Hit from behind

[Sean Waters]

Re: Hit from behind

 

OK, to get very basic:

 

In games I run you can't run around behind people to get combat bonuses* because it's stupid, even if it is technically legal.

 

 

*there are always exceptions: you may be invisible, or somesuch, but in the normal course of events you just can't.

[Gary]

Re: Hit from behind

 

OK, to get very basic:

 

In games I run you can't run around behind people to get combat bonuses* because it's stupid, even if it is technically legal.

 

 

*there are always exceptions: you may be invisible, or somesuch, but in the normal course of events you just can't.

 

 

Would you allow someone with 3" or more Stretching, possibly with extra limbs to get combat bonuses for attacking from behind?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Hit from behind

 

I wasn't really intending to have some complicated set of formulas for where exactly you were in your move when your opponent shot at you, or how many inches of movement you could achieve, based on the difference in DEX scores before your opponent got a chance to shoot.

I just figured that if you chose Move then Shoot, and your Opponent chose Shoot, that they could get off a shot while you moved.

Again, it was not in accordance with the rules, but it did seem to make sense at the time.

 

If the rules don'rt work, they need to be changed. There's lots of other appproaches that can be taken. I would summarize the underlying problem as the need to break up the chaotic flow of combat (everyone is acting at the same time) into discrete manageable chunks for game purposes (each person takes actions in turn). This artificial segregation of actions means a curtailment of reactions to actions.

 

One approach, as I think someone already suggested, would be to break the segment into half phases (best DEX gets an action, next, next, using a half phase only,until we get through all DEXes, then those whose half phase didn't end their phase gets their second half phase action).

 

This would chunk it up a little more, but we'll still wonder why WeaponsMaster (Dex 27) has time to sling his bow, draw his two swords and inflict his Autofire Slash on Beemer (Dex 26) before Beemer can blink to fire his eyebeams.

 

And now we'll ask whether we really think Tar Baby (DEX 3) could really have attacked Speedo (DEX 38) between his 3" Move (of a possible 25" half move) between the sprint and the punch Speedo intended to throw. [but at least there I can explain why, sometimes, Tar baby doesn't retaliate in the comics - he didn't have a phase that segment.]

 

To deal with these, we now need to create timing rules for DEXes that are very close (or not), only using X% of the possible move, what kind of attack each target wants to throw, etc. It could be done, but I agree with you that I don't think I want to play in a game that complex. And there will certainly still be issues within those complex rules that don't mesh perfectly.

 

I'm not arguing that the current system is perfect, but I do think the imperfections are necessitated by the need for a playable system.

 

[ASIDE: I'm reminded of an old IceStar story where a reformed villain is tellling his story. The villain based his tech powers on his gaming character from high school, sort of a rolling pinball gyro-vehicle. He lost to IceStar because IceStar froze his hydraulics, then leaped out of his path. It never occured to the villain to plan for that because "In the game, you can't move right after you attack".]

 

I am not trying to argue with you, since my debate is between myself and my own understanding of the rules, but . . .

according to what I think are the official rules, what you suggest would be entirely within them.

 

If someone who has a drawn weapon pointing in the general direction of an opponent, does not have time to tighten their finger on a trigger before that opponent can run the length of a football field and tackle them, then how would they have time to shift their entire body around to a new facing?

 

I know that is an extreme example, and I am not trying to be snarky toward you, but "stasis" seems fairly accurate as far as the rules are written.

 

It comes down to a matter of interpretation. Although we have a combat modifier that says "attacked from behind", there is no official rule for what facing is "behind" at any given moment in time.

 

With that in mind, I look to a common sense interpretation. Common sense tells me that I can reasonably allow the defender to visually track his opponent while he moves, so his opponent can't take a leisurely stroll from right flank to directly behind, then attack the target "from behind". It doesn't complicate my game to accept that facing changes are automatic actions which can be taken at any time (just as I would allow the target to speak, despite the fact it's not his phase), and failure to allow this not only hurts any "realism", but also harms the game itself (no one is ever NOT at half DCV, since virtually all attacks will be preceded by a half move to be "behind the target").

 

Defense maneuver is always an option, but I don't want it to be mandatory for every character, and besides, if it's the only way to get your full DCV, it's probably way too cheap.

