[Martial Arts] Melee Threat area?

[HeroPenguin]

Originally Posted by OldSam

==Fighting psychology or mental control of the fight==

If I am the attacker can I somehow <provoke> an attack / intercept of my opponent with making him <believe> that I start a real attack?

I am for myself training in martial arts for several years and this is an essential part of the advanced fighting methods - to make the opponent believe something, give him false informations with body language etc. to get him into a trap...

(This tactic is of course a kind of "feint" but as I understand the feint-maneuver, it could be intercepted with a counter-attack just as a normal attack...?)

As the good Dr. Kromm said, the Feint and Ruse maneuvers are ideal for this situation, though the mechanics of the game work a little differently than you describe. Instead of provoking the opponent to attack (though read below for a caveat!) Feint and Ruse somewhat abstract the process into a quick contest of skills. If you succeed, you pull the wool over the opponent's eyes and they suffer a defensive penalty against you next turn. GM narration turns this into tricking the opponent into giving you an opening because he's reacting to something you "telegraphed". It's not an issue of Wait, but an issue of Feint.

On the turn following, the opponent will likely give up the Wait because they believe that you had ACTED, and are no longer reserving a Wait for them. This in turn works to your benefit as well, as when they act they are no longer reserving a Wait for you, either, and after a successful Feint, they will be much worse off for it. So in the end, the result is that you trick an opponent into attacking, and take advantage of the opening. It's not a contest to force them to attack, but a maneuver that makes them believe you left an openning, and their attempt to capitalize on it.

Tricky, ain't it?

[Lonewulf]

Originally Posted by roguebfl

Um No, in DnD you provoke an AoO for leave a threated square, not the zone

Unless they take an all-out retreat, at least in 3.5. From what I recall from my last D&D session as player.

[roguebfl]

Originally Posted by khorboth

This brings up one of the most often ignored rules in DnD. Under no circumstances and with no abilities can you ever make multiple AoO's on the same target in one round. The result being that the runaround being discussed in this thread works fine in DnD too, since fighters and rogues have no problem absorbing one extra attack.

book, page, and chapter reference would useful her as you said it's often over looked

Originally Posted by Lonewulf

Unless they take an all-out retreat, at least in 3.5. From what I recall from my last D&D session as player.

but the requires you to be moved directly away from them, and can still prove from others so is not applicable for going around someone.

[khorboth]

Originally Posted by roguebfl

book, page, and chapter reference would useful her as you said it's often over looked

Oh, sure. Make me quote rules and back up my broad statements. ;)

3ed PHB, p. 80 (combat reflexes) - "You still only make one attack of opportunity per enemy."

3.5ed PHB, p.137-138 - "if the same opponent provokes two attacks of opportunity from you - such as by moving out of a threatened square and then casting a spell in a threatened square - you could make two separate attacks of opportunity."

Dang edition changes. Maybe in 4th, you'll be able to spend your unused AoE's at the end of the round like normal attacks. (j/k, they're getting rid of them, but let's not derail the thread for a joke.)

[Lonewulf]

Originally Posted by roguebfl

but the requires you to be moved directly away from them, and can still prove from others so is not applicable for going around someone.

Who said that it was applicable to running around someone? I never did.

Anyways, I think that AoOs are cute, and not in the fun type of cute.

I mean, I fight three guys ahead of me, and one guy directly behind me provokes me, and I get an AoO, even though by all logic, my back is entirely turned to the individual...

BLIND WARRIOR JUTSU!

[Kromm]

Guys, I'm happy to discuss the ups and downs of this stuff in GURPS or simply in the abstract in this forum, but detailed D&D rules debates belong in Roleplaying in General. Thanks!

[OldSam]

I got the MA-sourcebook now and read about the "ruses" (p101): Actually they are the same like feints only with the difference that your skill is based on IQ during the quick-contest, right?

Originally Posted by HeroPenguin

On the turn following, the opponent will likely give up the Wait because they believe that you had ACTED, and are no longer reserving a Wait for them. This in turn works to your benefit as well, as when they act they are no longer reserving a Wait for you, either, and after a successful Feint, they will be much worse off for it. So in the end, the result is that you trick an opponent into attacking, and take advantage of the opening.

