Defend and dodge

[larsdangly]

I feel like this is one of those issues where everyone knows what they want the rule to be, including the designer and every experienced player I know, and some versions of the rules support this interpretation. So we just have to get over the fact that the current edition RAW disagrees with this 'common law' rule.

[Skarg]

Originally Posted by RobW

A maximum one-hex move before defending was a change for us. It prevents a defensive tactic we often used, of charging up to a dangerous foe and then trying to thwart their attack by defending. We jokingly called this charge-defending. But TBH removing that tactic hasn't impacted the flavour of the game, and it feels good to follow SJ's intent on the issue.

If it feels good to you, great.

And yeah, I don't think it has a major impact, though mainly just because not many people use Defend very often anyway.

On the other hand, I can think of a wizard who might be dead if he couldn't have Defended the other day, from EITHER of the two fishy new RAW changes. i.e. "Oh you didn't creep along at 1 hex per turn, so you can't Defend." Or, just as silly: "Oh, you were not engaged at the start of your movement, and even though you were standing still, a foe came and engaged you, and you can't Defend because of a ridiculous rule that says your options are based on your engagement status at the start of your movement phase."

No, sorry but as much as I do love and respect Steve, it's pretty clear this is just a mistake, to me.

[larsdangly]

Defend and Dodge get used a lot at my table, but generally only in conflicts that have multiple combatants on one or both sides. If you are in a 1 on 1 face off, the opportunity cost of defending (i.e., you didn't attack that turn) generally out weighs its benefit, unless you are in some very peculiar temporary pickle. But in more tactically complex situations you will often be better off defending while a compatriot does something else. I would say it is not uncommon to have at least one combatant chose to defend on every turn in a fight with a half dozen people on a side.

[hcobb]

Staff IV, Knife, and Two Weapons for double parry and occult blast.

Four points of protection.
Attackers must roll an extra die to hit.
Attack at adjDX 14 while ignoring the target's armor.

[Skarg]

Originally Posted by larsdangly

Defend and Dodge get used a lot at my table, but generally only in conflicts that have multiple combatants on one or both sides. If you are in a 1 on 1 face off, the opportunity cost of defending (i.e., you didn't attack that turn) generally out weighs its benefit, unless you are in some very peculiar temporary pickle. But in more tactically complex situations you will often be better off defending while a compatriot does something else. I would say it is not uncommon to have at least one combatant chose to defend on every turn in a fight with a half dozen people on a side.

interesting. So I'm curious how your group plays this, as it didn't seem clear from what I read in your earlier comments.

Do you allow people to Defend regardless of their Engagement status? If not, do you require them to base it on their engagement status at the start of their movement, regardless of current status (i.e. A is disengaged, moves 1, then gets engaged, but not allowed to defend?)?

Do you allow Defend after 1/2 MA, or only after 0 or 1 hex movement?

[larsdangly]

Originally Posted by Skarg

interesting. So I'm curious how your group plays this, as it didn't seem clear from what I read in your earlier comments.

Do you allow people to Defend regardless of their Engagement status? If not, do you require them to base it on their engagement status at the start of their movement, regardless of current status (i.e. A is disengaged, moves 1, then gets engaged, but not allowed to defend?)?

Do you allow Defend after 1/2 MA, or only after 0 or 1 hex movement?

Yes, I allow people to defend on any turn they moved 1/2 MA or less and are subject to a melee attack that entered through one of their front hexes. I would be open to the argument that you should also limit movement to 1 hex, but my starting position is that defending shouldn't be more restricted than attacking, and you can move 1/2 MA and attack so...

[Skarg]

Originally Posted by larsdangly

Yes, I allow people to defend on any turn they moved 1/2 MA or less and are subject to a melee attack that entered through one of their front hexes. I would be open to the argument that you should also limit movement to 1 hex, but my starting position is that defending shouldn't be more restricted than attacking, and you can move 1/2 MA and attack so...

Yep, my feelings too, and how we've always played it. Thanks.

[red2]

Thanks for all the replies. We have pretty much been playing that you can defend or dodge whenever you want as long as you have not acted or moved more than 1/2MA. The only issue is I get "well if you are going to defend, I am going to attack someone else," but I am okay with that.

The problem I am having is that my kids are old enough now to read the rules themselves which leads to some heated debates. This is of course is half the fun.

Tonight we are going to try playing with the charge-defend option against pole weapons. I thing that is RAW for melee (we are just playing melee). Those spears are still too lethal.

[hcobb]

The way to deal with a line of fixed spears is to push them back and trample them with your cavalry before they have a chance to strike.

If you're short on horses you can use dragons instead, but just keep in mind that dragons have a very low power to weigh ratio so their fat overgrown bellies are the only thing they're good for.

Example of running over spearsmen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kg8bKDFouc

[Skarg]

Originally Posted by red2

Thanks for all the replies. We have pretty much been playing that you can defend or dodge whenever you want as long as you have not acted or moved more than 1/2MA. The only issue is I get "well if you are going to defend, I am going to attack someone else," but I am okay with that.

Player A: "I attack the orc."
Orc: "I defend."
Player A: "well if you are going to defend, I am going to attack someone else"
Me as GM: No, you declared your action, and the orc reacted to it. Roll 4 dice to hit the orc.

I.e. When you attack on your action, you are actually doing that. If the target hasn't taken their action, they can react to that. You cannot react to them reacting to your attack by changing your mind and attacking someone else, because you only know he's defending because he reacted to you actually attacking him, and unless you're an octopus or something that gets more than one attack per turn, you only get that one attack you already declared.