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 > Play By Post

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-29-2019, 07:34 AM   #81
ericthered
Hero of Democracy
 
ericthered's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: far from the ocean
Default Re: A Challenger Appears! Green versus Red

No AP recovered. Red steps back again (4 yards) and evaluates again raising the total evaluate to +2.



8 seconds until the pain returns.
__________________
Worlds Beyond Earth -- my blog
ericthered is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2019, 12:47 PM   #82
Plane
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Default Re: A Challenger Appears! Green versus Red

HT roll was 11 v 11, just barely passed, AP is at 12/12. Contemplating...

See I don't want to just let you keep getting AP while I get nothing further. Yet to close the gap with you is going to cost ridiculous amounts of AP. I'm going to do it, just to exhibit how crazy it is.

This is basically the situation where I think it'd be better to always use movement points (being 2x more economic to shuffle forward than shuffle backward) and maybe give people 20% of their MP for free (a step) per second, and charge 1 AP per each additional 20% (necessary for 2 MP stuff like sidestep or backward, or moving in non-standing postures)

Something for the future, but for now I'll follow the Cole rules. I'm liking "Variant Move: Acceleration" because 1 AP per 20% MP sounds better than 1 AP per 20%. Especially since right above it on page 9 is "1 AP per additional step" and a step tends to be 20% of your move. Since it's based on a change in residual velocity it means I can speed up.

Acceleration rules on the free step would also be interesting: you would pay 1 AP to start moving forward (stepping forward as part of maneuver, or doing a slip) or backward (retreating, or using step from maneuver to back up) but you must continue it for free, or else use 1 AP to slow down (1 per 33%)

In the example on page 10 they charge 2 AP for 43% so the 'round normally' guideline could reduce costs, possibly to 0%, like for example someone with Move 11, moving 1 yard is less than 10% so you wouldn't round up to 1 AP (for 20%) but instead down to 0 AP (for 0%) I think?

I'm taking a "Move+Attack" maneuver, and I am increasing my velocity 4 points, from 1 to 5. 4 is 2/3 of Move 6, so this would normally cost me 3 AP to do (66 is closer to 60% than to 80%) but I believe that the -1 to DX and HT we both suffer results in -0.5 to basic speed (so our dodges, like our parries, should probably be 1 lower than listed?) so 4/5.5 is around 72%, closer to 80 so this costs me 4 AP.

THIS IS THE CHEAP VERSION because 80% AP would cost 8 AP if using the 1 AP/10% first option... who knew that moving 3 feet could be so much more exhausting than throwing a spinning roundhouse kick?

5 is enough to step 1 yard BEYOND you, so I am making an attempt to evade you by spending an additional AP. This total cost of 5 AP reduces my total from 12 to 7, but will necessitate you spending 1 AP as well to obstruct my evasion if you don't want me stepping into the hex in your rear. Do you want to do that, or just let me win and save the AP?

B387 "Obstructions" doesn't actually list a movement point cost for "enemy in hex" like it does a +1 for "minor obstruction" (ally in way). It occurs to me that there might actually be a double-charging system in place here. If you pay 1 AP to do an evade AND THEN ALSO 1 AP per 10% or 20% of Movement Points, and then charge movement points to evade obstructions like allies/enemies, then you're basically charging 2 AP to evade when using MP (tactical combat) and 1 AP when not using it ("step" maneuvers)

I'm thinking to avoid that double charging that the approach of buying MP using AP, then spending that MP per standard costs, is the better one. So if someone had Move 10 then ran 3 yards forward while evading someone, 40% of his MP would cost him 2 AP. Someone with Move 5 would be spending 70% of their MP, so that'd either cost 3AP (round down to 60%) or 4 AP (round up to 80%) not sure which you do when rounding normally...

I don't like zero-cost so I think I'd prefer to round up any fractions. On the other hand, this would probably be in the context of my idea of measuring AP in tenths, so 1 AP per 20% MP would become 0.1 AP per 2% MP, so you could spend 0.5 AP to get 10% of your Movement Points if that's all you needed.

CLIFFS
regained 1 AP to max 12/12, spent 5 AP to run into your hex and try to evade past you into your rear hex, you have the option of going from 9/10 to 8/10 AP if you want to try to obstruct the evasion with a quick contest


I won't decide on my attack until after this part is resolved.

