[Plane]

Originally Posted by ericthered

I was talking about this post, though other parts of the thread were in my mind as well. I'll try to be more precise in the future.

The thing with:

• can easily hammer-fist a foot when someone is running and his foot is off the ground
  ..
  flexible person really can drop and punch the foot that easy
  ..
  roll these ifs, ands, buts, and maybes into the -4 to strike the foot

is that:

• 1) you do explicitly take the crouch option (with a -2) if you're a standing opponent attacking someone lying down
  
  2) if the -2 was worked into the -4 to hit the foot, that mean based on size the foot is as big as the leg?
  
  3) doing a technique like "Stomp" which doesn't require any added flexibility still suffers the -4 (as does aiming at the foot with a gun or a spear)
  
  4) flexible people probably have high DX which allow them to absorb penalties, and they still suffer a -2 to their melee attacks when remaining in a crouching position
  
  5) Campaigns actually required someone to KNEEL to grab items and pick things up off the ground, so merely requiring a crouch to TOUCH something on the ground is a pretty fair compromise.

My "move the restrictions up a level" idea is a nod to Kromm referencing picking feet off the ground, since a Step/Footdodge/Knee/LegParry would all involve that. Kicks against the upper body would go even further, whereas a kick against your opponent's shin probably doesn't lift your foot any higher than throwing a knee to their body would.

Originally Posted by ericthered

I'd think that rerolling weird results would make things less random, not more. And once again, crouching is not a posture.

Correct. It's a variation of the standing posture, like how supine/prone are variations of the lying posture. Notably if you are crouching this affects Movement Point costs in tactical combat, and reduce you to 2/3 speed otherwise. It doesn't take a Change Posture maneuver to enter/exit and is more of a "sub-posture" than a true posture.

Originally Posted by ericthered

It still has the effect of discouraging deceptive attacks, but it may make sense to have those cost more. Its probably worth coming up with these ideas as we fight and then applying them in a second fight.

Deceptive attacks sort of balance out because even if they are less likely to get a discount, by applying a penalty to the defense, the defense is also less likely to get a discount.

Your bringing this up cements the importance of ratios in my mind though. The attacker losing a 0.2 discount to block a 0.1 discount for a defender doesn't favor the attacker. If we inherently gave defenders a 0.2*margin discount it would balance out though.

Originally Posted by ericthered

Then why does it apply at all? Unless you aren't allowed an infinite number of free actions?

I think you are (not that I'd oppose some kid of sliding cap on those... like how there are growing penalties for multiple fast draws in a single turn) the only downside is that if you exit as a free action, there's no penalty to hit you for people making ranged attacks, and you can't enter the safety of a crouch until the start of your next turn.

There's no incentive to stay in a crouch in already-fighting 1-on-1 pure HTH, so you could enter/hit/exit when delivering low strikes if you wanted.

If someone was sneaking up, that -2 to hit with ranged attacks could probably be applied to perception (similar to a size modifier) though, to notice if they are sneaking up. If the normal -2/-2 is 2/3 speed, would probably assign 3/4 speed to a -1/-1 halfway point.

Originally Posted by ericthered

Are we using 1 AP for RWB then, or not?

I think I still ended up including that cost, though you could still pay 0 if you rolled a critical success on it.

Pg 10 of Pyramid 44 does say "Techniques (1 AP or 2 AP)" after all :) Albeit this is probably written from the assumptions of most techniques counting as an attack to do which RWB/PreventFall/BreakFall don't do, so it's a gray area... but they don't appear under "Zero-Cost Events" so that's the closest guideline I can think of.

Originally Posted by ericthered

Be aware scaling HP deduction from HT with HP makes them multiplicative. Not an objection, just an observation.

Maybe additive scaling like "roll 3d6 against HT+HP, subtract MoS/10 from damage"?

Average human rolling a 10 against sum 20 would have MoS 1 and subtract 0.1 damage

Originally Posted by ericthered

Lets try shock impeding defenses later. I suspect it will make "first blood" extremely important.

Okay :) I was hoping to rely on my Parry so I won't argue.

