06-26-2021, 09:36 AM | #31 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Pacheco, California
|
Re: Defend and changing options
Defend and especially the super defends increases your chance of being hit by clumsy opponents.
adjDX 5 has a 4.63% chance of hitting on 3 dice, 5.4% on 4 dice, 5.88% on 5 dice, and 6.08% on 6 dice. (Problem is that automatic success increases by 3 points per die while that die only adds an average of 3.5 to the roll. If automatic success only advanced by two the problem wouldn't exist.) See here for the numbers: https://www.hcobb.com/tft/TFT_Saving...rcentages.html
__________________
-HJC Last edited by hcobb; 06-26-2021 at 09:46 AM. |
06-26-2021, 11:06 AM | #32 | ||||
Join Date: Jul 2018
|
Re: Defend and changing options
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Defending is the non-heroic way of fighting, especially if you heavily outnumber the other side. Fights like that are the most common in reality, but very rare (and boring) in RPG's. |
||||
06-27-2021, 08:47 AM | #33 | |||
The Fantasy Trip Line Editor
Join Date: May 2021
|
Re: Defend and changing options
Quote:
Even with aggressive tactics, survival and winning are priorities, and attacking every single TFT turn is not. Even if it were, getting a group in melee to constantly do something seems to me like a theoretical goal that wouldn't often be achieved in reality. Quote:
ST 11 DX 11 (8) Spear 1d, Leather, Large Shield (total 4 hits stopped) AdjDX 8 hits on 4/DX about 1/20 of the time, averaging 0.5 damage/hit. If they do a furious non-stop alternation of attacks like that (which I don't think they actually would do), one of them will tend to fall to ST 3 after they take 8 hits, so 16 spear hits, after 320 attacks, attacking every other turn each, so 640 turns. They may drop from fatigue before they drop from damage. If they both end up at ST 3, they may have a far harder time trying to hurt each other. Of course, examples like that can vary in a lot of ways, and have different assumptions in many ways. Certainly you can also give an example that expects someone to die in 3 turns or less, particularly by reducing armor or increasing adjDX, or using heavier weapons and/or higher-attribute fighters. When one actually plays out even a somewhat large combat in TFT, one other thing that often happens is you get a line of bodies on the ground between the two forces, which becomes a natural deterrent to continuing to charge into battle. The fighters behind the bodies can have good reason to wait for their opponents to advance onto the bodies and suffer -2 or more DX for bad footing. Not to mention that pole arms are at an advantage when foes advance onto them. So even from a game tactics perspective, not rushing into combat every turn can tend to have various advantages, not even considering survival goals, other tactical reasons for delay, or problems getting a group to commit to efficient organized action. Quote:
Avoiding "boredom" is also not the reason (or at least, not the main reason) why I've seen people choose not to defend. Other reasons include wanting to help your group win, wanting to be perceived by comrades as brave and useful (avoiding being seen as passive or "non-heroic", as you put it), and practical and effective tactics which aim to take down foes as quickly as possible (which, when done effectively, can be even more likely to avoid injury than defending). I also mostly play and run campaigns where the GM is not trying to "balance" combat so the PCs will always have an advantage and survive (and also isn't trying to avoid supposedly-boring situations where the PCs have a clear advantage). The logic of the campaign situation, and the choices of the characters and players determine who is fighting whom, as well as what tactics they use. All those reflections aside, I was just remarking that in my experience playing with defending allowed as a response to being attacked, people don't often take that option. It tends to be seen as a coup for the attacker to get their target to use their action defending. |
|||
06-30-2021, 10:30 AM | #35 |
The Fantasy Trip Line Editor
Join Date: May 2021
|
Re: Defend and changing options
|
06-30-2021, 12:35 PM | #36 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Pacheco, California
|
Re: Defend and changing options
A typical PC has adjDX 12 for the leet combat talents, and will be backed by Tactics.
The op force that strikes before them has adjDX 13+ so typically DX 14 (wolves and such). The chance of rolling 14 or less on four dice is 55.63% A fencing defend is -1 DX and five dice so the wolf needs to roll 13 or less on five dice which is still a 15.2% Using a two rapier parry instead is 13 or less on four dice 44.37%, but then the two blades stop four hits so the wolf needs to inflict 5 or more points of damage (half the time for a 1d6+1 attack) for a net 22.19% chance of inflicting damage. (Neglecting the 0.39% chance of double or more damage for now.) Taking Shield Expertise as well reduces the wolf down to adjDX 12 so that the PC strikes first with their very fine rapier (look Ma, no silvers for healing potions) hitting 74.07% of the time for an average of (1d6+3) 6.5 points, or a 2/3rds chance of inflicting the five hits required for a stun adjustment. (That's a 49.38% chance, neglecting double and triple damage as above). The stunned wolf is then DX 14 -1 -1 -2 or adjDX 10 for an even chance of a hit against the two hits stopped by an expert small shield. (I.e. it takes the wolf six turns to take down the fencer with the buckler.)
__________________
-HJC |
06-30-2021, 05:55 PM | #37 |
Join Date: Dec 2017
|
Re: Defend and changing options
You can't 'prove' a general point with a highly specific situational example. What if we are discussing a duel between two heavily armored knights with adjDX of 9 or 10? Now Defend has a good chance of shutting your foe down.
|
06-30-2021, 07:20 PM | #38 |
Join Date: Jun 2019
|
Re: Defend and changing options
Ummmm... if you mean because there's no point picking Dodge or Defend to use against an opponent has already acted, well of course not. That is obviously obvious. Is it still true against multiple opponents of varied adjDX and positions? Just as obviously, no.
__________________
"I'm not arguing. I'm just explaining why I'm right." |
04-11-2022, 06:13 PM | #39 |
Join Date: Jun 2019
|
Re: Defend and changing options
Hexagram 9 - Questions and Answers, now offers more clarity on these deep dark Defend dillies. If you haven't seen it, the pertinent parts are:
The gods have spoken.
__________________
"I'm not arguing. I'm just explaining why I'm right." |
04-11-2022, 09:34 PM | #40 |
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: New England
|
Re: Defend and changing options
That'll be getting a house rule treatment in games I run. It doesn't seem right to me that, by merely appearing to defend, someone can benefit from by having enemies pick an easier target and then turn around and attack anyway.
|
|
|