(the DX penalties when my adrenaline wears off, they would make sense to apply to "step rolls" if using my idea of making rolls every time someone stepped into a new hex, to give the possibility of tripping)

More house speculation... If we envisioned non-reactive stepping as "retreating while dodging nothing" (take the +2 for a telegraphed, perhaps the +1 for one foe if only paying attention to walking) and used the dodge skill for each footstep, that could be used to generate MoS/10 discounts per yard or 20% move 'step'. I would give a +3 for forward, +2 for side, +1 for backward as well. Maybe also the +1 if you make a hiking roll on 1st step, running on subsequent) and you still succeed on normal failures (just no discount) and tripping is the result of critically failed dodges.

Someone who is stepping carefully could get the +2 for all-out determined dodge, which allows traveling at 50% move. More economical. Someone dong a full Move maneuver (100% speed) wouldn't get that +2 but could move faster, would make sense that you're more likely to trip while moving fast. Would also make sense to give +1 for defensive attack, -2 for committed attack.

Obviously "no defenses" with All-Out Attack creates a huge problem with this approach. It would only work if using house rules to replace that with something like a -4 to all defenses for AOAs. Or perhaps allow, as an alternative to rolling dodge, just a skill check vs hiking/running if better? It's possible to buy that up much more cheaply than dodge, but then, perhaps it's good to incentivize that.

Although... crits only happen if you fail by 10, so for a 16 to be a crit you need to be at skill 6. Crits would be more likely if using the old system (1/4 of HT+DX = base 5) but 4e's +3 gives an 8 so the baseline DX10/HT10 human would need a -2 to dodge (perhaps from DX/HT loss due to fatigue, shock or grappling) to even begin to be more likely to trip. The majority of the application would be in the likelihood of getting MoS/10 discounts, since you advised against MoF/10 surcharges.

Last edited by Plane; 01-29-2019 at 01:58 PM.
Plane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2019, 08:52 AM   #83
ericthered
Hero of Democracy
 
ericthered's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: far from the ocean
Default Re: A Challenger Appears! Green versus Red

Quote:
Originally Posted by Plane View Post
This is basically the situation where I think it'd be better to always use movement points (being 2x more economic to shuffle forward than shuffle backward) and maybe give people 20% of their MP for free (a step) per second, and charge 1 AP per each additional 20% (necessary for 2 MP stuff like sidestep or backward, or moving in non-standing postures)


Something for the future, but for now I'll follow the Cole rules. I'm liking "Variant Move: Acceleration" because 1 AP per 20% MP sounds better than 1 AP per 20%. Especially since right above it on page 9 is "1 AP per additional step" and a step tends to be 20% of your move. Since it's based on a change in residual velocity it means I can speed up.

Acceleration rules on the free step would also be interesting: you would pay 1 AP to start moving forward (stepping forward as part of maneuver, or doing a slip) or backward (retreating, or using step from maneuver to back up) but you must continue it for free, or else use 1 AP to slow down (1 per 33%)
I think steps are fundamentally different from other movement. They aren't made with the intent of giving your body momentum in a direction: its a minimized side effect. If you watch dancing or a sport, or try doing this sort of thing yourself you'll see that this sort of movement is core skill. The biggest difficulty is really making sure you don't trip over something.


So I flat-out disagree with the idea that stepping back costs extra movement point in general.



Quote:
In the example on page 10 they charge 2 AP for 43% so the 'round normally' guideline could reduce costs, possibly to 0%, like for example someone with Move 11, moving 1 yard is less than 10% so you wouldn't round up to 1 AP (for 20%) but instead down to 0 AP (for 0%) I think?

I'm fine with charging by percent of move, but I'd always charge either the free step or the 1 AP for extra steps. Its an entirely different kind of movement.



I'm taking a "Move+Attack" maneuver, and I am increasing my velocity 4 points, from 1 to 5. 4 is 2/3 of Move 6, so this would normally cost me 3 AP to do (66 is closer to 60% than to 80%) but I believe that the -1 to DX and HT we both suffer results in -0.5 to basic speed (so our dodges, like our parries, should probably be 1 lower than listed?) so 4/5.5 is around 72%, closer to 80 so this costs me 4 AP.

