Forcing a Step Backward

[Nolgroth]

There have been a lot of threads about D&D 4th, but one thing that got me thinking was the "shift" ability that is built into a couple of powers. Whatever it actually means, I took it as the ability to force the opponent back one (or more) steps. This is a pretty brilliant idea actually, as many times in my gaming career, I have been puzzled at how two swordsmen stay in the exact same spot for the entire battle. Seems rather static and not very fun. In every sword battle I have ever seen on the silver screen, the two combatants move around a lot.

 

So how would you build the ability to "force" somebody to give ground? My own brain has not engaged on this one, so any helpful ideas would be appreciated.

[BoneDaddy]

Re: Forcing a Step Backward

 

A limited shove linked to the strike? Limited knockback?

[Trebuchet]

Re: Forcing a Step Backward

 

People fall back in HtH combat because it makes it harder for the attacker to hit them, so I'd approach this from the other end: Provide a small DCV bonus (maybe +1) for falling back and what you want will follow naturally. Of course, at some point the character backing up will need to stop - he'll back into a wall or be on the edge of a cliff - but this should still make your combats much more mobile.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Forcing a Step Backward

 

Another aspect to consider is weapon length and/or skill disparity.

 

If one combatant has a dagger and is facing someone armed with a sword they should quickly surmise that they are already at a disadvantage assuming equal combat skill. I think Fantasy Hero addresses this by giving the sword wielder a +1 OCV until the dagger wielder scores a hit. From that point on the dagger wielder is in 'knife-fighting range' and gets the +1 OCV instead of the sword wielder.

 

A similar concept can be used for different skill levels of fighters. The better skilled combatant will usually do better if being aggressive and the lesser skilled combatant will do better to be defensive (by backing up or retreating).

 

I would treat this retreat a little different than a full or half move though. If the retreating character is not changing his facing (not giving the attacker a free shot at his back) he may not have a complete view of the terrain behind him and might trip on a small object. I would restrict this type movement to 1-2" in a heroic game.

[CTaylor]

Re: Forcing a Step Backward

 

There's a couple ways of doing this, you can either build it as a martial arts maneuver (the shove maneuver forces the target back 1") or a knockback only effect on an attack, or a telekinetic push, or extra strength to move someone bodily back, or my favorite weird way of doing this: teleport, running, or flight as an attack 1" (very cheap, incidentally).

[braincraft]

Re: Forcing a Step Backward

 

If you want to enforce genre conventions, you could also use a carrot instead of a stick.

 

How about swordsmen buying skill levels limited 'only against stationary targets' or 'only against targets who are not retreating'. That makes it a smart thing to use your half-move to back up, flank, or perform crazy acrobatic maneuvers.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Forcing a Step Backward

 

There's a couple ways of doing this' date=' you can either build it as a martial arts maneuver (the shove maneuver forces the target back 1") or a knockback only effect on an attack, or a telekinetic push, or extra strength to move someone bodily back, or my favorite weird way of doing this: teleport, running, or flight as an attack 1" (very cheap, incidentally).[/quote']

 

Basically the way I look at it. X" Teleport, Useable As Attack, linked to (whatever), must cross intervening space.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: Forcing a Step Backward

 

People fall back in HtH combat because it makes it harder for the attacker to hit them' date=' so I'd approach this from the other end: Provide a small DCV bonus (maybe +1) for falling back and what you want will follow naturally. Of course, at some point the character backing up will need to stop - he'll back into a wall or be on the edge of a cliff - but this should still make your combats much more mobile.[/quote']

 

That's what we've done for years. Works out well and the player can actually maneuver interestingly around the battlefield by choosing which direction he retreats in. Combats end up being much more dynamic. I give them the 1 hex of movement in the retreat free as well as let the attacker follow them 1 hex for free. Gets everyone's Errol Flynn up!.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Forcing a Step Backward

 

Normally in the HERO System you move and then attack. Attacks end your move. This does make a static fight more likely however, as you cite.

