Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > The Fantasy Trip > The Fantasy Trip: House Rules

View Poll Results: Who goes first?
RAW say Halberd 11 57.89%
RAW say Horse Bow 3 15.79%
RAW say Halberd, but I rule Horse Bow 5 26.32%
RAW say Horse Bow, but I rule Halberd 0 0%
Voters: 19. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-19-2019, 03:30 PM   #21
MikMod
 
Join Date: May 2019
Default Re: YOU'RE the GM: the last chance archer

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Rice View Post
What rules? Melee p.20 "a figure may only Defend with a non missile weapon ready..."

Maybe ITL says something different but I'm working from Melee at present.
ITL p117: Under Defending - "You may 'parry' with a bow or crossbow - but it will be ruined"
MikMod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2019, 03:30 PM   #22
MikMod
 
Join Date: May 2019
Default Re: YOU'RE the GM: the last chance archer

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shostak View Post
Entering HTH happens during movement, but the attacks don't (except, the case of a 6 on the roll resolving the attempt to enter HTH).
Hence the scare quotes and use of 'action' instead of just attack.

Actually ITL p116: Following moving onto an enemy from behind etc - "Initiating HTH combat is considered an attack."

And ITL p116: " When a figure is attacked HTH, it immediately (that is, still in the movement phase) rolls one die..."

Last edited by MikMod; 06-19-2019 at 03:34 PM.
MikMod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2019, 03:33 PM   #23
Chris Rice
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: London Uk, but originally from Scotland
Default Re: YOU'RE the GM: the last chance archer

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikMod View Post
ITL p117: Under Defending - "You may 'parry' with a bow or crossbow - but it will be ruined"
That seems reasonable and I'll probably allow it, even though I'm using basic Melee at the moment and that isn't in the rules.
Chris Rice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2019, 04:27 AM   #24
Tywyll
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Default Re: YOU'RE the GM: the last chance archer

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shostak View Post
You can, once, with the "On-Last-Shot Missile Attack" option. It comes after pole weapon charges. The wording on ITL 111 is quite clear that these pole weapon attacks are resolved before all other attacks in that particular melee. Further, the description of last-shot missile attacks in no way implies that the archer would attack out of DX order, never mind acting before a pole weapon charge.

Consider this situation in which there are no pole weapons: a Bowman ST 11 DX 13 is disengaged in a larger battle. A Friendly Swordsman ST 12 DX 12 is engaged with an Enemy (rapier) ST 9 DX 14. The Bowman wants to support the Friendly Swordsman by loosing an arrow at the Enemy. The Enemy's DX is higher, and acts first, killing the Friendly Sworsdman. The Bowman shoots and misses. Next turn, the Enemy charge attacks the Bowman, who selects the One-Last-Shot missile attack. Why would the Bowman suddenly now act before the Enemy?
Because arrows hit before the attacker arrives?

The alternative is that archers get to fire after the person running at them arrives and (potentially) kills them. So do we have zombie archers?

Ultimately I guess this is a situation where the rule nature (movement then combat) doesn't adequately describe something that logically occurs. I'm fine with ignoring what is written in this case for something that makes more sense in the fiction. I think its a poorly written rule to not allow it RAW.

Last edited by Tywyll; 06-20-2019 at 04:32 AM.
Tywyll is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2019, 10:26 AM   #25
Skarg
 
Join Date: May 2015
Default Re: YOU'RE the GM: the last chance archer

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tywyll View Post
... The alternative is that archers get to fire after the person running at them arrives and (potentially) kills them. So do we have zombie archers?
It seems to me that there is a consistent reading of the rules that matches how it plays out, except for the part about polearms going first.

That is, ITL says an archer "usually" gets to get a last shot off, and that is what usually happens - i.e. if they either attack first, or survive an attacker going first, and then shoot.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Tywyll View Post
Ultimately I guess this is a situation where the rule nature (movement then combat) doesn't adequately describe something that logically occurs. I'm fine with ignoring what is written in this case for something that makes more sense in the fiction.
Yes. The abstract representation breaks down in some cases unless you start making some embellishments. (i.e. Polearms go first due to reach, but a ranged weapon has no reach disadvantage against a polearm. If you have bows go before polearms, then they're going before other bows, unless you add a whole missile weapon phase that always goes before hand weapon attacks.)

I suggested a house rule that can fix it logically earlier in this thread, but an alternative house rule solution also occurs to me now, that is less complex:

* When a polearm user charges a ranged weapon user and attacks the ranged weapon user, the polearm user does not automatically get to attack before the ranged weapon user, because he has no reach advantage. Resolve such polearm attacks in order of adjDX.

There is still some weirdness in this means than non-polearm friends of a ranged weapon user could also defend the ranged weapon user before the polearm charge if they are in reach and have higher DX. I suppose you could reduce that weirdness by saying the polearm precedence only gets removed if the charged archer actually has high enough DX to attack before the polearm user.
Skarg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2019, 12:16 PM   #26
JLV
 
JLV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Far northern California
Default Re: YOU'RE the GM: the last chance archer

We need to keep in mind during these discussions that Melee and Wizard, as recently re-published, are an almost exact copy of the original Melee and Wizard rules. ITL, on the other hand, changed quite a bit from "classic" ITL, which means MANY of the rules in Melee and Wizard are overcome by events if you are playing ITL. This has significantly increased the levels of confusion I'm seeing in these boards.