 

So I would reserve "attacked from behind" for situations where the opponent is unable to take reasonable action to prevent being disadvantaged by the location of his opponent. That may include multiple opponents attacking. It would certainly include being attacked by an unexpected, unperceived opponent. It would not include a character moving a couple of hexes around the target.

 

I think d20 gets this more or less right - there's no drawback to where one opponent is located, unless another takes the opposite position so you can't watch them both at once.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Hit from behind

 

One has to accept the abstract of combat meshing with the concrete timing of a person's phase. We accept that one character moves at a time because allocating a 5 SPD character's 20" flight per phase into 200,000 discrete millimeters of movement over the turn is impractical.

 

To assume the other characters are held in stasis, however, is excessive.

 

In any case, if one accepts your premise that character A can use his phase to "run around behind my opponent and attack him", then his opponent should be able to "run around behind Character A and attack him" when his phase comes up - and Character A is in "between phases stasis".

 

With this in mind, why waste points on DCV? It's very inefficienct when it will always be halved anyway. May as well use lots of DCV halving maneuvers as well, since your DCV will always be cut in half in any case.

Technically true, but I find it realistic and more dramatic to confer some kind of penalties when a target is, say, stuck between a wall of archers on one side and a menacing spearman on the other (that is, without all of the attackers having to Coordinate). The target is completely aware of all attackers and fully expects them all to be attacking him/her. Giving the target a choice of which way to face and presenting a--relatively minor--bonus of +1 to +2 OCV to attackers who aren't in front of him has always been a good compromise to me. It replaces the surprise DCV penalty in this kind of situation; it never stacks with the surprise penalty. Just the way I handle it.

[Zeropoint]

Re: Hit from behind

 

That seems like a workable, balanced, and realistic approach to me.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Hit from behind

 

Technically true' date=' but I find it realistic and more dramatic to confer some kind of penalties when a target is, say, stuck between a wall of archers on one side and a menacing spearman on the other (that is, without all of the attackers having to Coordinate). The target is completely aware of all attackers and fully expects them all to be attacking him/her. Giving the target a choice of which way to face and presenting a--relatively minor--bonus of +1 to +2 OCV to attackers who aren't in front of him has always been a good compromise to me. It replaces the surprise DCV penalty in this kind of situation; it never stacks with the surprise penalty. Just the way [i']I[/i] handle it.

 

I think this is fair and reasonable - when there are opponents on both sides, the target clearly is at a disadvantage. It's not any more reasonable to place the attackers in "between phase stasis" so the defender can adjust to face each attacker independently than it is to place the defender in "between phase stasis" and let his opponent move into his blind spot.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Hit from behind

 

One way to address the apparent iniquity of this is to call off actions as half phases.

 

I would instead suggest to keep in mind that all actions in a Segment or Phase are simultaneous, and that even though it is the attacker's turn to act, his target is still in motion and can keep him in view.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Hit from behind

 

Would you allow someone with 3" or more Stretching' date=' possibly with extra limbs to get combat bonuses for attacking from behind?[/quote']

 

Not unless he can convince me it is a suprise manouvre.

[RDU Neil]

Re: Hit from behind

 

Before we stopped using the SPD chart, I'd been breaking actions down into "half phases" all the time. I did it for exactly the reason that KA states. If two characters who would otherwise act simultaneously (same SPD and DEX, etc.) go after eachother. One needs to move and strike, the other just needs to shoot. The shot goes off before the strike.

 

If move and strike guy is faster (DEX) but going in same phase the slower guy who just needs to shoot would get the shot off, and likely at point blank range because the move would happen brining them into HtH range, then the shot... before second phase actions could take place.

 

This worked fine for us... as most of the time supers have massively higher SPDs than normals, so closing and pounding a thug isn't a problem... but if your martial artist is going up against an equally skilled opponent, such a maneuver is much more risky.

 

Worked just fine and didn't slow things down at all. (We also played with the -1 for a half move rule for years after 4th came out, not realizing the rule was gone.)

 

We also felt this balanced out a perceived (maybe not real, but we felt it was real) lack of benefit to ranged attacks. That closing and attacking was just as efficient as simply pulling a trigger didn't set well with us... but this was mostly fueled by heroic level, "realistic" type campaigns... not supers.