 

 

One thing you can do, as the GM, is just modify the Attack ends phase a bit and allow a small adjustment after an attack. To keep it from being too abusive, I recommend you keep it simple and fixed. For instance you can allow melee attackers the following options immediately following a normal 1/2 Phase Attack:

 

1) Hold Fast: stay in the hex they are in

2) Follow Up: if the opponent was knocked down or back, the attacker can chose to move 1" forward towards the victim of their attack for free. Don't worry about max movement for the phase, etc.

3) Pull Back: Move one hex away from their victim, maintaining facing.

 

A Dex roll at -1 (similar to a D4C) might be appropriate for a Pull Back if you so choose; if they fail they either don't pull back or else lose their balance and suffer a DCV penalty, or both -- as seems more fun to you (pick one method and stick with it).

 

Some ramifications of allowing the Pull Back option --> defenders with Full Phase melee attacks will have a more difficult time of it, and any character built around the idea of soaking an attack and then responding with a full phase attack will be hosed. So, in other words, some "Brick" oriented characters would have a harder time of it.

[CTaylor]

Re: Forcing a Step Backward

 

I give them the 1 hex of movement in the retreat free as well as let the attacker follow them 1 hex for free. Gets everyone's Errol Flynn up!.

 

That's a good house rule, gets people in motion a bit more. Although if you add in the optional zone of control rules from Fantasy Hero people are a bit less likely to move around in combat.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Forcing a Step Backward

 

That's what we've done for years. Works out well and the player can actually maneuver interestingly around the battlefield by choosing which direction he retreats in. Combats end up being much more dynamic. I give them the 1 hex of movement in the retreat free as well as let the attacker follow them 1 hex for free. Gets everyone's Errol Flynn up!.

A smart character could also use her defensive retreat to maneuver her opponent into a less advantageous position - perhaps a narrow area in which it is difficult to use large weapons or out onto a narrow balcony when the defending character has Absolute Balance. Not every retrograde motion has to be an actual retreat.

[Maur]

Re: Forcing a Step Backward

 

I'm not retreating. I'm advancing in a new direction.

[Captain Obvious]

Re: Forcing a Step Backward

 

Some ramifications of allowing the Pull Back option --> defenders with Full Phase melee attacks will have a more difficult time of it, and any character built around the idea of soaking an attack and then responding with a full phase attack will be hosed. So, in other words, some "Brick" oriented characters would have a harder time of it.

 

They'll just have to maneuver the enemy into a good position before opening up with that full phase attack. We can sell it as "tactical richness".

[Wildcat]

Re: Forcing a Step Backward

 

Someone here may want to check out the Valdorian Age Pg 105... Look for 'Force Back' under 'Sword Stunts'

 

 

Just an idea

[Sean Waters]

Re: Forcing a Step Backward

 

I would think this sort of thing is very dependent on play style. Unless you are using some sort of minatures, tracking small scale movement is probably a pain in the neck.

 

If you are tracking position though I'd suggest this:

 

You can house rule that if a character is hit in combat then they have to take a step back or suffer a -1OCV until next phase. This leaves the choice with the attacked character - they don't have to back up - but if they don't or can't then they will be at a disadvantage. The attacking character can follow as a free action immediately after the attack.

 

You could create a new non-exclusive basis for custom martial art maneouvres that forces an opponent back 1" either on a STR v STR roll or on any hit.

[Nolgroth]

Re: Forcing a Step Backward

 

People fall back in HtH combat because it makes it harder for the attacker to hit them' date=' so I'd approach this from the other end: Provide a small DCV bonus (maybe +1) for falling back and what you want will follow naturally. Of course, at some point the character backing up will need to stop - he'll back into a wall or be on the edge of a cliff - but this should still make your combats much more mobile.[/quote']That's not a bad idea. Terrain should play a feature in combat and while backing up may give the defender a bonus, it could also play into the attacker's hand as well.

 

That's what we've done for years. Works out well and the player can actually maneuver interestingly around the battlefield by choosing which direction he retreats in. Combats end up being much more dynamic. I give them the 1 hex of movement in the retreat free as well as let the attacker follow them 1 hex for free. Gets everyone's Errol Flynn up!.

