RE: Combat Questions

[Deleriad]

I would say Fabricius's best tactic if he doesn't have initiative is to do the following.

H attack, F parry.
On F's SR, F pre-declares a parry. That then goes
H attack, F parry.
H is now out of actions so F can close without risk.
On his 4th action F gets a free attack.

Next round. Combatants now closed.
H tries to disengage. F can respond with an attack.
Now long range, H attacks, F parries. H now out of actions.
3rd action, F closes.
4th action F gets a free attack.

Over the first two rounds it has gone as follows if no one gets a CM
H attacks, F parries
H attacks, F parries
F closes, H no response
F attacks, H no response. Probably hope for a disarm.

H steps-back, F attacks
H attacks F parries
F closes, H no response
F attack, H no response

That means despite the extra CAs, H and F have both launched 3 attacks each, however all of F's have been against a target with no CAs.

 

[Denalor]

But: you do not re-roll the DM-roll for an impale, I think, you only roll twice the weapon dice and choose the higher, then you roll once for DM

Actually, I’m not sure whether this is really true. Do you only re-roll the damage dice of the weapon itself or do you completely re-roll the whole damage (i.e. the DM is also re-rolled) ?

I’m not too sure whether you’d really use the Brawn roll of Fabricus for the opposing test. I think you’d need to again use the original Attack roll ?

Upon reconsideration, I take the Brawn, makes more sense, since that removal is the damage-causing action and not the original impaling.

Heorward damage = 12 (max'd) + 2 + 4 (on db roll) = 18 points of damage to 3 on D20 (right leg of Fabricius)

Could you please elaborate why the damage (roll) was max’d ?
Heorweard did gain a single CM (normal success vs failure), but you never mention which he chose. Maximise Damage is not an applicable choice, since that is only allowed upon a critical success and he only rolled a 58, a normal success
Or did you just roll the 12 and the max’d did not imply a CM ?
Umm… actually, when you wrote that example you didn’t know yet that you may have a CM… or did you edit the example afterwards ?

 

[Raegenhere (Huscarl)]

But: you do not re-roll the DM-roll for an impale, I think, you only roll twice the weapon dice and choose the higher, then you roll once for DM

Actually, I’m not sure whether this is really true. Do you only re-roll the damage dice of the weapon itself or do you completely re-roll the whole damage (i.e. the DM is also re-rolled) ?

I actually rolled twice completely - damage dice for the weapon and damage bonus for Fabricius and chose the highest of the two totals. Perhaps, I should have only re-roll the weapon damage dice twice?

I’m not too sure whether you’d really use the Brawn roll of Fabricus for the opposing test. I think you’d need to again use the original Attack roll ?

Upon reconsideration, I take the Brawn, makes more sense, since that removal is the damage-causing action and not the original impaling.

I interpreted it as Brawn for brute-strength of pulling / twisting the impale weapon out, after all it could be stuck on gristle, muscle, etc.

Heorward damage = 12 (max'd) + 2 + 4 (on db roll) = 18 points of damage to 3 on D20 (right leg of Fabricius)

Could you please elaborate why the damage (roll) was max’d ?
Heorweard did gain a single CM (normal success vs failure), but you never mention which he chose. Maximise Damage is not an applicable choice, since that is only allowed upon a critical success and he only rolled a 58, a normal success
Or did you just roll the 12 and the max’d did not imply a CM ?
Umm… actually, when you wrote that example you didn’t know yet that you may have a CM… or did you edit the example afterwards ?

I was typing out what I rolled, I actually rolled a 12 on the D12 for the Great Axe and wrote max'd for dramatic licence , I can see that just confused and left open the possibility that I'd chosen the Maximise Damage CM. In fact, I didn't use a CM at all, I just rolled the damage for Heorweards 1 CA attack. I wasn't sure if having beaten Fabricius evade as he tries to close could I take an extra CM for the success. I believe I can, so I definitely would have chosen the CM Chose Location and chopped Fabricius head from his shoulders given that roll. The armour on head (plate helm) same AP as the plate greaves on the legs.

 

[Ucee]

In my opinion the problem with current rules is that in Combat Actions table the divide between CA 2 and CA 3 is set on the average of human DEX & INT, giving 50% of human chars a big advantage over the other 50%.
I think the table should be edited to make CA 3 a bit harder to achieve, let's say avg of dex+int 15 or above and problem would be solved.

 

[PhilHibbs]

In fact, I didn't use a CM at all, I just rolled the damage for Heorweards 1 CA attack. I wasn't sure if having beaten Fabricius evade as he tries to close could I take an extra CM for the success. I believe I can, so I definitely would have chosen the CM Chose Location and chopped Fabricius head from his shoulders given that roll.

You have to choose your bonus manouevre(s) before you roll damage.

 

[stacktrace]

In my opinion the problem with current rules is that in Combat Actions table the divide between CA 2 and CA 3 is set on the average of human DEX & INT, giving 50% of human chars a big advantage over the other 50%.
I think the table should be edited to make CA 3 a bit harder to achieve, let's say avg of dex+int 15 or above and problem would be solved.

This has bugged me as well, how big a difference 2 and 3 combat actions is. I am toying with creating a chart that cross references avg of DEX & INT with Weapon Skill to determine the number of CAs one has. So those that just missed the cutoff can still gain additional CAs.

But so far I have only been theory crafting and trying to hold back making rules changes until actually playing. Perhaps such characters who are very close to 3 CAs just spend improvement rolls to increase their stats to get to 3 will play out just fine.

 

[PhilHibbs]

This has bugged me as well, how big a difference 2 and 3 combat actions is. I am toying with creating a chart that cross references avg of DEX & INT with Weapon Skill to determine the number of CAs one has. So those that just missed the cutoff can still gain additional CAs.

..and if they don't end up using the combat skill that gave them the extra action? I guess it's the same as the bonus shield action.

 

[stacktrace]

That is how I was thinking, the bonus action would need to be combat style related, same as I treat the extra CA from additional weapons.

As far as the chart goes, I was thinking that someone with an average INT&DEX of 10-11 would gain their 3rd CA at about 90%-100% weapon style, to sync up with older editions that grant extra or split attacks upon becoming a Runelord or gaining 100%+ in a skill.

A character that would normally gain a 3rd CA right from the start at character creation, would gain one somewhere around 60%-70% (the range a combat oriented character would typically start with) and then extrapulate the rest of the values from there.

 

[Rasta]

Personally, I like the CA how they are in this version. The last version, when it was harder to achive, you also have to raise the bottom end as well.

So this meant that dwarves would only get one combat action on average, while elves would get three combat actions on average.

This new breakdown actually balances the field better in my opinion.

 

[stacktrace]

In retrospec I agree now with you Rasta. I went about putting actual numbers together, and finally came up with what I thought was a pretty good breakdown. I then went through the Monsters to check their listed actions against my shiney new formula. At first it was matching up quite well, but it ran into problems with the races/monsters which were small and nimble but not necessarily highly skilled such as Dragonewts and Halflings.

I rather like the idea of this distinction so out the window that idea went.