 

(As for the "close 20 feet before they draw their gun" situation... that is moot because the rules say "close 20 feet before the guy who has braced and set with his assault rifle and is fully prepared and aware of your attack can simply pull the trigger" That is a big difference.)

[bigdamnhero]

Re: Hit from behind

 

(As for the "close 20 feet before they draw their gun" situation... that is moot because the rules say "close 20 feet before the guy who has braced and set with his assault rifle and is fully prepared and aware of your attack can simply pull the trigger" That is a big difference.)

Exactly. I have no problem believing that High Dex Guy can 1/2 move and attack before Low Dex Guy can draw and fire; the question is whether HDG can 1/2 move and attack before LDG can fire a weapon that's already readied.

 

I usually handle this by allowing LDG to make a Dex roll to see if he can react to HDG's move in time to get a shot off before HDG closes. (I suppose you could make it an opposed Dex roll if you really wanted to.) If LDG was set or had a held action I would probably give him the shot automatically. Now if HDG was a 40" Speedster who was only 3" away, I probably wouldn't bother because that's the whole point of being a speedster.

 

I know this is kinda like allowing abort-to-an-attack, which could potentially open up a whole `nother can of worms. But for this very narrow set of circumstances, I think it works without cluttering up the turn sequence too much.

 

As for attacking from behind, only if there's some reason why the defender wouldn't logically turn to face the attacker, typically because he's engaged with another opponent.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Hit from behind

 

(As for the "close 20 feet before they draw their gun" situation... that is moot because the rules say "close 20 feet before the guy who has braced and set with his assault rifle and is fully prepared and aware of your attack can simply pull the trigger" That is a big difference.)

 

Why doesn't he have a reserved phase? That's what "fully prepared" would imply to me.

 

I don't have a problem with this approach in theory, but in practice you now have to draw the line somewhere. Why can DEX 30 guy draw his bow, select, notch and fire an arrow before the same guy with the assault rifle, who has a 29 DEX, can pull the trigger?

 

One approach I would consider is permitting any character, at any time, to Hurry, and to use Hurry multiple times, with stacking penalties. He couldn't Hurry to shoot before a character who has already announced his attack. However, when Mr. Assault Rifle is charged, he could announce "I'll Hurry to shoot before that guy gets to me". He then starts rolling 1d6 at a time. When his DEX + those Hurry d6's exceeds the DEX on which the charging character started moving, he counts the d6's, applies the Hurry penalty for that many Hurry's, and fires.

 

To me, this has a few advantages:

 

(a) It provides for Assault Rifle Guy (ARG) to be able to pull the trigger

 

( It restricts the situation to circumstances where ARG has a phase in the same segment

 

© ARG takes a penalty for accelerating his action, so there is a cost to him.

 

(d) for widely divergent DEX scores, the odds of hitting are remote, so Joe Thug (11 DEX) isn't going to his Speedster (35 DEX) with this tactic very easily (on average, he'll have rolled 7d6 to Hurry), but two evenly matched opponents (both 35 DEX) will be much less punitive with only 1d6 rolled.

 

It is a limited form of "abort to attack", but within that parameter, I think it works reasonably well.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Hit from behind

 

Yeah. That kind of situation can be covered with Delayed (Half-)Phases, the Fast Draw skill (when appropriate), and maneuvers such as Hurry and Hipshot. Those, in a sense, are like, "abort to attack," actions. They just don't let you attack at any time, which would create an action mess IMHO.

[RDU Neil]

Re: Hit from behind

 

Yeah. That kind of situation can be covered with Delayed (Half-)Phases' date=' the Fast Draw skill (when appropriate), and maneuvers such as Hurry and Hipshot. Those, in a sense, [i']are[/i] like, "abort to attack," actions. They just don't let you attack at any time, which would create an action mess IMHO.

 

Yes they could... but IMO only... a clean, succinct interpretation of "half phases" which is a long standing Hero mechanic is much more intuitive and effective than trying to apply a bunch of convoluted skills and complicated late edition maneuvers which are highly situational and full of exceptions.

 

Highly complicated way to balance out the head scratching "what the?" issue when Dex 14 guy runs 20 feet and punches before Dex 13 guy can pull the trigger.

 

All I'm saying is that doing the half-phase thing works just fine in play from my experience.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Hit from behind

 

It's perfectly legal to move around behind someone and take a shot at their back, or to use indirect / partially indirect attacks (including Stretching and Telekinesis) to accomplish the same thing.

