Riposte to Setup? (And other set up questions)

[Tomsdad]

Sorry If I'm rehashing old stuff, but I'm just what to check if I getting set ups right.

1).OK Basically can I riposte into a set up attack?

Riposte is a defensive option and the Set up is your next maneuver, and you're having to make and take a penalty on your parry so I'd say yes. However on MA pg125 it says you can't combine Deceptive attack with Riposte*, and in the write up for Set up attack it describes it as a form of deceptive attack

2). Either way I guess I can combine a Set up attack maneuver with the counter attack technique?

3). Although there's rules for making a set up attack a technique I prefer the normal version, but I'd still allow for a set up attack to be included in a combination it is after all an attack (although the extra +3 to defend against remaining attacks in combination if a previous one misses or is successfully defended can ruin a set up attack here)

4). (not directly related to set up) Counter attack technique with a telegraphic attack option. Now Telegraphic precludes several options but not as far as I can tell the counter attack technique (or any technique that's not explicitly tied to a deceptive attack option). But for 6pts I can put 5 points into my Counter attack technique make each counter attack telegraphic and have +4 to hit an net 0 on targets defence? I've never really had counter attack come up much but that seems a powerful combined effect?

EDIT: actually the more I think about this last one the more I'd consider the counter attack is just deceptive attack tweaked slightly into a technique (it's ultimately a deceptive attack which's penalty can be brought off with a side condition of needing to follow a successful defence) so not compatible with a telegraphed attack. This may effect how I view '2' as well.

I admit I'm hazy on the order of precedence in application of maneuvers and options, Cheers TD

*but I understand from other threads that isn't really a hard and fast prohibition)

[The Benj]

Yes, it's a limited version of Deceptive Attack which you can improve as a Technique. It's not worth doing if you haven't put points in it, from memory.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by The Benj

Yes, it's a limited version of Deceptive Attack which you can improve as a Technique. It's not worth doing if you haven't put points in it, from memory.

Cheers for reply

So by that I infer that you can't do a Set up with a counter attack technique (both are deceptive attacks one with immediate effect one with delayed effect). Although you could do set up attack and then following it on your next round with an attack using the counter attack technique. As you say counter attacks only really starts be worth anything with once points are spent on it.

And

You can't do a telegraphic attack with a counter attack technique (the former doesn't allow deceptive and the later is deceptive).

But

I can allow riposte prior a set up as riposte is defensive option (all be it a deceptive one).

And

You can have set up in combinations just as you can have other options on attacks in combinations

Cheers, TD

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Sorry If I'm rehashing old stuff, but I'm just what to check if I getting set ups right.

1).OK Basically can I riposte into a set up attack?

Riposte is a defensive option and the Set up is your next maneuver, and you're having to make and take a penalty on your parry so I'd say yes. However on MA pg125 it says you can't combine Deceptive attack with Riposte*, and in the write up for Set up attack it describes it as a form of deceptive attack

If as GM you decide that Deceptive Attacks and Ripostes stack, then Setup Attacks and Ripostes stack too. I have no problem stacking them, and have used this option in Crakkerjakk's DF game with DA and Riposte. But sure, if you can absorb the penalties, stack away assuming the GM says go.

2). Either way I guess I can combine a Set up attack maneuver with the counter attack technique?

I don't see why not. Counterattak is akin to a bought-off Deceptive Attack, and if you use Setup to open up a line, and then counter into that line . . . seems fine to me. You paid points to be good at it, after all.

3). Although there's rules for making a set up attack a technique I prefer the normal version, but I'd still allow for a set up attack to be included in a combination it is after all an attack (although the extra +3 to defend against remaining attacks in combination if a previous one misses or is successfully defended can ruin a set up attack here)

Definitely include them in combos, and yes, if you screw up something in a combo, they tend to fall apart. The price you pay for predictability!

[DouglasCole]

Just to be insane about it . . .

You could use Riposte to give the foe a penalty to defend against your next attack.

Your next attack could be a setup attack, which leverages the riposte bonus.

Your foe attacks back, and you riposte again.

You stack your Setup Attack with the new Riposte..

I mean, this is the kind of sequence where you're up the guy's left armpit and can probably serve him as shishkebab. But if you allow stacking DA and Riposte, the above sequence is perfectly legal.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

If as GM you decide that Deceptive Attacks and Ripostes stack, then Setup Attacks and Ripostes stack too. I have no problem stacking them, and have used this option in Crakkerjakk's DF game with DA and Riposte. But sure, if you can absorb the penalties, stack away assuming the GM says go.

Good, good. I am the GM, and I do allow this, just wanted to check I was getting this 'right' (as in there was no good reason not to allow it)

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

I don't see why not. Counter-attack is akin to a bought-off Deceptive Attack, and if you use Setup to open up a line, and then counter into that line . . . seems fine to me. You paid points to be good at it, after all.

Ah, I was thinking more doing the set up attack including the counter-attack technique (thus penalising the defence against the set up attack, reducing the the chance of the target limiting the resulting penalty from the set up attack to his defend against the next attack)

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

Definitely include them in combos, and yes, if you screw up something in a combo, they tend to fall apart. The price you pay for predictability!

Cool!

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

Just to be insane about it . . .

You could use Riposte to give the foe a penalty to defend against your next attack.

Your next attack could be a setup attack, which leverages the riposte bonus.

Your foe attacks back, and you riposte again.

You stack your Setup Attack with the new Riposte..

I mean, this is the kind of sequence where you're up the guy's left armpit and can probably serve him as shishkebab. But if you allow stacking DA and Riposte, the above sequence is perfectly legal.

That was pretty much what I was thinking (or doing it with counter-attack instead of riposte). Given counter-attack makes it's trade off at the point you spend CP's on it, it seems to be quite powerful in combination here!

Obviously the longer this goes on for the chance of the target doing something to break the sequence increases (certainly if he's paying attention), but the penalties to defend from counter attacks reduce the targets chances of mitigating the set ups by just defending well)

And you polish it all off with a nice AoA(Determined) telegraphic thrust to the eye! (OK bit of a risk)

Cheers for the reply.

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

Just to be insane about it . . .

You could use Riposte to give the foe a penalty to defend against your next attack.

Your next attack could be a setup attack, which leverages the riposte bonus.

Your foe attacks back, and you riposte again.

You stack your Setup Attack with the new Riposte..

I mean, this is the kind of sequence where you're up the guy's left armpit and can probably serve him as shishkebab. But if you allow stacking DA and Riposte, the above sequence is perfectly legal.

Bruce Lee would approve.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Kromm

Bruce Lee would approve.

it does seem kinda Jeet Kun Do-ish, doesn't it?

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by Kromm

Bruce Lee would approve.

In fact when it comes to set ups without mixing in other stuff I believe he said:

“Its like a finger pointing away to the moon. Don't concentrate on the finger or you will miss all that heavenly glory.”

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

it does seem kinda Jeet Kun Do-ish, doesn't it?

It sounds like a PIA.