Quote:
THIS IS THE CHEAP VERSION because 80% AP would cost 8 AP if using the 1 AP/10% first option... who knew that moving 3 feet could be so much more exhausting than throwing a spinning roundhouse kick?

I agree that move is much higher than it should be in the last gasp. I'd be happy saying that for 2 AP you can move to full acceleration. Is it really all that different from an all out attack, effort wise? I can see a strong case for spending 3 AP to move at full speed and 2 AP for half, but spending 8 AP to move 4 yards is frankly ridiculous.


Quote:
5 is enough to step 1 yard BEYOND you, so I am making an attempt to evade you by spending an additional AP. This total cost of 5 AP reduces my total from 12 to 7, but will necessitate you spending 1 AP as well to obstruct my evasion if you don't want me stepping into the hex in your rear. Do you want to do that, or just let me win and save the AP?

B387 "Obstructions" doesn't actually list a movement point cost for "enemy in hex" like it does a +1 for "minor obstruction" (ally in way). It occurs to me that there might actually be a double-charging system in place here. If you pay 1 AP to do an evade AND THEN ALSO 1 AP per 10% or 20% of Movement Points, and then charge movement points to evade obstructions like allies/enemies, then you're basically charging 2 AP to evade when using MP (tactical combat) and 1 AP when not using it ("step" maneuvers)

charging the move AP and the evade AP for trying to move past someone doesn't sound like double counting to me, especially, when you think about the situations in which you can move for free. Evading is a fairly intense action. Think about basketball and people who try to move past their opponent's guard. Its a pretty intense action. I agree its painful when stacked on the move cost, but that's a problem with the move cost.



Quote:
(the DX penalties when my adrenaline wears off, they would make sense to apply to "step rolls" if using my idea of making rolls every time someone stepped into a new hex, to give the possibility of tripping)

I think the dodge and move penalty that will show up cover that. Does adrenaline all run out at once, or do I have to wait 24 seconds past my second damaging kick to get the "over HP/3" effects?



I'll obstruct the evade, of course. As a note, if this ever worked, it would count as a run-around, not a pure attack in the back. The thread also presents the kernel of a truly awesome character.



I resist the evade by 1, 12 vs. 13. You have a -5 to your attempt because I'm standing up, and -1 from FP loss. Good luck!
__________________
Worlds Beyond Earth -- my blog
ericthered is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2019, 10:35 AM   #84
Plane
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Default Re: A Challenger Appears! Green versus Red

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
I think steps are fundamentally different from other movement. They aren't made with the intent of giving your body momentum in a direction: its a minimized side effect. If you watch dancing or a sport, or try doing this sort of thing yourself you'll see that this sort of movement is core skill. The biggest difficulty is really making sure you don't trip over something.
You mean like what holds for http://www.recordholders.org/en/list...s-running.html is a pattern in longterm movement but not for short-term? Side-shuffling and back-pedalling just feels awkward compared to a casual stroll forward, moreso than merely the aspect of not tripping, it's the different muscles used, unusual stabilization/lean/gait.

Maybe not so much as 2x, but should always be slightly more if able to quantify it. Like if you wanted to apply a basic cost of 2 MP mitigated by MoS, penalized by MoF, give forward movement a +10 and the other no bonus?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
So I flat-out disagree with the idea that stepping back costs extra movement point in general.
In that case perhaps we should bump up forward movement to 2 MP as well, but then have improved sprinting rules where you can get better than 20% boost? It might throw off Enhanced Move value though...

Maybe something like forward movement costs 2 MP (just like side and back) the first second you begin moving that way, but if using "inheriting momentum from previous turn" rules, forward movement would be better at it (inherit 100%) than the others (inherit 25%)?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
Does adrenaline all run out at once, or do I have to wait 24 seconds past my second damaging kick to get the "over HP/3" effects?
I assume it's on a per-injury basis, with a new countdown starting at each threshold. I guess if wanting to represent countdowns via some 'Adrenaline Points' system, there would need to be separate types for each threshold.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
https://dicelog.com/joinlogdice
I'll obstruct the evade, of course. As a note, if this ever worked, it would count as a run-around, not a pure attack in the back. The thread also presents the kernel of a truly awesome character.