Originally Posted by ericthered

I think your 7 AP vs 4 AP is forgetting to charge AP for the evade contest, so its 6 vs. 3

Ah yeah I forgot that, I had only looked at the stuff prior to all the decimaling. Good catch!

Originally Posted by ericthered

We could have random hits on the far side transfer to the facing side x in 6 times. anywhere from 3 (50%) to 5 (87%) should be fair.

I guess whatever best represents the difference of 4 points that now exists between two previously equal locations. I can't get my head around the math so if it happens I'll leave it up to you.

Originally Posted by ericthered

You're presenting your right foot? I believe you're a boxer...

Yes, with a -2 to parry kicks, come to think of it. Sumos also have that problem.

Originally Posted by ericthered

16 (skill) -2 (kick) -2(right leg) +2 (presented leg) -2 (deceptive) =12 vs 15

Its a miss. Dang. Had it hit you'd be facing a -2 to parry with either your foot or hand from the position of the attack.

Leg Parry can only be done by Brawling / Karate. As for my hand parries it's actually a lot worse...
*-2 from deceptive
*-2 from boxing/sumo inability to deal with kicks
*-2 from using upper body to parry attacks on the lower body

Total -6 :) You could probably do without deceptive attacks and eve make telegraphic attacks in the future, if you wanted to...

Originally Posted by ericthered

That burned 1 AP. I'm very glad I didn't go for some of the more AP-rich options I considered.

So now we are down to 5 v 3 AP ...

B231 / MA75 "If you miss with a kick, roll vs. Kicking skill or DX to avoid falling"

Might consider Brawling's "Stamp Kick" in the future, a mere extra -1 to do and failing its DX roll just loses you your retreat instead of falling down, plus it does more damage (I feel like I am signing Alex Green's death warrant here, hopefully Zach Red falls down here!)

Do you think DX checks to avoid falling down (whether prompted by knockback or missed kicks) warrant an AP cost?

You suggested paying AP for the distance you get knocked back, so it occurs to me that if someone falls down, they end up occupying 2 hexes which is like 1 yard of movement (at least for one half of their body) so in the very least it would make sense to charge for that yard of movement if the DX check is failed and they do fall into a lying posture.

Note that if you fail this check and start falling that you have the option to use "Breakfall" first to change a 1 yard fall to a 0 yard fall, lessening the potential damage. Since the option exists to land in a crouched (standing) posture, I assume if that option is taken that if any damage is rolled it would apply to the feet?

In any case, if you fall, whether or not you make the breakfall, if you do roll any damage I'd allow you to use RWB to halve it (as I was going to do with that chest thing until you cancelled out me needing to make a DX check)

if it is enough damage to cause "knockback" (I don't think that's actually possible with a 1 yard fall, it takes 8 damage to knock back someone with HP10, so 4 basic damage if using RWB) then instead of bouncing upward (how I would normally treat knockback from hitting the ground) you can instead choose 1 of 6 directions to roll that many yards in.

All this is moot if you pass the DX check of course =/

I guess since you missed your kick and I don't have to make an active defense, it functions like an untriggered Wait so I get to roll HT to recover AP

Rereading Pyramid 3/44 it seems like I would roll against HT 12 as usual. Although shock penalties apply to the HT roll to mitigate losing AP equal to lost HP, they do't appear to apply to the HT roll made to recover AP, unless I'm missing that somewhere.

I'll make that roll now, but will wait to see what happens regarding your DX check first before choosing my next maneuver.

https://dicelog.com/joinlogdice 282: I rolled a 7 which is a margin of success of 5 against HT 12, so since I passed by 4 full points, I get a +1 bonus and recover a total of 2 AP bringing me up to 5 AP / 12 AP

That's tying you at 5 AP / 10 AP, unless you spend 1 AP on your Kicking Technique to avoid falling, reducing you to 4 AP / 10 AP.

You still have a free step, were you wanting to use that to exit our shared hex (where you could still kick me), or avoid using it so if I attack you next turn you don't need to spend AP?