Fencer example

[larsdangly]

I agree with that. I feel like most of this stuff arises so rarely and situationally that it isn't worth codifying by house rules. More like the kind of thing where you have to make a specific ruling in the moment, and the situation won't come up again for months or years

[Lord Twig]

I can certainly see the argument for not allowing defense to work to the rear, but I find that I am erring in favor of making the game more survivable. If a character is defending, it is probably for a good reason, so I'll let them have it. They still won't get shield or parry armor from the rear, and the opponent still get's +4DX, but at least you can make it try to attack on 4 dice (or 5 dice with Fencing).

[oldwolf]

Originally Posted by Lord Twig

I can certainly see the argument for not allowing defense to work to the rear, but I find that I am erring in favor of making the game more survivable. If a character is defending, it is probably for a good reason, so I'll let them have it. They still won't get shield or parry armor from the rear, and the opponent still get's +4DX, but at least you can make it try to attack on 4 dice (or 5 dice with Fencing).

First, I will speak to your last "(or 5 dice for fencing)". All weapons get the 5 dice defending with weapon expertise. Fencing is just weapon expertise for fencing weapons.

Second, I think the reason the the defend option applies to attacks from all directions is to balance some of the mechanics of the game. Facing is chosen at the end of ones movement. This can lead to a free attack on a side hex by a character with an MA of 12 or greater.

Consider one character in chainmail with a tower shield facing an unarmored character with a two handed sword and an MA of 12. Mr MA 12 is cautious and has stayed with 4 hexes between them, just too far for chainmail to charge attack. MA 12 wins initiative and tells chainmail to move first. Chainmail is cautious and moves just one hex and stops, facing Mr MA 12. MA 12 makes a charge attack that places him in one of Chainmail's side hexes, bypassing his tower shield and getting a DX+2 bonus to his attack. Note that this is an attack that Chainmail cannot respond to with an attack of his own since it is from a side hex. In reality this would never happen since no one facing an opponent who runs 24 feet around to their side would fail to shuffle their feet a few inches in the same time to pivot and keep facing them. The game mechanic of setting ones facing at the end of ones movement (a very good rule, by the way) prevents this. Having defend work against all melee attacks, regardless of direction corrects for this. Essentially it keeps the game from being dominated by naked characters with big swords. Or, even worse, being dominated by naked elves with big swords, who could have an MA of 14!

[hcobb]

In this example it's best to not move at all so you can spin in response to rear attacks by ITL 111

[oldwolf]

Originally Posted by hcobb

In this example it's best to not move at all so you can spin in response to rear attacks by ITL 111

Actually I don't think that works quite as you say. If Chainmail is told he must move first by MA 12 who won initiative, then even if he chooses to stand still, that is still his move and his facing at the end of that choice is now fixed. He doesn't get to spin in place later. Staying in place will keep him far enough back that MA 12 can no longer run to one of his side hexes. He would however, still be vulnerable to the dread naked elf with big sword and MA 14 doing so.

[RobW]

Originally Posted by oldwolf

Staying in place will keep him far enough back that MA 12 can no longer run to one of his side hexes. He would however, still be vulnerable to the dread naked elf with big sword and MA 14 doing so.

Yes, against that elf, the best course if you lose initiative is probably to take a step backwards, keeping your front towards your opponent.

How to interpret that advancing gives away a free attack from the side? The literal translation of events is that the slower figure has stepped forward and then stared straight-ahead, transfixed and statue-like, while the faster figure has then run around it. That's not what is "actually happening". That sequence of events is an abstraction of the idea that a faster figure can dart past the guard of an incautious slower figure.

[RobW]

Originally Posted by hcobb

In this example it's best to not move at all so you can spin in response to rear attacks by ITL 111

Most relevant passage I can find in ITL 111 completely contradicts that.

Originally Posted by ITL p 111

If a figure has not yet moved, it is perfectly legal for it to turn in place during its movement phase to face a figure attacking from behind. A figure which has already moved, of course, may not change facing again.

[hcobb]

The biggest store of available fatigue in a Death Test are the grunts on the other side. So here's a scheme to harvest this.

Elf big sister
ST 8 DX 12 IQ 12 MA 14
4*Whip(1d-1)
Diplomacy(1) Unarmed Combat I-III(4) Running(2) Humanish(1) Physicker(2) Tactics(1) Whip(1)

Elf little sister
ST 6 DX 11 IQ 15 MA 12
2-h Maul of Power(1d/1d)
Humanish(1)
4-Hex Illusion, Blast, Drain Strength, Mage Sight, Pathfinder, Remove Thrown Spell, Reveal/Conceal, Reverse Missiles, Scrying, Speed Movement, Staff I-IV, Trip

Knock the enemy over with Whip or UC throw then pin the brawny victim with UC III for the draining.

[oldwolf]

Originally Posted by RobW

How to interpret that advancing gives away a free attack from the side? The literal translation of events is that the slower figure has stepped forward and then stared straight-ahead, transfixed and statue-like, while the faster figure has then run around it. That's not what is "actually happening". That sequence of events is an abstraction of the idea that a faster figure can dart past the guard of an incautious slower figure.

That is how I see it as well and I think the 360 degree defend is to keep this balanced.

[larsdangly]

Originally Posted by oldwolf

First, I will speak to your last "(or 5 dice for fencing)". All weapons get the 5 dice defending with weapon expertise. Fencing is just weapon expertise for fencing weapons.

Second, I think the reason the the defend option applies to attacks from all directions is to balance some of the mechanics of the game. Facing is chosen at the end of ones movement. This can lead to a free attack on a side hex by a character with an MA of 12 or greater.

Consider one character in chainmail with a tower shield facing an unarmored character with a two handed sword and an MA of 12. Mr MA 12 is cautious and has stayed with 4 hexes between them, just too far for chainmail to charge attack. MA 12 wins initiative and tells chainmail to move first. Chainmail is cautious and moves just one hex and stops, facing Mr MA 12. MA 12 makes a charge attack that places him in one of Chainmail's side hexes, bypassing his tower shield and getting a DX+2 bonus to his attack. Note that this is an attack that Chainmail cannot respond to with an attack of his own since it is from a side hex. In reality this would never happen since no one facing an opponent who runs 24 feet around to their side would fail to shuffle their feet a few inches in the same time to pivot and keep facing them. The game mechanic of setting ones facing at the end of ones movement (a very good rule, by the way) prevents this. Having defend work against all melee attacks, regardless of direction corrects for this. Essentially it keeps the game from being dominated by naked characters with big swords. Or, even worse, being dominated by naked elves with big swords, who could have an MA of 14!

It sounds to me like a player who likes heavily armored characters and makes mistakes during the movement phase. The way for this character to avoid being attacked through a side hex is to use his or her movement to control facing and distance so that this tactic won't work. Effectively, he used his move to rush a foe who was agile enough to get to a side facing when he should have stayed put or backed away 1 hex. Anyway, I'll happily allow for this outcome rather than let people defend to a rear facing.