I resist the evade by 1, 12 vs. 13. You have a -5 to your attempt because I'm standing up, and -1 from FP loss. Good luck!
https://dicelog.com/joinlogdice I rolled a 10. I can't remember how to calculate my evade (was your 13 from DX12 + One Foe? aren't you also -1 to DX from FP loss?) but I'm pretty sure that's not high enough to absorb that annoying basic -5.

I guess since I can't attack you from behind, I'll attack you from the front. Due to that killer -4 to hit (my +1 from Evaluate just means I can ignore the -1 to DX from FP loss) my Boxing 14 at http://www.themook.net/rpg/examples/...dex.php?id=one is reduced to Boxing 10...

You know... it occurs to me, Boxing 14 obviously makes right-hand punches my most accurate thing. But with the -4 on left hand punches, they're as inaccurate as kicking (DX12 minus 2) and just have the benefit of not falling down...

Slams on the other hand, can be done at full DX, so I could hit with them at skill 12, or in this case an 8 to hit instead of a 6 for a left-handed punch on a M+A. I probably should've done that earlier... off-hand punching stinks!

I think I'll open up my usual DWA (2ap reduces 7/12 to 5/12 AP) by using Extra Effort in Combat: Heroic Charge (2 ap reduces 5/12 ap to 3/12 ap) to offset the -4 to hit and skill cap of 9) and have the first half be a slam (random hit location as always)

12 minus 4 (DWA) being 8 isn't very good, so I'll roll against a Telegraphic Slam (12 to hit) I got an 8 and succeeded. Rolled a 10 on random hit location so per https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9v...ZGNjdJejg/view it is a chest hit. Rolled a 1 on sub-location D so your Vitals are targeted.


Yet again I could've scraped by without having to telegraph it... but since I did, you get +2 to defend against it. The -1 to defend against DWAs is offset by your +1 One Foe. Your dodge 9 parry 11 is reduced to 8/10 due to FP loss.

You have 8/10 AP from having obstructed the evasion. Since you used your free step already, you would have to spend 1 AP to retreat. Do you defend? If so, roll, indicate <= target number in 2nd field
Plane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2019, 01:03 PM   #85
Plane
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Default Re: A Challenger Appears! Green versus Red

Some thinking about defenses.. we don't have to apply this to this battle (in fact, it would change everything if we had been elbowing instead of handing), but would be interesting to keep in mind for future ones.

Do you think we should adapt the rule "you may make unarmed parries with a handless arm" from the One Hand disadvantage (B147) to allow ANYONE (not just handless people) to parry using the arm instead of the hand? Or would that be like a "Controllable Disadvantage" (perk) to allow people to make parries using arms instead of hands? Perhaps this is assumed to be a built-in perk that all beings with hands possess? After all, everyone probably has "Controllable Disadvantage: One Eye" as well, since they have the option of simply closing their eye.

The only thing this shouldn't do is protect the areas from being injured. At best maybe give a -1 to target them. Switching a CD on and off should probably be a free action but there should be some limit to how often you can do it (maybe once per turn?) since conceptually it would involve the retracting of the forearm/hand (turtling up) and interfere with the use of the hands for grappling and punching (but you could still throw elbows)

PWTOH seems like it would not apply
  • Parrying with the Off Hand: You parry with your “off” hand (your left or “shield” hand if right handed; see Handedness, p. 17), or with a weapon held in it, at -4 to skill
A "handless arm" is neither a hand or a weapon held in a hand, so like parrying with the legs (which suffers no -4 for an 'off leg) if you are parrying with your arm instead of your hand, I do not think there would be a -4 to skill resulting in a -2 to parry, like there would be for parrying with a hand or with a weapon held in it.

This would help to explain what I remember reading about unarmed combat skills not suffering off-hand parry penalties. That must be because the arm is parrying and not the hand.

It might also apply to defensive-grip weapons (like Tonfas) which are allowed to make Brawling-based parries by resting along the arm. I'm not entirely sure though because the hand is still holding the weapon, even if the arm is stabilizing it... I'm thinking perhaps split the difference and apply only half the usual penalties you would have based on using your hands (so -2 for off hand, -1 for Bad Grip 2, etc) in that situation.

The right column of B376 (Parrying "Unarmed"): Beings that lack hands (like most animals) can’t parry unarmed – they can only dodge. appears to contradict the idea of 'unarmed parries with handless arms' that One Hand refers too...

