All-Out Attack Sequence

[Alden Loveshade]

This is probably somewhere in the basic rules, but a quick search didn't find it. I've done this the same way for years, but just played with some people who did it differently. I believe GM overrules all rules, but want to know how others do this.

There are two opponents both using melee weapons that don't need to be readied. A is using All-Out Attack for Double attacks, B is using Attack and Defense. So A gets two swings, and B gets one.

What order would you put their swings (A1 is A's first swing, A2 is the second, and B is B's swing).

1) A1, B, A2
2) A1, A2, B
3) B, A1, A2

[evileeyore]

It depends on their speed.

If A is faster then 2, if B is faster then 3. But I don't break up someone's Turn just because their getting more than one attack*.






* Unless I'm running a "gritty realistic" game and they're getting the 'extra' attacks via Altered Time Rate.

[Ulzgoroth]

You make all your attacks during your turn, so 2/3. (2 and 3 are not distinguishable, since turn order is round-robin.)

[Nereidalbel]

A attacks twice, B defends against both (assuming successful attack rolls), then B attacks, with A having no defense at all. Repeat until somebody either changes tactics or stops moving.

Thus, 2 is the one fitting RAW.

[Tomsdad]

yep 2 or 3 depending on who was acting first in this exchange

[Maz]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

You make all your attacks during your turn [...]

And thank the dicegods for that.

This also means no matter how you obtain multiple attacks, it's always done the same way.

Some examples of ways to get multiple attacks:
All-Out Attack: Double.
Dual-weapon Attack.
Rapid Strike. (And combination strikes)
Altered Time Rate.
Extra Attack.


Note also that some defensive options also apply against ALL attacks from a single attacker, no matter how many and how they have those attacks.
For instance a Retreat gives it's bonus against all of the attacks.

[Plane]

If you opted to take AOA: Double, you would go first with BOTH if your turn was first... or you could take a Wait and interrupt an opponent's turn.

I wouldn't be opposed to something like taking your first attack and doing a Wait to apply your second... unless of course you use an active defense, in which case you can only convert to a standard Attack maneuver.

[naloth]

Originally Posted by Plane

I wouldn't be opposed to something like taking your first attack and doing a Wait to apply your second... unless of course you use an active defense, in which case you can only convert to a standard Attack maneuver.

You aren't really intended to have the flexibility to decide to attack again or defend after you see the results of your first attack.

After all, if you miss you'll want to defend from a counter attack. If you get a solid hit, your opponent (if they don't have HPT) probably won't be hitting you back and you've probably forced them to use their best defense that turn (parry/block) already.

[Plane]

Good point, and it would give AOA Double an unfair advantage over AOA Strong or AOA Determined, so you should have to final-decide what your maneuver is once triggered.

If you want to wait to do the 2nd attack until they hit you back though, that would seem fine. I wouldn't care if people wanted to do that with Extra Attack or Rapid Strike either.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Plane

If you want to wait to do the 2nd attack until they hit you back though, that would seem fine. I wouldn't care if people wanted to do that with Extra Attack or Rapid Strike either.

I cannot imagine why.

Nobody is going to 'wait to do the second attack until they hit you back'. That's not even what Wait does, and isn't remotely what it's for. Wait is a powerful way to get the drop on opponents after they've committed to actions and exposed themselves, and to make your actions and position responsive to things that happened after your turn. Letting you treat Wait as an attack option rather than a maneuver is...big.