Shield Wall Training [MA]

[ericthered]

This has arisen out of the combat examples thread (very indirectly), and now I have a number of questions regarding using the shield wall.

1) a deceptive attack is launched. Does that deceptive attack lower all defenses against the attack, or simply defenses from the target. I believe as written, its just the target, which then means its BETTER to block your friend, and let him block you, which is a little weird.

2) a feint is launched. Does it only work on the player it was launched on?

3) retreating: player A retreats, and his neighbor, player B, is attacked by an enemy who steps into B's old place. B is still adjacent and blocks for A. does he get the retreat bonus.

4) retreating 2: Player B retreats, and a enemy pursues him. His neighbor, player B, blocks. Does B get a "retreat bonus" to the block?

[gilbertocarlos]

Originally Posted by ericthered

1) a deceptive attack is launched. Does that deceptive attack lower all defenses against the attack, or simply defenses from the target. I believe as written, its just the target, which then means its BETTER to block your friend, and let him block you, which is a little weird.

It lowers all defenses, since it can be either:
A)A very fast attack, and since it's faster, it's faster for everyone, and everyone will have a harder time defending.
B)A hard to follow attack, like a thrust that originally comes to legs and in midattack changes to torso, since the change is hard to track, it's hard to track to everyone, everyone will have a hard time defending.
C)A strange angle attack, like a sword cut upwards, and then, it's hard for everyone by simply being unexpected.

Originally Posted by ericthered

2) a feint is launched. Does it only work on the player it was launched on?

It work only on the target, but everyone can benefit from the feint in the Feinteer chooses.

Originally Posted by ericthered

3) retreating: player A retreats, and his neighbor, player B, is attacked by an enemy who steps into B's old place. B is still adjacent and blocks for A. does he get the retreat bonus.

[QUOTE=ericthered;1422806]4) retreating 2: Player B retreats, and a enemy pursues him. His neighbor, player B, blocks. Does B get a "retreat bonus" to the block?

You get a retreat bonus only from attacks against you, since defending someone else is getting in the way, not getting out of the way, you don't get a bonus, you may even get a penalty if the GM wishes so.

Also,If you keep moving, you are not in formation, you are moving freely, and should lose the bonuses from the shieldwall.

[Kromm]

Deceptive Attack and Feint are always vs. a single target only. They are set up in a way that – based on observing one foe and how he reacts, holds his weapon, stands, moves, and so on – they come in too fast, at too weird an angle, with too unusual a timing, etc. for him to defend properly. Shield-Wall Training doesn't change anything in that regard. And note that covering an ally who has left himself open is one of the benefits of a shield wall . . . tricky fighting is a lot less effective against a row of guys with interlocked shields.

Retreating only ever benefits the person who does it, and only if he rolls his own active defense. With Shield-Wall Training, it's actually disadvantageous, as it means you're no longer in the wall and able to block for others or have them block for you. However, a fighter who hasn't yet retreated can use it to step to a place where his mate can block for him or he can block for his mate . . . but nobody gets a retreat bonus for this.

[Dustin]

1) I would say that a Deceptive Attack remains deceptive for any neighborly attempts to defend against it. Since Deceptive Attack can include sheer speed, this makes the most sense. An interesting alternative might be to allow a variant of Deceptive that gives -1 to anyone's active defense against it per -3 to skill instead of -2.

2) Feints are contests between 2 characters, so it only works on one target. A feinter could feint against a shieldman and use the bonus against the shieldman's attempt to block for his buddy, in your example.

3) If the shieldman retreats, I would not let him take his Retreat bonus on neighborly defenses.

4) If the target retreats, I would allow the Retreat bonus for the shieldman's neighborly Block. Afterwards, the target is out of the Wall, though.

EDIT: Word of Kromm says otherwise than me, but throwing it in anyways. Call them houserules.

[Kromm]

Please note that whatever the explanation for Deceptive Attack, it's always deceptive relative to a specific foe that you can see. Side-on, say, its speed or attitude may well be less deceptive. In terms of tempo, it's basically just a feint in a half-beat instead of a full beat.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Kromm

Please note that whatever the explanation for Deceptive Attack, it's always deceptive relative to a specific foe that you can see. Side-on, say, its speed or attitude may well be less deceptive. In terms of tempo, it's basically just a feint in a half-beat instead of a full beat.

Hmm. This means that two ultra-high-skill defenders standing side-by-side who can Sacrificial Parry for each other are nearly unassailable, and will probably never defend themselves. For any attack, no matter how skilled the attacker, one of the two will be able to use their unpenalized Parry score.

[Kuroshima]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Hmm. This means that two ultra-high-skill defenders standing side-by-side who can Sacrificial Parry for each other are nearly unassailable, and will probably never defend themselves. For any attack, no matter how skilled the attacker, one of the two will be able to use their unpenalized Parry score.

Feint against both, and then attack one of them. Hell, if you have A and B, A AoA, counting on B protecting him, you can feint against B, and proceed to destroy A. At least that's my reading.

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Hmm. This means that two ultra-high-skill defenders standing side-by-side who can Sacrificial Parry for each other are nearly unassailable, and will probably never defend themselves. For any attack, no matter how skilled the attacker, one of the two will be able to use their unpenalized Parry score.

Sure. Fighting two people at once is generally regarded as very difficult. At the high-skill end of the pool, this is just one of many possible reasons for it. Realistically, the one-on-one exchange of pure skill only exists in true one-on-one combat.

[cbower]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Hmm. This means that two ultra-high-skill defenders standing side-by-side who can Sacrificial Parry for each other are nearly unassailable, and will probably never defend themselves. For any attack, no matter how skilled the attacker, one of the two will be able to use their unpenalized Parry score.

I can see that. Would you want to assault Aramis and d'Artagnan while they were side-by-side on a narrow stairway? It's GURPS though, so overwhelming numbers would probably win in the end. Ranks of enemies using Rapid Strikes, weapons with Reach, etc.

[Kuroshima]

Originally Posted by cbower

I can see that. Would you want to assault Aramis and d'Artagnan while they were side-by-side on a narrow stairway? It's GURPS though, so overwhelming numbers would probably win in the end. Ranks of enemies using Rapid Strikes, weapons with Reach, etc.

Nuke it from orbit, that never fails ;)

Now seriously, I would have nothing against declaring DA against someone who is NOT the target.

Another interesting thing is to have a group if characters with Teamwork, equiped with long reach weapons and have them first ones feint and transfer the feint to the ones that actually attack. Teamwork works wonders for formation fighting.