I am going to interpret that as a mistake. This should probably be "Being that lack arms" which still excludes most animals (Quadripeds) because they have legs, not arms (even though there should be a 'No Arms' trait somewhere between 'No Fine Manipulators' and 'No Manipulators' in value to represent that... worth -40 I would guess) to explain why they aren't paw-armed centauroids.

That said: animals with the Brawling skill (as many do) would have the "Leg Parry" option introduced in Martial Arts, which I believe overrides B376.

The left column of B376 defines parrying as "an attempt to deflect a blow using a weapon or your bare hands." Since handless arms are not 'bare hands', I must conclude they are a weapon (similar to parrying with non-bare hands, such as gloved hands0 So it is still subject to the cumulative -4 for using the same weapon multiple times in a second.

Despite being a natural weapon, I think you would still count a "unarmed" in the sense of armaments referring to hand-directed weaponry. It's not quite You can also use it to parry as if you had a weapon as B88 says for Strikers, you would need (Striker, Limb) to get those benefits (free attacks on unarmed attacks you parry, weapons don't get free attacks if they parry you, no -3 against swinging)

The incentive to parrying using a hand
  • 1) you can make Grabbing Parries (Hand Catches) with the appropriate skill
    2) if you want to follow up with things like Judo Throw or Arm Lock, you can perform them using your hand (arm parries would suffer -2 for using arm crook)
    3) only suffers half DX penalties (referred control, technical grappling) if the arm is grappled instead of the hand
    4) suffers no DX penalties if the torso is grappled (arm parries suffer 1/2 due to referred control)

The incentive to parrying using an arm:
  • 1) no -2 (from -4 DX) for using the off hand.
    2) Only suffers half penalty (referred control, Technical Grappling) to DX from grapples to the hand.
    3) higher crippling threshold (1/2 HP) if struck by something with contact damage, like an Aura or Damaging Parry
    4) can be done even if hands are occupied with holding something, like a weapon or grappling (though there should probably be some penalties associated here, like enhanced localized encumbrance, or suffering whatever CP you are applying)

The incentive to using both: since the -4 is tracked per hand or per weapon (not per limb) if you alternate, you can accrue penalties slower. For example:
  • 1) right-handed parry at -0
    2) right-armed parry at -0
    3) left-armed parry at -0
    4) left-handed parry at -2 (off hand)
    5) -4 cumulative penalty for a 2nd right-handed, right-armed or left-armed parry

Given what a huge power boost this would be to parries though, I think if you are using both the right hand and right arm, a -2 to DX (-1 to parry) for "doing two things at once" would be appropriate. So modified with that...
  • 1) right-handed parry at -1
    2) right-armed parry at -1
    3) left-armed parry at -1
    4) left-handed parry at -3 (off hand)
    5) -4 cumulative penalty for a 2nd right-handed, right-armed or left-armed parry (possible total -5 if still wanting to retain options of arm/hand paired parrying)

This would be needed to be specified ahead of time, so by taking a -1 you open the option to a 2nd parry using the other half of the arm also at a mere -1 instead of needing to do a -4 for reusing the hand or reusing the arm. This retains some flexibility and advantage for people who have arms.

- - -

Another issue I think is that since arms are shorter than hands, maybe the right arm should be -1 to parry attacks from the front-left and vice versa, since you can just barely cover your left shoulder using your right hand, trying to get your forearm to cover it is pretty awkward.

Actually maybe that should be -1 for the front and -2 for the front-opposite? Conversely, since getting your hand backward is awkward, hand parries could suffer -1 to parry attacks from the side on top of the usual -2 all active defenses suffer against side attacks from lack of vision.

You could wave all this for 'Extra Flexible' limbs or Doublejointed people, of course.

- - -

"Bad Grip" should probably apply DX penalties to parries using hands, but not to parries using arms. To grapples but not to punches.

How this would affect things: more freedom to parry multiple attacks (using your arms, you're turtling up basically) at the cost of offensive options. This would probably hurt Boxers (who specialize in punches) more than Brawlers (elbowing defaults to brawling)

Using a free action to switch between open hands (for grappling) and closed hands (for punching) also sounds good. I think fists are unnatural (the -4 to hit like the foot must assume a spread-open hand for grasping) and would effectively shrink the target (-5 to hit?) at the expense of losing the ability to use the fingers (for grappling, or finger-poking).

