Beat setup: does a block or parry establish sustained contact until the next second? - Page 3

Plane · 02-02-2021, 01:00 AM

reading MA100 that seems like the intent:

1) if you blocked/parried with a shield/sword you can use the shield/sword to Beat the weapon you successfully defended against
2) if you bashed/stabbed with a shield/sword and it was blocked, you can use the shield/sword to Beat the shield that blocked the attack
3) if you bashed/stabbed with a shield/sword and it was parried, you can use the shield/sword to Beat the sword that parried the attack

Rather than envisioning this like "weapons made contact when a defense was made, contact was broken, then Beat initiated new contact" it seems more like "contact was continuous" was the intention.

This kinda gets weird if you happen to have "Extra Attack" though because in theory you might for example take Committed Attack (get 2 steps), step 1 hex away (out of range to sustain contact between weapons) hit some other guy, then step back and still Beat your foe's weapon.

The "setup" here seems a lot like Judo Throw which suffers from a similar dilemma: all that seems to matter is that you parried your foe's attack the preceding turn and that you're in C-range when delivering the throw, but not that you actually remain in reach of the foe during the intermediate time.

That gets especially weird if you have Move and Attack + Extra Attack since you could move quite a ways away, do something, come back in the same second and then complete the Judo Throw.

This probably works better if we follow the TG suggestion of needing Grabbing Parry to set up Judo Throw because then you can't move away from your foe without either releasing the grapple or being strong enough to drag him along with you.

It seems like maybe the same logic should then apply to Beats. Defensively we might do something like "Grabbing Parry" to set up an Armed Grapple.

Offensively is interesting though because while we do have an example of a grapple riding an attack (bites) that happens on successful attacks while Beat's intended to be allowed as a followup to UNsuccessful ones.

I think the justification there would be if your foe used a Grabbing Parry type defense, because of grapples being mutual you could use the Beat?

Otherwise it's hard to imagine the justification (sustained weapon contact) for the Beat being set up in the next round...

Particularly since after your attack gets parried, and before your next turn where you do the Beat, your foe could make a 5-hex movement.

In the "continuum of combat" type thing, I guess you can just argue the Move and Attack used to get in range to make the Beat after that Move is just "moving with him", but the thing about that is: who says you took the same path?

What if, for example, you took a different path than your Beat target to catch up with them, due to reasons like terrain or avoiding getting in range of dangerous Waiters?

That would work against 'continuous' interpretation: you must've had a gap between you during that time, meaning you must've broke contact between your weapons.

To get a true-instant "I don't already need to have grapple-ish contact to throw off your weapon coordination by hitting it" it seems like we could instead use TG's "Break Free" or Disarm reducing CP on the weapon to induce DX penalties for wielding it, requiring them to "Retain Grip" attack to "Improve" control on it.

Beat almost seems like it should work like "Shoving People Around" except instead of forcing people you've grappled to take steps, you force weapons you've grappled (or are grappling you) into weird position that create penalties for their attacks or defenses.

02-02-2021, 01:00 AM	#1
Plane Join Date: Aug 2018	Beat setup: does a block or parry establish sustained contact until the next second? reading MA100 that seems like the intent: 1) if you blocked/parried with a shield/sword you can use the shield/sword to Beat the weapon you successfully defended against 2) if you bashed/stabbed with a shield/sword and it was blocked, you can use the shield/sword to Beat the shield that blocked the attack 3) if you bashed/stabbed with a shield/sword and it was parried, you can use the shield/sword to Beat the sword that parried the attack Rather than envisioning this like "weapons made contact when a defense was made, contact was broken, then Beat initiated new contact" it seems more like "contact was continuous" was the intention. This kinda gets weird if you happen to have "Extra Attack" though because in theory you might for example take Committed Attack (get 2 steps), step 1 hex away (out of range to sustain contact between weapons) hit some other guy, then step back and still Beat your foe's weapon. The "setup" here seems a lot like Judo Throw which suffers from a similar dilemma: all that seems to matter is that you parried your foe's attack the preceding turn and that you're in C-range when delivering the throw, but not that you actually remain in reach of the foe during the intermediate time. That gets especially weird if you have Move and Attack + Extra Attack since you could move quite a ways away, do something, come back in the same second and then complete the Judo Throw. This probably works better if we follow the TG suggestion of needing Grabbing Parry to set up Judo Throw because then you can't move away from your foe without either releasing the grapple or being strong enough to drag him along with you. It seems like maybe the same logic should then apply to Beats. Defensively we might do something like "Grabbing Parry" to set up an Armed Grapple. Offensively is interesting though because while we do have an example of a grapple riding an attack (bites) that happens on successful attacks while Beat's intended to be allowed as a followup to UNsuccessful ones. I think the justification there would be if your foe used a Grabbing Parry type defense, because of grapples being mutual you could use the Beat? Otherwise it's hard to imagine the justification (sustained weapon contact) for the Beat being set up in the next round... Particularly since after your attack gets parried, and before your next turn where you do the Beat, your foe could make a 5-hex movement. In the "continuum of combat" type thing, I guess you can just argue the Move and Attack used to get in range to make the Beat after that Move is just "moving with him", but the thing about that is: who says you took the same path? What if, for example, you took a different path than your Beat target to catch up with them, due to reasons like terrain or avoiding getting in range of dangerous Waiters? That would work against 'continuous' interpretation: you must've had a gap between you during that time, meaning you must've broke contact between your weapons. To get a true-instant "I don't already need to have grapple-ish contact to throw off your weapon coordination by hitting it" it seems like we could instead use TG's "Break Free" or Disarm reducing CP on the weapon to induce DX penalties for wielding it, requiring them to "Retain Grip" attack to "Improve" control on it. Beat almost seems like it should work like "Shoving People Around" except instead of forcing people you've grappled to take steps, you force weapons you've grappled (or are grappling you) into weird position that create penalties for their attacks or defenses.