 

It also makes perfect sense for highly mobile characters to do this -- they've paid some amount of points to be extra mobile. It makes total thematic sense for a speedster character to zoom around slower opponents and pop them one in the back of the head, for instance.

 

Similarly it makes perfect sense for a character using Acrobatics to flip and cavort around an opponent and land an attack from behind.

 

Targets of such a manuever can Abort to a Block or Dodge and change their facing as part of that -- it's primary purpose is to improve their DCV vs an opponent which falls squarely into the realm of a "defensive action".

 

There's a sample fight here wherein one of the characters (Nova) aborts several times to avoid being attacked from behind by the other character (Namorita). http://www.herocentral.net/readStoryThread.htm?postId=486927&campaignId=480875

 

The Defense Manuever Skill is a direct defense against this, allowing a character to shift facing and avoid being hit from behind. Characters / players that are concerned about it should buy that Skill.

 

 

All that having been said, players that abuse it for purely metagame reasons are just being cheesy. It's up to the GM to control metagaming / twinkiness in their game. If a player abuses it, try talking to them and asking them to use the tactic when it makes sense and is situationally appropriate.

 

You can also point out that it may not be an appropriate tactic for characters with certain Psychological Limitations that are common in some genres such as "Honorable" and "Code of the HERO".

 

If all else fails, the GM can take a wide range of tacts to mitigate / correct the abuse.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Hit from behind

 

(As for the "close 20 feet before they draw their gun" situation... that is moot because the rules say "close 20 feet before the guy who has braced and set with his assault rifle and is fully prepared and aware of your attack can simply pull the trigger" That is a big difference.)

 

Such a gunman would be holding an action or covering the target if he gets to shoot first. If not, he may make use of the Hurry or Hip Shot maneuvers to act before his attacker. Otherwise he's just holding his gun and is still in the process of aiming. Granted, this is here primarily for the purpose of game balance, but reality does continue to support it, if in theory if not in actuality. I have no doubt that I, if holding a gun and pointing down a hallway suddenly found a crazred madman running toward me, I could fire off a few shots before he reached me.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Hit from behind

 

I usually handle this by allowing LDG to make a Dex roll to see if he can react to HDG's move in time to get a shot off before HDG closes. (I suppose you could make it an opposed Dex roll if you really wanted to.) If LDG was set or had a held action I would probably give him the shot automatically. Now if HDG was a 40" Speedster who was only 3" away, I probably wouldn't bother because that's the whole point of being a speedster.

 

Sounds similar to the mechanc for the Hurry maneuver.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Hit from behind

 

It's perfectly legal to move around behind someone and take a shot at their back, or to use indirect / partially indirect attacks (including Stretching and Telekinesis) to accomplish the same thing.

 

It also makes perfect sense for highly mobile characters to do this -- they've paid some amount of points to be extra mobile. It makes total thematic sense for a speedster character to zoom around slower opponents and pop them one in the back of the head, for instance.

 

Similarly it makes perfect sense for a character using Acrobatics to flip and cavort around an opponent and land an attack from behind.

 

Targets of such a manuever can Abort to a Block or Dodge and change their facing as part of that -- it's primary purpose is to improve their DCV vs an opponent which falls squarely into the realm of a "defensive action".

 

There's a sample fight here wherein one of the characters (Nova) aborts several times to avoid being attacked from behind by the other character (Namorita). http://www.herocentral.net/readStoryThread.htm?postId=486927&campaignId=480875

 

The Defense Manuever Skill is a direct defense against this, allowing a character to shift facing and avoid being hit from behind. Characters / players that are concerned about it should buy that Skill.

 

 

All that having been said, players that abuse it for purely metagame reasons are just being cheesy. It's up to the GM to control metagaming / twinkiness in their game. If a player abuses it, try talking to them and asking them to use the tactic when it makes sense and is situationally appropriate.

 

You can also point out that it may not be an appropriate tactic for characters with certain Psychological Limitations that are common in some genres such as "Honorable" and "Code of the HERO".

 

If all else fails, the GM can take a wide range of tacts to mitigate / correct the abuse.