Toes can't withdraw. I would say those with prehensile toes can, but when they aren't (they're longer) they would be a SM higher then toes normally are (-5 to hit instead of -6) and the foot as a whole would be larger (-3 to hit instead of -4)

If we were to say that fingers were normally -6 to target (this never really gets specified, there is a Missing Finger disadvantage but no way to actually use your knife to cut off a finger...) then making a fist should similarly protect them and make them -7 to hit (like the skull) which is still easier than the spine (-8) or eye (-9). Something like 1/4 HP cripple threshold (as with Joints for Extremities) sounds about right.

A -1 to hit hands/fingers while making a fist would also increase grappling penalties from -2/-3 to -3/-4 (round up fractions 2.5/3.5) which also sounds realistic. This also falls in line with what I was thinking about with One Hand as a controllable disadvantage giving a -1 to target when using it, rather than completely protecting the limbs from harm while using it (otherwise stuff like Controllable Disadvantage: No Manipulators would protect all limbs from harm if not using them, which might be way too powerful for a perk).

However I think it should be stackable: in that final (fully withdrawn) position you'd be -3 to hit the arms (-2-1), -6 to hit the hands (-4-1-1) and -9 (-6-1-1-1) to hit the fingers, but at the expense of being unable to use the arms/hands/fingers at all for defense or attack.

Which should really be awful, if not for how powerful dodging is in 4e, which is why I'd prefer to just drop the intrinsic +3 it gets, especially when using rules like One Foe or "Duck!" which allow you to regain it with proper situations.

Do you think closing a fist should be a free action for everyone, or should that maybe involve some kind of DX check (similar to Quick Draw) to perform as a free action instead of a ready? Or maybe allow in place of an attack, should be easy using a +4 to telegraph.

Last edited by Plane; 01-31-2019 at 01:26 PM.
Plane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2019, 10:07 AM   #86
ericthered
Hero of Democracy
 
ericthered's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: far from the ocean
Default Re: A Challenger Appears! Green versus Red

Quote:
Originally Posted by Plane View Post
Do you think we should adapt the rule "you may make unarmed parries with a handless arm" from the One Hand disadvantage (B147) to allow ANYONE (not just handless people) to parry using the arm instead of the hand?....
unarmed parries are already considered to be arms rather than hands. Look at the parry unarmed rules on basic 376: a failed parry unarmed against a weapon allows the attacker to hit your arm, not your hand.
__________________
Worlds Beyond Earth -- my blog
ericthered is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2019, 10:29 AM   #87
ericthered
Hero of Democracy
 
ericthered's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: far from the ocean
Default Re: A Challenger Appears! Green versus Red

As a note, a crushing damage to the vitals is effectivally a normal attack to the torso.



a ST 11 slam is considered a 11 lb weapon, and I have basic lift 16.2 at the moment, so I can parry it (though its somewhat silly...)


I'll go ahead at burn an extra AP to retreat: I'll end up on the winning end of the FP battle anyways...



Parry 11 -1 (FP loss) -1 (DWA) +1 (one foe) +2 (telegraphic) +1 retreat = 13


and I rolled 13. very glad I chose to retreat. I'm at 6/10 AP. Make your second attack. Please note I get a retreat bonus against that as well.
__________________
Worlds Beyond Earth -- my blog
ericthered is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2019, 01:57 PM   #88
Plane
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Default Re: A Challenger Appears! Green versus Red

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
unarmed parries are already considered to be arms rather than hands. Look at the parry unarmed rules on basic 376: a failed parry unarmed against a weapon allows the attacker to hit your arm, not your hand.
I believe Grabbing Parry and Aggressive Parry open up the hand to be targeted, so perhaps the -4 to skill (-2 to parry) for using the off-hand should apply only to those, but not standard unarmed parries?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
As a note, a crushing damage to the vitals is effectivally a normal attack to the torso.
Martial Arts introduced some options there for it being a hit to the solar plexus, definitely more effective.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
I'll go ahead at burn an extra AP to retreat: I'll end up on the winning end of the FP battle anyways...
Oddly I just noticed, since retreats are so inferior for Brawling parries (1 ap for +1) you pretty much have the same efficiency ratio as for Feverish Defense (2 ap for +2).

