Help implementing spotting feints

Pg 101 of Martial Arts says that the GM should not tell the players when an npc successfully feints. He should lead them to believe the npc just missed.

Does this mean that he just missed his normal attack? Or missed his feint roll? And if the former, how do you hide something from your players that requires a quick contest of skills?

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Fez

Pg 101 of Martial Arts says that the GM should not tell the players when an npc successfully feints. He should lead them to believe the npc just missed.

Does this mean that he just missed his normal attack? Or missed his feint roll? And if the former, how do you hide something from your players that requires a quick contest of skills?

"missed his feint roll" doesn't actually mean anything. There is no feint roll that can be missed. The former works fine, as a missed attack (in the normal rules) has no effect on the player or player character.


You could partially hide something requiring a quick contest by lying about what the quick contest means, but that doesn't seem to be useful in this case.

[vicky_molokh]

IMHO delaying the Feint contest until the first time when the results of the contest would matter (i.e. right before the Defence roll on the next turn) is the best solution.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

IMHO delaying the Feint contest until the first time when the results of the contest would matter (i.e. right before the Defence roll on the next turn) is the best solution.

That's definitely part of the solution, but you also need to not disclose that there was a feint before that point, which means dissembling about the feinting party's action.

[kenclary]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

That's definitely part of the solution, but you also need to not disclose that there was a feint before that point, which means dissembling about the feinting party's action.

Not necessarily. "He does something tricky to try to make an opening" works as an explanation.

[Bruno]

GM: *rolls some dice, pretends to look at them* "Darth George takes a swing at you and misses!"
*time passes*
GM: "So, Darth George's miss was actually a Feint. Roll to resist!" *Rolls the real roll for Darth George, compares to PCs roll*

[Peter V. Dell'Orto]

Originally Posted by Fez

Pg 101 of Martial Arts says that the GM should not tell the players when an npc successfully feints. He should lead them to believe the npc just missed.

Does this mean that he just missed his normal attack?

As one of the co-authors, I can tell you this with complete certainty: It means "missed his normal attack." Just do & apply the contest of skills retroactively next turn.


I implemented that in my games after we found that knowing the result of the feint skewed the actions of the feinted person. There was a temptation to over-react to a bad feint sometimes. But also a strong feeling that using player knowledge like that was bad so you'd see people stay and suck up the results of the feint even if they had a legitimate in-game reason to have done something different.

With the rule from MA instituted, we'd get fun situations like players hearing "The Black Knight Who Never Misses swings . . . and misses" - and having to decide if Peter threw a 17 behind the GM screen or if they were feinted. Since part of the enjoyment of the game for us is the "tactical skirmish game" element of it all, this really adds to it. And since the GM doesn't know if the feint was good or not, the NPCs equally need to base their next action on the uncertain results of the first action (and any odd reaction to that). Fun stuff.

[kenclary]

Originally Posted by Toadkiller_Dog

I implemented that in my games after we found that knowing the result of the feint skewed the actions of the feinted person. There was a temptation to over-react to a bad feint sometimes. But also a strong feeling that using player knowledge like that was bad so you'd see people stay and suck up the results of the feint even if they had a legitimate in-game reason to have done something different.

With the rule from MA instituted, we'd get fun situations like players hearing "The Black Knight Who Never Misses swings . . . and misses" - and having to decide if Peter threw a 17 behind the GM screen or if they were feinted. Since part of the enjoyment of the game for us is the "tactical skirmish game" element of it all, this really adds to it. And since the GM doesn't know if the feint was good or not, the NPCs equally need to base their next action on the uncertain results of the first action (and any odd reaction to that). Fun stuff.

FWIW, the RAW handling of feints, where people might react with knowledge of a feint, is still tactically sound. The notion that a feint could "force" a retreat, AoD, or some other choice is not actually bad.

It's also not always metagaming. Feints represent many things, including timing tricks, fancy footwork play, and other maneuvering, beyond just fake attacks. Combatants in real life may very know that their balance or timing has been thrown off.

I can see both sides of the argument - and really appreciate having one of the authors chime in on the ruling.

If you go with the rule as written in MA, you're assuming that the results of the feint are unknown to both the attacker and defender until the actual attack is about to be resolved. This prevents meta-gaming, and leaves the results a bit more chancy, much like real combat could be.

But if you roll the results out in the open, the defender will know that he's been feinted - perhaps it's one of those situations we see in fiction where the character does something and immediately realizes it was the wrong thing to do. So he reacts differently, perhaps precipitously, to try to correct for the situation, leaving him unable to capitalize on the actions of his opponent. Again, much like real combat could be.

It may be one of those times where there isn't a "right" answer...

[Peter V. Dell'Orto]

Originally Posted by Fez

It may be one of those times where there isn't a "right" answer...

The right answer is the one you and your group find more fun. Ultimately.