 

 

I can see the strength and sense of the argument but still I disagree. If someone with a high move rate used those 27" of running in an inventive way (say they run away, out of sight, round a building and back coming up on the blindside) then they get a surprise manouvre bonus of +1 to +3, and if they try it again, the target may well guess and spin on them as they come back around, catching the runner with a surprise manouvre.

 

The trouble is with being sensible and saying that lots of running is very genre appropriate for getting behind opponent and getting a bonus is: what is the cut off point?

 

I mean even your basic 6" running allows you to get behind an opponent you are in melee with as a half move, but that doesn't seem worth a bonus. What sort of run, or speed, do you need to get that bonus?

 

My preferred option, if someone wants to do this is:

 

+4 melee skill levels (20 active points) LINKED to running/flight/teleport (-1/2) for 13 real points. You can make it cost END too if you like, or make it RSR (acrobatics roll).

 

Running allows you to get from A to B fast and do scads of move through damage. In the normal course of events it (and powers like stretching, extra limbs, shapeshift) don't, and I'd say shouldn't, automatically give OCV bonuses. I may be a skinflint, but it has the advantage of consistency, at least.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Hit from behind

 

It's perfectly legal to move around behind someone and take a shot at their back' date=' or to use indirect / partially indirect attacks (including Stretching and Telekinesis) to accomplish the same thing.[/quote']

True. But I think the point is that such cases should be the minority. Situational modifiers for that type of thing should be awarded for difficult and imaginative uses (and surprise/unusual circumstances), not for every single attack roll. Just about every character has enough movement to move around the target every single Phase and attack from behind. That's what I'd rather focus my baseline rules around, and come up with exceptional, optional, or even judgement call rules for...

It also makes perfect sense for highly mobile characters to do this -- they've paid some amount of points to be extra mobile. It makes total thematic sense for a speedster character to zoom around slower opponents and pop them one in the back of the head, for instance.

...those types of situations. That's why I do things like allow modifiers for the second and successive attacks of a Move By and such. See my previous posts.

 

Similarly it makes perfect sense for a character using Acrobatics to flip and cavort around an opponent and land an attack from behind.

Every time they attack? Not likely. As a surprise maneuver (or when taking advantage of unusual situations like tricky terrain) I'm fine with it.

 

Targets of such a manuever can Abort to a Block or Dodge and change their facing as part of that -- it's primary purpose is to improve their DCV vs an opponent which falls squarely into the realm of a "defensive action".

Agreed. But they shouldn't have to all the time in ordinary combat. Aborts are a tremendously useful thing and should not be undervalued, but if a simple combat becomes a huge sequence of Aborts by whoever doesn't act first, or by both/all combatants, I think the play experience is going to get rather tedious and frustrating. I don't want Aborts to turn into the Hero analogy of ridiculous D&D Attacks of Opportunity.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Hit from behind

 

I can see the strength and sense of the argument but still I disagree. If someone with a high move rate used those 27" of running in an inventive way (say they run away, out of sight, round a building and back coming up on the blindside) then they get a surprise manouvre bonus of +1 to +3, and if they try it again, the target may well guess and spin on them as they come back around, catching the runner with a surprise manouvre.

 

The trouble is with being sensible and saying that lots of running is very genre appropriate for getting behind opponent and getting a bonus is: what is the cut off point?

 

I mean even your basic 6" running allows you to get behind an opponent you are in melee with as a half move, but that doesn't seem worth a bonus. What sort of run, or speed, do you need to get that bonus?

 

Im not saying that it takes "lots of running" to make it genre appropriate, Im saying that

a) its mechanically how the game works. If you have a enough movement to get behind someone you hit them at 1/2 DCV. It doesnt matter if you move 1" or 27" to accomplish this.

and

there are in-character circumstances that make it a valid and appropriate tactic, and there are some SFX and character concepts for which it is particularly common / appropriate.

 

 

 

 

My preferred option, if someone wants to do this is:

 

+4 melee skill levels (20 active points) LINKED to running/flight/teleport (-1/2) for 13 real points. You can make it cost END too if you like, or make it RSR (acrobatics roll).

 

Running allows you to get from A to B fast and do scads of move through damage. In the normal course of events it (and powers like stretching, extra limbs, shapeshift) don't, and I'd say shouldn't, automatically give OCV bonuses. I may be a skinflint, but it has the advantage of consistency, at least.