Nice. Pretty much what I am thinking. It wouldn't be fast movement. That would be Dodge' date=' DFC or even outright Running Away. I am basically picturing the scene from [i']Revenge of the Sith[/i] where Obi-Wan and Darth Whiner are fighting and the latter is on the offensive, forcing Obi-Wan to keep back stepping. There are many, many other examples from film also fit this general concept.

 

Thanks for all the replies. The Teleport option is not a bad idea either. I think I like Treb's and Steamtech's solution(s); very organic in feel.

[Nolgroth]

Re: Forcing a Step Backward

 

Someone here may want to check out the Valdorian Age Pg 105... Look for 'Force Back' under 'Sword Stunts'

 

 

Just an idea

If I had Valdorian Age, I would be happy to.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Forcing a Step Backward

 

When an attacker wants to move a target and explicitly states it, I often allow Move Throughs to do limited Knockback even in games where Knockdown is usually used. That maneuver even has nice options for the attacker's resultant position (staying at the point of attack, following the knocked back target, etc.). That may not completely fit everyone's definition of driving back an opponent in a sword fight or whatever, but it works well enough for me and I find I can play with it situationally when small adjustments are needed.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Forcing a Step Backward

 

You could rule that if the character is subject to a knockdown result they can avoid it by taking a 1" step backwards.

 

I think that whatever method you chose the character being forced back should have the option not to retreat, but will suffer some penalty if they do not.

[CTaylor]

Re: Forcing a Step Backward

 

I'd suggest a dex roll involved but that's not a bad idea, Sean. I'll be putting that in my house rules. Maybe a -1 DCV penalty as well: not as bad as being prone, but a penalty anyway. And it only works vs knockdown, not knockback.

[tesuji]

Re: Forcing a Step Backward

 

I had similar thoughts after atching princess bride and any number of pirate movies that gamer ombats are way too static.

 

So here is what i was tooling around with for a grecian hero game that never got started -

 

In a melee combat if you use your full dcv against an attack you move one hex in a random direction. A successful acrobatics roll lets you choose the direction.

 

If you elect to dodge the result is TWO hexes, roll a direction die twice. Again acrobatics lets you pick the movement.

 

But the wrinkle i wanted to add was for phalanx and other formation fighting wyere you are not actually dodging but covering in position flanked by others so i was going to allow a bonus to dcv equal to haf the shield bonus of your neighbors for tight formations so that they could fight at 1/2 dcv but with effectively double the usual shield bonus if protected on both sides.

 

so as long as the line held, everyone could stay fairly well covered at 1/2 dcv not jumping around. once it broke and it became hurley burley, you would wind up all over the place.

 

never got to run it tho.

[Captain Obvious]

Re: Forcing a Step Backward

 

I had similar thoughts after atching princess bride and any number of pirate movies that gamer ombats are way too static.

 

So here is what i was tooling around with for a grecian hero game that never got started -

 

In a melee combat if you use your full dcv against an attack you move one hex in a random direction. A successful acrobatics roll lets you choose the direction.

 

If you elect to dodge the result is TWO hexes, roll a direction die twice. Again acrobatics lets you pick the movement.

 

But the wrinkle i wanted to add was for phalanx and other formation fighting wyere you are not actually dodging but covering in position flanked by others so i was going to allow a bonus to dcv equal to haf the shield bonus of your neighbors for tight formations so that they could fight at 1/2 dcv but with effectively double the usual shield bonus if protected on both sides.

 

so as long as the line held, everyone could stay fairly well covered at 1/2 dcv not jumping around. once it broke and it became hurley burley, you would wind up all over the place.

 

never got to run it tho.

 

Fantasy Hero already has rules for a shield wall. Not quite the same as yours, DCV-wise, but I think it works out similarly in the end. The random movement is a pretty good idea though.

[CTaylor]

Re: Forcing a Step Backward

 

I kind of like the random move idea, although I'd probably allow a 1 point familiarity to negate the randomness of the move rather than acrobatics.