My problem here is (unless I misunderstood someting): I have only "advantage of the opening" if my opponent misses his attack (in his turn after my feint)... Because if I get hit in the first round then my feint-advantage is nearly gone due to shock-penalties etc - and the feint doesn't give attack and defense bonuses which means I have to rely on my normal parry/dodge first. (so actually this would make no real difference to regular feinting during combat instead of making an attack)

The kind of ruses/mental feints I was thinking about are more a matter of distance, timing and of course the mentioned mental control:
With deceptive body-language, "eye-contact / mental control" etc. I make the opponent believe that I am in reach and start an attack or am open/vulnerable fot his attack...
But in fact I am not really in his reach but only a small step further away so that his attack will miss (unless he does "move and attack") _and_ penalizes his defense.

Would go somehow like this:
Both fighters are facing each other with 1 hex/yard distance between them so both could step and attack.
Then fighter A "feints mentally" and makes fighter B believe that he steps in and attacks but in fact he stays in his hex (of course his body "moves" a bit but not a whole step). Now after winning the feint-contest against fighter B, B has penalized defense next turn. Now B steps in to attack, but A steps <back> before/during A's attack and doesn't get hit...
Next turn A steps in for attack and B has defense-penalties.

I know, normally the rule for a feint is that a fighter <must be in reach> for really hitting his target, so this is maybe a bit hard to simulate...

But is there a way to do this tactic with the regular rules (including MA)?

[Kromm]

That's just a Ruse -- really! No feint-like mechanic other than a Beat requires weapon-on-weapon contact, so you can just stand there and use your turn to make a Ruse. And as the Basic Set says, you can feint if you could have hit the target with an attack. If you're a step away with a one-yard weapon, then you could have hit him . . . so you can use the Feint maneuver . . . so you can opt for a Ruse. And you could apply this to the usual ends (penalty on his defense) or invoke the Defensive Feints rule (penalty on his attack).

It sounds like what you want to do is:

1. Stand with one yard between you, which is Attack range with a single step with a one-yard weapon.

2. On your turn, take the Feint maneuver and use it for a Ruse.

3. Turn your Ruse bonus into a penalty on his attack -- that is, consider it a Defensive Feint -- so that he'll step in and miss you.

4. Now that he is in reach, do a Deceptive Attack to skewer him and then step away afterward, as is always allowed on an Attack maneuver.

[OldSam]

Originally Posted by Kromm

That's just a Ruse -- really! No feint-like mechanic other than a Beat requires weapon-on-weapon contact, so you can just stand there and use your turn to make a Ruse.

ah ok, thanks! (I thought I have to move in like a real attack...)

Originally Posted by Kromm

It sounds like what you want to do is:

1. Stand with one yard between you, which is Attack range with a single step with a one-yard weapon.

2. On your turn, take the Feint maneuver and use it for a Ruse.

3. Turn your Ruse bonus into a penalty on his attack -- that is, consider it a Defensive Feint -- so that he'll step in and miss you.

4. Now that he is in reach, do a Deceptive Attack to skewer him and then step away afterward, as is always allowed on an Attack maneuver.

Not exactly because in this case I think the Ruse is a bit wasted, isn't it?
(He is in reach in my turn at 1. yet...) Wouldn't it in this case make more sense to start a deceptive attack at first to avoid being hit in case of very bad luck in defense...?

(edit: Of course if he has a greater reach, say he has a broadsword and I am unarmed then the defensive feint is a good tactic to get closer to him but my tought was that both fighers have same weapon-reach...)

What I really wanted is stepping back <after> my feint in 2. so that I am out reach...
But I think this is not allowed, is it...? In fact in reality I wouldn't step back <after> my action but <at the same time> he moves in... this is a bit problematic because of the turn-based actions...
This way he would _definitely_ miss in 3. cause he doesn't get in reach unless he makes move&attack but thinking he can get me he moves in anyway...

[chandley]

Now, what I want is some way to force someone to burn a Wait, using a Feint or Ruse.

Say you do have two opponents circling, spending actions Waiting to interrupt the other guys foolish attack. First guy to attack is going to get a stop hit, and had better be pretty confident in his defenses...

How to break the stand off? One way is to just take your attack and hope. Is there some way to Ruse your way into forcing your opponent to use their Wait and attack you, perhaps at the penalty invoked by a Defensive Feint? Because thats useful for a skilled fighter. Force your waiting opponent to attack you at a penalty, which makes you much more confident in your defenses, and now you can attack without getting interrupted by a stop hit...

Chandley