 

I disagree. I've run this as its written in the book for 16 years and never had a major problem with it. There has been the occasional person that overused / abused the tactic but they were easily dealt with and taught the error of their cheesy ways.

 

In general I don't mind a player using the tactic about once per TURN or so, particularly if they've tried hitting an opponent a couple of times and found their DCV to be too high. If they try it every single Phase or rely on it as a key element of their combat repetoire its pretty egregious.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Hit from behind

 

True. But I think the point is that such cases should be the minority.

In your opinion, which I don't share.

Situational modifiers for that type of thing should be awarded for difficult and imaginative uses (and surprise/unusual circumstances), not for every single attack roll. Just about every character has enough movement to move around the target every single Phase and attack from behind. That's what I'd rather focus my baseline rules around, and come up with exceptional, optional, or even judgement call rules for...

I think the assumption is that there are things that you can do which isnt necessarily the same as things that you should or would do.

 

You're supposed to take actions with your character that are appropriate for that character, make sense, contribute to the telling of a cinematic adventure story, and otherwise add to the overall play experience of yourself and the group.

 

This doesn't mean you can't also take actions that are tactically and mechanically sound, but it does mean that you should balance the two.

 

Having your character jig around to smack people in the back is mechanically and tactically sound, and is logically sound as well -- you are attacking people from outside their field of vision and from a direction that a persons body is not configured to be responsive to.

 

Whether or not it is suitable to weaving a particular character's tapestry of exploits or not will vary from character to character, but in general "run around and hit you in the back every action" is not very exciting, fun, evocative, or contributory to a fun playing experience.

 

 

The HERO System is not a nanny. It's not there to make you "behave", hold your hand, protect you from yourself, or otherwise keep the training wheels on.

 

Nevertheless mature roleplayers should be able to find a happy balance between what the rules will let you do and what it is appropriate to do themselves. This is as true of using / exploiting the combat modifier chart as it is of any other facet of the HERO System that is open to abuse (which is quite a lot of it).

 

 

If you think 1/2 DCV is too much, fine and well. I don't -- I think the rules as written work well in the general case across genres and its up to the GM to arbitrate specific uses / abuses of it.

[Vanguard]

Re: Hit from behind

 

A couple of thoughts:

 

1) This points out one aspect of Hero combat that annoys me (now that I am doing it 'by the book').

I used to assume (incorrectly) that if you have two characters 10 hexes apart,

both with the same SPD,

if the character with the higher DEX decides to do a Move-by, Move-through, or just close to HTH range and Punch,

that the lower DEX character could get off a Ranged attack while the higher DEX character was moving.

 

 

KA.

 

Actually, my GM does it that way and has all the time. Granted, he KNOWS the "proper" way to do it but it makes more sense to do it the other way.

 

It means there's a lot more thinking in combat. I mean, I'm not going to just blindly charge that guy standing in the hallway with a pistol because I know he's going to get a chance to shoot me as I do it.

 

I think it makes characters think a bit more.

 

It DOES have it's draw backs, sorta, for things like Move-bys, passing strikes, etc but I beleive the rulling he made was "If your half move is enough to get you there, you can make the attack without fear of reprisal."

 

I could be wrong, in either case I think it helps more then it hinders (IE: IT does slow combat down a bit more but you only really notice it if you're playing Champions and are dealing with speeds of 5+).

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Hit from behind

 

In your opinion, which I don't share.

 

I think the assumption is that there are things that you can do which isnt necessarily the same as things that you should or would do.

 

You're supposed to take actions with your character that are appropriate for that character, make sense, contribute to the telling of a cinematic adventure story, and otherwise add to the overall play experience of yourself and the group.

 

This doesn't mean you can't also take actions that are tactically and mechanically sound, but it does mean that you should balance the two.

 

Having your character jig around to smack people in the back is mechanically and tactically sound, and is logically sound as well -- you are attacking people from outside their field of vision and from a direction that a persons body is not configured to be responsive to.

 

Given the level of advantage provided by halving a target's DCV, and the ease with which a simple half move can nomally place the attacker behind the defender, does it make sense for any character of average or above intelligence, combat experience and/or tactial skill to refrain from moving around behind his opponent at every conceivable opportunity? To me, if such an advantage is so easily gained, it is too foolish to pas up. Attacking while blind is extremely disadvantageous, and I would not expect a character to pass on the significant advantage provided by opening his eyes. If it is almost as easy to obtain a comparable advantage simply by moving 3 hexes from "in front of" to "behind" an opponent, it seems unreasonable to now suggest a competent character would not seek to access such an advantage.