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
Parry 11 -1 (FP loss) -1 (DWA) +1 (one foe) +2 (telegraphic) +1 retreat = 13

and I rolled 13. very glad I chose to retreat. I'm at 6/10 AP. Make your second attack. Please note I get a retreat bonus against that as well.
Hm... what is the penalty for reacting to something moving 4yards/second on the speed/range table? :)
Plane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2019, 02:36 PM   #89
ericthered
Hero of Democracy
 
ericthered's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: far from the ocean
Default Re: A Challenger Appears! Green versus Red

Quote:
Originally Posted by Plane View Post
I believe Grabbing Parry and Aggressive Parry open up the hand to be targeted, so perhaps the -4 to skill (-2 to parry) for using the off-hand should apply only to those, but not standard unarmed parries?
quite possible. That would work pretty well. You could still make an argument that off-hands should take a penalty to parry, but historically, the off-side is renowned for its defensive roll.

Quote:
Martial Arts introduced some options there for it being a hit to the solar plexus, definitely more effective.
I see. It only matters for knockdown, but that matters a lot in this sort of fight. Especially with our lowered effective HT.

Quote:
Oddly I just noticed, since retreats are so inferior for Brawling parries (1 ap for +1) you pretty much have the same efficiency ratio as for Feverish Defense (2 ap for +2).
Yep. Retreat gives me a big enough bonus that it actually makes dodge and parry equal. I parried in this case because dodge is more flexible and I want to leave it available in case you do something that penalizes parry.

Quote:
Hm... what is the penalty for reacting to something moving 4yards/second on the speed/range table? :)
To try and hit it with a ranged weapon? -1. To hit it with a melee weapon? none, as far as I can tell. To dodge or parry it? none.
__________________
Worlds Beyond Earth -- my blog
ericthered is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2019, 09:40 PM   #90
Plane
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Default Re: A Challenger Appears! Green versus Red

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
To try and hit it with a ranged weapon? -1. To hit it with a melee weapon? none, as far as I can tell. To dodge or parry it? none.
Your "full Douglas Cole" phrase early on probably had me wanting to channel https://gamingballistic.com/tag/dodge-this/ but that's something to consider for other battles, I suppose.

Particularly when we consider that since people's dodge is based on their Basic Speed, that they can probably also punch at equal or better velocities, so it would only make sense to penalize all the defenses we've already done basic on that... although Move+Attack might work like a sum of yards moved + basic speed (you add the speed of your sprint to the speed of your fist).

Anyway... when a Slam is dodged, I'm supposed to go sailing past you for another couple yards, as MP permits. Since I have Move 5 and only used 4 to enter your hex, and ended up not actually getting past you, I would still have 1 MP left to move past you now that you dodge, and should end up in the hex behind you...

If this were something like AOA:Double I might argue that I could wait until I'm past you to deliver my 2nd attack (possible also with Extra Attack, or Rapid Strike) but since a Dual Weapon Attack is simultaneous, I believe the 2nd half of the attack would also be delivered from the front.

Although, since you RETREATED, you would ALSO end up in the hex behind you... so in this case, I don't think I ended up getting a "free evade" as you might normally get if someone dodges your Slam, because if you dodge a Slam while retreating, so long as you retreat by the same number of hexes the Slammer over-runs your position by, you should be able to prevent them from getting behind you...

So I guess the benefit here is regardless that I've been able to maintain close contact with you, by using my final Movement Point after you retreated from the attack I made after moving the first 4 hexes.

Now, for the 2nd half of the attack... I think I'll just do a telegraphed right-handed punch to random location. There's no M+A penalty due to Extra Effort (DWA is a single attack), the -4 from DWA is cancelled by the +4 from telegraph, the -1 from FP loss is cancelled by the +1 from Evaluate, so I can roll against a 14.

I got a 9, successful! I got an 11 for RHL (abdomen) and on sub-table E got a 2: the punch targets your Digestive Tract.

I'd still be at 3/12 AP since I paid the full 2 for a DWA up front. You have 7/10 after spending an AP on your retreat, though as you mentioned you get that bonus against this attack as well. HOW DO YOU RESPOND?
Plane is offline   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 08:16 AM.


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