for a player to fight many guards. And as someone said, is not fail proof. You still need to beat the guys evade rolls. I will have the player choose one guy,thats the one he is going to fight. The evade roll is against all others.

I'm liking more and more the Acrobat profession. Evade is just too good.

 

[gran_orco]

I will have the player choose one guy,thats the one he is going to fight. The evade roll is against all others.

But, is the player who chooses who can fight with him, or should be the GM who declares who can attack him? In fact, the hero must fight with those that have had a succesful evade roll!

 

[duncan_disorderly]

I will have the player choose one guy,thats the one he is going to fight. The evade roll is against all others.

But, is the player who chooses who can fight with him, or should be the GM who declares who can attack him? In fact, the hero must fight with those that have had a succesful evade roll!

When you try to use the outmanoeuvre manoeuvre on a group, you are attempting to restrict the number who can attack you, but you can not reduce the number below 1, so you are going to pick 1 opponent you have to fight - the others will depend on how the rolling goes...

So, for example, you are attacked by a Dark Troll accompanied by his Great Troll Bodyguard and 3 trollkin slaves. You might decide that if you beat the Dark Troll, the others will flee, and try to outmanoeuvre the Great Troll and the Trollkin. Alternatively, you might decide that if you can get into a position where the Trollkin are blocking the larger trolls from reaching you, you will survive long enough for your colleagues to help, in which case you would choose to outmanoeuvre all except Trollkin A.
In either case you may end up fighting (some of) the other Trolls if they beat your roll.

I would say as a general rule that once you have outmanoeuvred someone, you can not then attack them in that round without allowing them the chance to fight back (assuming they have any CA's left, obviously).