05-02-2014, 06:58 PM | #1 |
Join Date: Nov 2011
|
Focused Defense Discussion
Focused defense is a pretty interesting option from Martial Arts: Gladiators that's significant for some styles. How has it worked for people and what house rules have been created for it?
It's been mentioned before but there are some weird parts to focused defense. The presented and denied sides work out well enough (though +1/-1 for hit locations and equipment striking and maybe active defenses without other effects is a fairly easy and reasonable addition). Random hit locations aren't touched upon but are relatively easy to handle. Enemies to the rear should get a penalty to hitting presented locations in addition to their bonus to hit denied locations but that's an easy detail to fix. Weapon reach is where things change. It seems clear that "lose a yard of maximum reach" can reduce a weapon to reach C (the inability of C reach weapons to attack suggests against absurd literalism here) but that's quite powerful for a reach 1 weapon and reach C weapons are challenged enough as it is (even while auto-ignoring the, highly inconsistent, 3.4.3.6 FAQ). It's also pretty odd that maximum reach is reduced. Why not all reaches? A reach 1 weapon goes down to reach C but a reach 1,2 goes down to... 1,1 and a 2,3 weapon becomes 2,2 instead of the seemingly logical 1,2. I can see argument against things like letting reach 1,2 weapons achieve reach C but that argues for reach reducing by steps rather than subtraction which would also allow you to be able to get stuff like reach 1,2 out of higher single number reaches the omission of which is a slight but not important shame otherwise. Why are two handed weapons not subject to the same rules as other weapons held with the denied hand? They can reach further but that's because they are longer. They are still restrained in how far they can reach by the denied hand. If someone can fight with a greatsword in one hand it shouldn't suddenly be able to reach much further because an extra hand was put on it. Sure the denied hand has probably moved down on the hilt when it was after switching to two hands but not enough to mean a yard of reach. For that matter it seems slightly generous to exempt two handed weapons from the denied hand active defense penalties. Last edited by Sindri; 05-02-2014 at 07:08 PM. |
05-03-2014, 02:27 AM | #2 |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Central Europe
|
Re: Focused Defense Discussion
I don't have time to refresh my memory, but I think I went over the problems which I saw in a previous thread which you can search for (edit: here). I would not use it, especially not for sword-and-shield fighting, and that is a shame.
__________________
"It is easier to banish a habit of thought than a piece of knowledge." H. Beam Piper This forum got less aggravating when I started using the ignore feature Last edited by Polydamas; 05-03-2014 at 02:31 AM. Reason: Added link |
05-03-2014, 10:12 AM | #3 | |
Join Date: Nov 2011
|
Re: Focused Defense Discussion
Quote:
Not being able to block in close combat is itself strange. You can parry with a long knife and you can block multiple attacks with a shield at a huge active defense cost but it's just straight impossible to block in close combat with a dueling buckler? |
|
05-03-2014, 12:42 PM | #4 |
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
Re: Focused Defense Discussion
It's odd that the shield is a Reach 1 weapon to start with - it should probably be Reach C (unless it has a fairly large boss). Now, if someone's pressed up against you, trying to raise it to Block or Bash (pushing probably isn't a problem) is going to be rather difficult - but then, using just about any weapon is going to be difficult without backing up in a case like that (which amounts to some sort of odd hands-free grapple). At Reach C it should probably be usable normally, although I could see a justification for it to be a little easier to bypass - against any Deceptive Attack, treat its DB as 1 lower (for DB 0 "shields," like the dueling buckler, this does nothing). Perhaps someone with experience fighting sword-and-board could weigh in?
|
05-03-2014, 02:36 PM | #5 | |
Join Date: Nov 2011
|
Re: Focused Defense Discussion
Quote:
|
|
05-03-2014, 05:46 PM | #6 | ||||||
Fightin' Round the World
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New Jersey
|
Re: Focused Defense Discussion
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Peter V. Dell'Orto aka Toadkiller_Dog or TKD My Author Page My S&C Blog My Dungeon Fantasy Game Blog "You fall onto five death checks." - Andy Dokachev |
||||||
05-03-2014, 06:38 PM | #7 | |||||
Join Date: Nov 2011
|
Re: Focused Defense Discussion
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||
05-04-2014, 01:10 AM | #8 | |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Central Europe
|
Re: Focused Defense Discussion
I agree that two-handed weapons, or pairs of weapons with the hands together such as sword and buckler, don't let you withdraw one side as much as a one-handed weapon does.
Quote:
Edit: Here is the wording from Martial Arts: Gladiators p. 21 "As well, weapons in the denied hand – even long ones – lose a yard of maximum reach while away from the opponent (and weapons with Reach C only can’t attack at all!). Armament held in two hands are unaffected – although they do not lose a yard of reach, the bearer attacks and parries with them normally."
__________________
"It is easier to banish a habit of thought than a piece of knowledge." H. Beam Piper This forum got less aggravating when I started using the ignore feature Last edited by Polydamas; 05-04-2014 at 05:15 AM. Reason: Moderated tone |
|
05-04-2014, 07:38 AM | #9 | |||
Fightin' Round the World
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New Jersey
|
Re: Focused Defense Discussion
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I think so too, but for some weapons (staff, spear) it shouldn't bother it at all, and I didn't want to get into hairsplitting which two handed weapons are deleteriously affected and which aren't. Easier to be nice to all of them then decide one by one which is penalized, IMO. Two hands? You're good, but your presented arm is -0 to hit.
__________________
Peter V. Dell'Orto aka Toadkiller_Dog or TKD My Author Page My S&C Blog My Dungeon Fantasy Game Blog "You fall onto five death checks." - Andy Dokachev |
|||
05-04-2014, 07:50 AM | #10 | ||
Fightin' Round the World
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New Jersey
|
Re: Focused Defense Discussion
Quote:
Quote:
If you don't like it, though, ditch the whole (it's optional!) or ditch the reach penalty and just keep to "to hit" penalties. It'll still work. The original form of the rule used that and it was fine; the reach stuff was added as it was clear that it was silly that you could deny right with a short weapon and still strike someone normally with it. You could probably replace that Reach penalty with a -2 to hit (no matter what the reach of the weapon) and get a "close enough" effect.
__________________
Peter V. Dell'Orto aka Toadkiller_Dog or TKD My Author Page My S&C Blog My Dungeon Fantasy Game Blog "You fall onto five death checks." - Andy Dokachev |
||
Tags |
author explanation, combat, focused defense, house rules, martial arts: gladiators, optional rules, rules |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|