Perhaps to facilitate discussion, it would be a good idea to state up front whether or not you are using ITL and are basing your arguments on ITL, or instead using Melee/Wizard and basing your arguments on THOSE rules...
JLV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2019, 12:22 PM   #27
Chris Rice
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: London Uk, but originally from Scotland
Default Re: YOU'RE the GM: the last chance archer

Quote:
Originally Posted by JLV View Post
We need to keep in mind during these discussions that Melee and Wizard, as recently re-published, are an almost exact copy of the original Melee and Wizard rules. ITL, on the other hand, changed quite a bit from "classic" ITL, which means MANY of the rules in Melee and Wizard are overcome by events if you are playing ITL. This has significantly increased the levels of confusion I'm seeing in these boards.

Perhaps to facilitate discussion, it would be a good idea to state up front whether or not you are using ITL and are basing your arguments on ITL, or instead using Melee/Wizard and basing your arguments on THOSE rules...
That's an interesting point as we always considered ITL as an extension of Melee and Wizard rather than a replacement. I'm only using Melee at the moment as I want to get what I considered the "base system" solid before moving on. Surely ITL hasn't changed that much in its base mechanics? There are more weapons and spells but they don't invalidate the ones in the base games. There are a few exceptions I'm sure, like the staff Spell, but not that many. Surely you don't consider them separate games?
Chris Rice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2019, 11:10 PM   #28
JLV
 
JLV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Far northern California
Default Re: YOU'RE the GM: the last chance archer

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Rice View Post
That's an interesting point as we always considered ITL as an extension of Melee and Wizard rather than a replacement. I'm only using Melee at the moment as I want to get what I considered the "base system" solid before moving on. Surely ITL hasn't changed that much in its base mechanics? There are more weapons and spells but they don't invalidate the ones in the base games. There are a few exceptions I'm sure, like the staff Spell, but not that many. Surely you don't consider them separate games?
I agree; in the old days, ITL WAS just an extension of the base rules, with nothing in one that invalidated the other. However, that seems to have changed in some surprising ways with the publishing of Legacy Edition. (I'd note there's some backing from SJG for my point here as well -- since I recall a post by Phil (I think) that said basically the same thing I'm saying here.)

Base mechanics are very similar, but there are some changes to them in ITL -- and those seem to be the cases being brought up by discussions like this. So, to be honest, I kind of DO consider them almost separate games now, simply because there are enough changes between the two that you really have to make a command decision to go with one set of rules or the other -- which will affect a LOT of how you judge individual issues in combat. So far, we're seeing most of the commentariat focusing on issues with physical combat, but I expect within the next few months to start seeing more and more of the same kinds of issues pop up between Wizard and ITL as well. (Some, of course, already have, with people posting various notes on how you can twist the Legacy rules to minimax and metagame the magic system, but so far a lot of that has been more theoretical than the kinds of crunchy issues we're seeing with Melee vs. ITL now...).

Mind you, that may be just my perception, but I think you'll agree that we seem to be having a lot more trouble this way than we did with the "classic" games (about the only big arguments back then that I recall were over pole-weapons -- which, oddly enough, still seem to be a major source of confusion, despite efforts to fix them).
JLV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2019, 01:52 AM   #29
Tywyll
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Default Re: YOU'RE the GM: the last chance archer

Yeah, one thing in Melee (I believe) which I used only when first introducing some players to the system was that winning initiative meant you always went first, even if it wasn't to your advantage. We houseruled it to allowing you to pick who went first...only for me to read the Advance Melee rules in ITL and see that that was how it was meant to be played.
Tywyll is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2019, 01:54 AM   #30
Tywyll
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Default Re: YOU'RE the GM: the last chance archer

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skarg View Post
It seems to me that there is a consistent reading of the rules that matches how it plays out, except for the part about polearms going first.

That is, ITL says an archer "usually" gets to get a last shot off, and that is what usually happens - i.e. if they either attack first, or survive an attacker going first, and then shoot.



Yes. The abstract representation breaks down in some cases unless you start making some embellishments. (i.e. Polearms go first due to reach, but a ranged weapon has no reach disadvantage against a polearm. If you have bows go before polearms, then they're going before other bows, unless you add a whole missile weapon phase that always goes before hand weapon attacks.)

I suggested a house rule that can fix it logically earlier in this thread, but an alternative house rule solution also occurs to me now, that is less complex:

* When a polearm user charges a ranged weapon user and attacks the ranged weapon user, the polearm user does not automatically get to attack before the ranged weapon user, because he has no reach advantage. Resolve such polearm attacks in order of adjDX.

There is still some weirdness in this means than non-polearm friends of a ranged weapon user could also defend the ranged weapon user before the polearm charge if they are in reach and have higher DX. I suppose you could reduce that weirdness by saying the polearm precedence only gets removed if the charged archer actually has high enough DX to attack before the polearm user.
Alternatively you could just say, archers firing at charging figures always are considered 'tied' to the Dx of their attacker if it is higher than their own, and they always win this tie. This is only for initiative purposes. This way it doesn't impact other figures around them, just the two in the discussion and it lets you know when everyone should be going.
Tywyll is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.