Dodge question

[sabanknight]

We are in a game at the moment and was wondering, if attacked from the rear and sides if you are aware of an attack do you have a - to active defences

[Diomedes]

Originally Posted by sabanknight

We are in a game at the moment and was wondering, if attacked from the rear and sides if you are aware of an attack do you have a - to active defences

Normally, you are at -2 to defenses against attacks from your side hexes, and cannot defend against attacks from the rear hex at all. Peripheral vision lets you defend attacks from the sides at no penalty, and the rear at -2. 360º Vison eliminates all penalties.

If your atttacker has done a runaround – moves from your line of sight to behind you and attacks, you have -2 to defend (instead of no defense).

[Crakkerjakk]

Originally Posted by sabanknight

We are in a game at the moment and was wondering, if attacked from the rear and sides if you are aware of an attack do you have a - to active defences

-2 to side hexes, no defense from rear hex. B390-391.

[Gollum]

Did I read it somewhere or did I just dream it?

I've not my books at hand, but I remember that if a character can't dodge an attack he is not aware of (of course), if he is aware of it, he can still dodge an attack from the back, with a -4 penalty.

And I also read that for a runaround attack that ends to the back, the penalty is -2. As from a side hexe (which is logical; it's not really an attack from the back)...

But as I wrote it above, I've not my books at hand, so, these numbers have to be checked.

[Ragitsu]

Originally Posted by Gollum

Did I read it somewhere or did I just dream it?

I've not my books at hand, but I remember that if a character can't dodge an attack he is not aware of (of course), if he is aware of it, he can still dodge an attack from the back, with a -4 penalty.

And I also read that for a runaround attack that ends to the back, the penalty is -2. As from a side hexe (which is logical; it's not really an attack from the back)...

But as I wrote it above, I've not my books at hand, so, these numbers have to be checked.

You are correct about the side Dodge penalty, at least.

[Ulzgoroth]

RAW, you can't dodge an attack from behind, unless it's a runaround attack.

RAW, you can defend against an attacker you can't see. I think that might be a -4 penalty.

I don't know how these go together.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

RAW, you can't dodge an attack from behind

That's not what my rules say. They say that you can, if you are aware of it.

[LemmingLord]

I can just see it now.. My character sneaks up behind someone during battle - his enemy is without any kind of periphereal vision... He cries out his battle cry, "AiyYaiYaiYaiYaI!!!! I'm Going to Kill You Jim!!!!!!!!" - ahhhh, but Jim doesn't get to doge because I came at him from behind. ;)

[Gollum]

Originally Posted by LemmingLord

I can just see it now.. My character sneaks up behind someone during battle - his enemy is without any kind of periphereal vision... He cries out his battle cry, "AiyYaiYaiYaiYaI!!!! I'm Going to Kill You Jim!!!!!!!!" - ahhhh, but Jim doesn't get to doge because I came at him from behind. ;)

Yes!

;-)

Or, more seriously, a foe sneaks behind your character, tries to cut his head off with his huge sword, but a friend of your character suddenly shouts: "On your back!" ... Or the foe just miserably miss his stealth roll...

There are a lot of situations where an attack in the back can realistically be dodged...

Sorry, but I still don't have my books at hand... So I am still unable to say whether my point of view is rules as the are written.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

That's not what my rules say. They say that you can, if you are aware of it.

B391. What's your reference?