Defend and dodge

[Steve Plambeck]

Precisely what Skarg said. The attacker can't change target or option after saying "I attack so-and-so."

Recall what the rules say the Defend option actually represents: parrying an incoming blow with your ready weapon.

You can't have parried an incoming blow that never came.

(There's a more extensive thread on all this in the archives)

[JustAnotherJarhead]

along with Steve, I also echo Skarg... Your character wouldn't know that the Orc was about to "defend" whatever that might look like, maybe a weapon parry, maybe a shield block, but they wouldn't know until they had engaged the Orc.

[Chris Rice]

A different perspective might be: that given a turn is not an single instant of time but a period of 5 seconds, the Defend option implies an "attitude of defensiveness" not simply a defence against a single attack.

This is justified by the fact that once a figure chooses the Defend option, every subsequent attack is at 4 dice, no matter how many attacks or assailants there are.

So: if I go to attack the Orc, but he's crouching and backing away from me, I might turn and attack his companion who is more obviously aggressive and not defending.

[TippetsTX]

Originally Posted by Chris Rice

A different perspective might be: that given a turn is not an single instant of time but a period of 5 seconds, the Defend option implies an "attitude of defensiveness" not simply a defence against a single attack.

I tend to look at the DEFEND option this way as well. In melee combat, a figure will usually assume one of three 'stances'... aggressive (charging forward), balanced offense (the default mode) and defensive. Your stance will influence the actions you can or cannot take and how effective attacks against the figure will be. I also agree that the chosen stance should be somewhat 'readable' by their opponents.

[Skarg]

Originally Posted by Chris Rice

A different perspective might be: that given a turn is not an single instant of time but a period of 5 seconds, the Defend option implies an "attitude of defensiveness" not simply a defence against a single attack.

This is justified by the fact that once a figure chooses the Defend option, every subsequent attack is at 4 dice, no matter how many attacks or assailants there are.

So: if I go to attack the Orc, but he's crouching and backing away from me, I might turn and attack his companion who is more obviously aggressive and not defending.

Yes, but only if the orc is crouching and backing away from you (i.e. if he already committed to Defend).

If you force figures who have not acted yet to pre-declare a defense before any attack, then (1) it'd make Defend even less useful than it already is, and (2) you'd have people wasting their whole turn Defending even when not being attacked.

e.g. In a two-orcs-vs-one-elf situation, if one of the orcs defended, it'd waste their turn while the elf attacked the other orc. If supposedly the elf can read the body language of an orc who's not under attack that he will Defend for five seconds, then surely that orc can notice the elf ignoring him and attacking his pal for five seconds, and stop cowering and take action, no?

[Skarg]

Originally Posted by TippetsTX

I tend to look at the DEFEND option this way as well. In melee combat, a figure will usually assume one of three 'stances'... aggressive (charging forward), balanced offense (the default mode) and defensive. Your stance will influence the actions you can or cannot take and how effective attacks against the figure will be. I also agree that the chosen stance should be somewhat 'readable' by their opponents.

Well, GURPS offers three such stances: All-Out Attack, Attack (and defend), and All-Out Defend. But how do you see TFT doing that? I only see Attack, and Defend, and Attack doesn't offer defense other than foes needing to roll 3/DX to hit you.

When we moved from TFT to GURPS, we it seemed us like the style of combat we'd been used to in TFT felt a little like almost everyone was almost always doing a GURPS All Out Attack (because they get no defenses), and the only other option was like a GURPS All Out Defense (with not very good defense skills).

[hcobb]

If your character is an IQ 15+ goblin then she can go and leave berserk at will.

No more weakness penalty for taking three points of damage from an arrow.

[Skarg]

Originally Posted by hcobb

If your character is an IQ 15+ goblin then she can go and leave berserk at will.

No more weakness penalty for taking three points of damage from an arrow.

At 2 fatigue per switch, berserk behavior with your ST 6 figure, and a non-zero risk of attacking your friends, I say, "knock yourself out" (perhaps literally...).

[JustAnotherJarhead]

Originally Posted by Chris Rice

So: if I go to attack the Orc, but he's crouching and backing away from me, I might turn and attack his companion who is more obviously aggressive and not defending.

Unless you are under a Speed spell, Haste spell or something similar , there is no time for this.

A 5 second combat turn implies quite a bit of dancing with the enemy, we are just rolling for that one attack of opportunity (split second chance), where you see the opportunity to slip your blade in just over the shield.

We are not assuming in TFT that you have a full 5 seconds to move your knight on the chessboard.

It just beats the hell out of a 60 second D&D round.

[Chris Rice]

Originally Posted by JustAnotherJarhead

We are not assuming in TFT that you have a full 5 seconds to move your knight on the chessboard.

Really? It's a tactical game. What are we assuming then?