 

Whether or not it is suitable to weaving a particular character's tapestry of exploits or not will vary from character to character' date=' but in general "run around and hit you in the back every action" is not very exciting, fun, evocative, or contributory to a fun playing experience.[/quote']

 

Here, we agree. In my opinion, if any rule strongly encourages actions which are not very exciting, fun, evocative, or contributory to a fun playing experience, then either that rule is being misinterpreted or misapplied, or it ought to be changed.

[Legendsmiths]

Re: Hit from behind

 

I will echo Ghost Raven and Killer Shrike. This is not a broken mechanic. In real life if you try to move behind someone, which you can do, they will see it and only an idiot wouldn't abort to Dodge/Block or Hurry to beat your action. If you have targets that just sit there and take it, then you are the one that isn't reacting realistically. If I had a gun and was staring across a room at an opponent without a ranged weapon who I knew was intent on coming to get me, I would most definitely "Hurry" to be sure I got my shot off. If I had a melee weapon, I would still "Hurry" so I could hold my action and hit him when he got to me. Even if I tag him and don't drop him, I've established the length of the engagement and if my weapon is longer he will take an OCV penalty to hit me.

 

If you are looking to alter the rules to handle the half-move & attack before the guy with the readied weapon can attack is to allow a Hurry action to be declared after the half-move is declared. If used in this manner, it would require a contest of DEX to see if you can interrupt, just as if you had a held action.

 

One thing to keep in mind about the half-move/attack vs. readied action is what are the SPDs of each character. Taking an extreme, to illustrate a point, a SPD 2 character "pokey" vs. SPD 12 "speedy" and Speed has a higher DEX. Speedy is going to do a half-move and attack in Seg 6 and Pokey is going to fire his pistol, if he can. The reason this works is technically it Pokey's reactions are such that he can barely react to make 2 phases per 12 seconds. While the length of his action isn't techically 6 seconds, Speedy's actions are certainly fast.

 

If you put 2 characters in the middle of the map and have them slug it out until one guy falls, don't complain that the system has a boring combat system or that it doesn't support creative actions. Hurry, Hipshot, and aborts are all there to prevent things like the half-move/attack vs. readied from happening.

 

In all my years of play this has never been a problem. No one should really be able to pull this off, and if they do it should only work once. Every other bad guy who sees this is going to hold his action to see what the character is going to do since he's so "unpredictable". A successful Block will fix his red wagon since he loses initiative (assuming the next action is in the same segment).

[Legendsmiths]

Re: Hit from behind

 

I will point out however, in the text for Surprised (which attacks from behind fall under):

 

5ER 381

"The GM should interpret the phrase "expecting any attacks" in a common-sense fashion. Obviously, anyone who's in combat expects to be attacked so in most cases other attackers entering the fray won't inflict the Suprised penalty. However, it's possible for a character in combat to {be surprised}: - attacker sneaks up behind via Stealth, - ordinary character suddenly reveals superhuman nature, - sniper finally shoots. On the other hand, if the character has good reason to suspect the presense of a sneaky attacker... Suprised probably wouldn't apply."

 

I think that's pretty clear that unless you use Acrobatics and have the leap to succeed, running around a target doesn't give you the Suprised bonus.

[RDU Neil]

Re: Hit from behind

 

 

Here, we agree. In my opinion, if any rule strongly encourages actions which are not very exciting, fun, evocative, or contributory to a fun playing experience, then either that rule is being misinterpreted or misapplied, or it ought to be changed.

 

 

BING BING bing!

 

This is a perfect, small scale example of "System Matters". Theory in practice.

 

If the game is intended to portray a dynamic, cinematic battle of kicks and punches and elbow shots and leg sweeps that reflect real life and movies and such... but what ends up is a portrayal of a bizarre dancing dosie-doe of "dance around your partner hit 'em in the back... then he dances around you and hits you in the back... repeat!"

 

... well then the system is not supporting the intent. This piece of the system... this rule... needs to be clarified, reinterpreted or changed.