Berserk and Jet Attacks

[Plane]

B124 actually sounds kind of odd in one regard...

you must use a Move maneuver to get as close as possible to a foe
if you can Move and Attack,
or end your Move with a slam,
you will.

It seems like they're talking about M&A like it's a variant of Move (which I guess makes sense).

Berserk doesn't actually say a Berserker can't make active defenses anywhere that I've noticed, so this is a consequence which I think might only apply when conditions force them to make an AOA (a foe is in range of their hand/melee weapon)

The "Move" maneuver they would make if a foe was far off allows active defenses.

You can't actually end a "Move" in a slam (Move doesn't give an attack) you need to make a 'Move and Attack' to have the option to do a slam.

"Move and Attack" allows defenses too! This is normally an inability to parry with the attacking weapon (you can still dodge) though Martial Arts makes this inability to dodge if you're kicking/slamming (so you can do hand parries)

That flexibility comes up less now though, as we discover in Martial Arts, you now get FULL move on an All-Out Attack if making a Slam, so you can now only do a Move and Attack if a foe is beyond Move+1, if you are wielding a reach 2+ weapon.

ie a Berserker who has a Reach C or a Reach 1 weapon should no longer be able to Move and Attack at all: because if an enemy is close enough for them to hit with a Move and Attack, they're close enough to hit with AOA(Slam) so they'll be forced to AOA now that the maneuver has equal range with slams.

Originally Posted by Anthony

That's the range at which you have to charge, beyond that range you can stand still and shoot. Honestly, Berserk is poorly written, but if I have to choose between an interpretation that allows move and attack, and an interpretation that requires moving without attacking, I'm going to go with the first because a berserker should be attacking every turn if they can.

The mention of the Move and Attack is in the same bullet as the "hand weapon" statement, so I was thinking that this was implied to also be with the hand/melee weapon...

In fairness to your point though, while it is in the same bullet, it's not in the same sentence, so I could see maybe treating it more flexibly...

It would work better to your interpretation if they had begun "If no foe is" as a separate bullet-point though...

Saying "you may attack with a ranged weapon" (stop) doesn't really make sense if you could ALREADY attack with one using M&A though...

I would instead say something like "may attack with a ranged weapon... using an Attack or All-Out Attack maneuver" if this was added flexibility you got at 20+ yards to avoid taking a -4 to hit penalty like you're be forced to take if at less than 20 yards.

One thing we need to keep in mind here about applying "if you can Move and Attack .. you will" to ranged attacks is... anybody can throw their melee weapon.

This basically forces a berserker with a sword to chuck his sword at the enemy (because he CAN) disarming himself.

But if CAN>WILL is only referring to MELEE attacks, then you're not forced to throw your melee weapons at the enemy at less than 20 yards.

I think if there's a visible foe, you always need to be running toward them, but if you're running from 40>30 yards then you could shoot your gun (move and attack) or maybe even throw a weapon (if you can throw that far) then you have the OPTION of doing so (Berserker's choice) since the 2nd bullet is "you may" not "you will"

Closer than 20 it sounds like you're just too mad to make a ranged attack, your mind is just focusing on tackling the guy.

Originally Posted by Sorenant

For example, even if using ranged attacks from 20 yards away is allowed by RAW, I wouldn't accept plays like "my character is 21 yards away from the enemy so I'll attack while keeping this distance"

I'm envisioning a guy in trench warfare, there's going to be a point where he isn't just going to idiotically leap out of the trench running forward with his gun, I would think. Which might be the point of that?

Originally Posted by Sorenant

20 yards is something for a SM+0 human, another thing for a SM+6 dragon.

Yeah I could see maybe making the "I must charge my foe" range increase with SM to some degree.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Plane

I think if there's a visible foe, you always need to be running toward them

Only if within 20 yards.

Originally Posted by Plane

Yeah I could see maybe making the "I must charge my foe" range increase with SM to some degree.

Might base it on Move too.

[Plane]

The second bullet point establishes a condition where you can use ranged weapons, but it doesn't appear to override the previous bullet point saying that if you're not in range to hit your foe with a "hand weapon" (melee attack) that you must move toward them.

So it sounds like what you would do is either do a Move (run toward them holding your gun, though you could drop it as a free action) or a Move and Attack (the wild firing at -4 or bulk) until you got within 20 yards, at which point you're just too angry to shoot and can only think of Pummeling them with the gun.

[Black Leviathan]

Originally Posted by Culture20

Yeah, we've all seen this in media. It's almost always the chaingun or machinegun wielder who is also a berserker.

