Why "Bypass Parry"?

[aelius]

As I understand it, you get a maneuver by beating your opponents level of success. Which means that when you are attacking you only get a maneuver if you would hit the target past his defenses.
So my question is: Why would you ever use the Bypass Parry maneuver? If you get the option to use it, you don't need it. If the target succeeds in his parry, which seems to me to be the only time you would need to reduce the apparent size of his weapon for parrying purposes, you don't get a maneuver to do it with.
If I am reading this wrong I would appreciate someone setting me straight so I and my players can make full use of the rule.

 

[Mongoose Pete]

As I understand it, you get a maneuver by beating your opponents level of success.

Yes.

Which means that when you are attacking you only get a maneuver if you would hit the target past his defenses.

No, not all of the time. It is still possible to suffer a CM even when you successfully parry, for example if I roll a critical attack and you roll a normal parry.

Does that clarify it?

 

[Ssendam]

No, not all of the time. It is still possible to suffer a CM even when you successfully parry, for example if I roll a critical attack and you roll a normal parry.

I think that's the only situation it becomes worth doing, right? It should probably be a critical only CM as that's what it effectively is, but it's pretty powerful so it makes sense.

 

[aelius]

I see. Your answer caused me to go back and reread the rule. I was thinking of the way it used to work. The problem with knowing the old rules is sometimes the brain fills in the gaps when reading the new rules.
And it fills them in wrong :shock:
Thanks.

 

[Deleriad]

If you consider a duel between two weapon masters with the same weapons, then CMs due to one of them failing a skill are fairly rare therefore the main source of CMs is a critical vs a normal.

If the attacker does get a CM from a critical attack vs a normal parry then they have to choose do no damage but get some other effect (e.g. bashing, disarming) or to get some damage through a parry. I suspect that in most cases you would choose to disarm though I could imagine if you have lightly armoured fighters with greatswords that a bypass parry would be useful as you might be able to disable a location with half damage.

I primarily play as a GM so if I'm really gunning to teach a PC a thing or two in a duel, I'll nearly always choose disarm as a CM if a critical attack is parried normally by an equal or larger size weapon. The chance of the defender being able to resist a disarm from a critical attack is minimal.

 

[soltakss]

I recently watched an episode of the Water Margin where Lin Chun disarmed around 10 guards in about as many seconds. That's where combat manouvres come into their own - heroic characters vs normal ones.

 

[Ultor]

Ah, the Water Margin. The line repeated every title sequence would make a perfect Wyrms' Friends mantra: "Do not despise the snake for having no horns, for who is to say it will not become a dragon?"