But yeah, that's the idea. If you can run at a target and attack it. If you have a ranged attack you just attack, if you have to reload you get into combat instead but if you can ready a thrown weapon I think that would be your go-to action. I don't however see a viable reason for you to do a Concentration action or to Aim.

[Black Leviathan]

Originally Posted by Plane

if you're not in range to hit your foe with a "hand weapon" (melee attack) that you must move toward them.

So it sounds like what you would do is either do a Move (run toward them holding your gun, though you could drop it as a free action) or a Move and Attack (the wild firing at -4 or bulk)

I think Step-and-Attack with a ranged weapon is valid. Berserk isn't mindlessly violent, but helplessly aggressive. You're not going to step in any direction but towards the nearest enemy, not going to take a retreat bonus, not going to waste time or seek cover moving into melee but you're not going to foil your ranged attack by barreling forward.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by Black Leviathan

you're not going to foil your ranged attack by barreling forward.

Why not? You'd otherwise foil your melee attack by taking a -4 that way.

Plus you can't even aim, so that's a foil.

[RyanW]

When it comes down to it, I consider berserk to require applying "maximum direct hurt as soon as possible" but give a bit of leeway interpreting that.

For example, if a character is prone several yards from a foe, Change Posture + Move and Attack is more in line than Move + Move + Move + Move + Move + All Out Attack to crawl over to him and stab him in the foot, even though neither Change Posture not Move and Attack are explicitly allowed under Berserk.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by RyanW

For example, if a character is prone several yards from a foe, Change Posture + Move and Attack is more in line than Move + Move + Move + Move + Move + All Out Attack to crawl over to him and stab him in the foot, even though neither Change Posture not Move and Attack are explicitly allowed under Berserk.

Wasn't the fix for that to allow a Berserker to use Acrobatic Stand?

That allows using Change Posture as a step (or I think a Movement Point if you were using a non-step manever?) if you make your roll, so it could avoid the need to do a Change Posture.

I think I remember something like you could even get a +4 (Determined) bonus to Acrobatic Stand if you were doing it at the start of an All-Out Attack?

Of course if you (non-critically) FAIL the roll, whatever maneuver you chose converts into a Change Posture. But I think that might be an accceptable situation for a Berserker since they're not actually "taking" that maneuver so much as it is transforming into that against their will?

[Black Leviathan]

Originally Posted by Plane

Why not? You'd otherwise foil your melee attack by taking a -4 that way.

Plus you can't even aim, so that's a foil.

For the same reason that a Berserker in melee wouldn't use a move and attack to circle around behind his enemy or just run from enemy to enemy arbitrarily while in combat. The point for the berserker is to get to the attack. If you have a ranged weapon in hand or you can draw one to attack then chasing after an enemy at the cost of a successful attack wouldn't be the berserker's MO.

I agree that at some point skill with a ranged weapon becomes it's own foil. If you're a berserker who just beat a man to death with a loaded crossbow but you have only a vague sense of how to fire one. Would you try to snap a shot off at the next enemy on your default, or charge at someone and club them to death with it? that's a less obvious call.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by Black Leviathan

The point for the berserker is to get to the attack.
If you have a ranged weapon in hand or you can draw one to attack then chasing after an enemy at the cost of a successful attack wouldn't be the berserker's MO.

If Berserker MO is to avoid penalties at all costs to avoid wasting ammunition on misses, then why "Step and Attack" rather than "Step and Aim"?

B550 requires you to get 2 yards from your target to avoid a -1 to hit on Speed/Range, so being able to fire at more than 20 yards is already them pre-firing before an optimal moment, as they're taking at least -7 to hit even before a Move and Attack.

If we were to allow an alternative means of shooting guns other than Move and Attack, I think it should at least be AOA:Determined, since it fits with how they operate (defenseless) in HTH when attacking someone, gives them them them the +1 to hit, and lets them move 50% their Basic Move towards a foe instead of a mere Step.

Originally Posted by Black Leviathan

I agree that at some point skill with a ranged weapon becomes it's own foil. If you're a berserker who just beat a man to death with a loaded crossbow but you have only a vague sense of how to fire one. Would you try to snap a shot off at the next enemy on your default, or charge at someone and club them to death with it? that's a less obvious call.

I'm thinking maybe somewhere in between: use a full-move forward sprint toward an enemy until you're 2 yards away and can fire without a Speed/Range penalty, THEN club them with it.

Single-shot stuff like bows/crossbows/black powder are a way bigger consideration (just 1 shot, do or die, can't reload!) compared to multi-shot weapons, whether they be single-shot (revolvers) semi-automatic (pistols) or full auto (machine gun) where you can keep firing even if you miss the first horrible shot taken at a distance.