Facing and Passing

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Facing and Passing

 

However, to address Sean's original question, I think I would like to propose a change to Interpose. If a hero is defending someone in HtH combat they may try to interpose themselves between the attackers and the person being defended. The Hero can add 1 to the targets DCV for every 1 reduction to the hero's DCV up to half the hero's DCV. He may further increase the target's DCV by 1 for every 2 DCV reduction to the hero's DCV. Any attack made on the target that misses due to the interposition hits the hero instead. The target's DCV is reduced by 1 for every additional opponent after the first for all attacks made on the target.

 

I reckon this would get to the point of the defence - making opponents miss to the point of taking hits and ignoring your own defences.

 

Doc

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Facing and Passing

 

To get this sraight:

You say tehre is no rule to protect a princes.

Is say: Yes, there is guarding an area and just not letting the foe get close to her.

You say: Not if I try really, really hard to make it NOT work.

 

Actually, what was stated initially is that there is no rule preventing someone from simply walking past an armed combatant without any difficulty. And this remains true - in order for such a difficulty to exist, the armed combatant must, in some fashion, have a delayed action he can use to cause difficulty to that person seeking to move past him.

 

Okay' date=' it's an optional rule. One designed to solve this problem. It's written in the description, in the [b']first Sentence[/b] for crying out loud.

Any rule in the book (optional or core) that is specifically written to solve a problem is a viable solution for said problem. And preferable for any half baked hosue ruling atempt.

 

It's an optional rule which you have further assumed will be enhanced by an additional option (the weapon length increasing the favoured area) with the most favourable interpretation plausible for that additional option (that the added reach from weapon length will also be doubled for this purpose). By your interpretation, a radius of 8 meters minimum can be defended by a guard with a long spear or lance (sticking to the 6e chart), and the discussion of extra-long weapon suggests some might have even greater reach.

 

By your interpretation, a footman with a long spear can make a 6 meter half move, then declare he is holding his action to guard an area and move a further 8 meters to attack a target entering that area. Had he not declared this guarding action, he could only have moved 12 meters and would not have been entitled to make an attack. I would interpret similar to Doc - you can, in guarding the area, attack a target as far away as you could reach, plus one meter. You do not move from the space you are guarding from, but merely lunge forward if attacking at the extreme edge of that range.

 

How unusual of me' date=' to asume my GM is not a complete jerk and/or idiot. No wait, not.[/quote']

 

The result obtained by extrapolating your interpretation to an extra long weapon seems quite idiotic to me.

 

Yes' date=' I asume a Knight that wants to protect a Princes is doing his best to do so. And he will propably have retreated into an area with only one enterance for attackers (like most fair maidens bedrooms). And not running around 12+ m afar fighting people, when he sould be protecting the princes from being taken hostage.[/quote']

 

Seems like a great option provided we know when the attack is to take place, and we can sit around waiting for it to happen. That may be the case in some games, and in some source material examples. In other scenarios, the princess needs to travel. Yes, we can keep her here, and she won't marry the King and fulfill the prophecy, but it will be hard for an Orc to get at her. And how polite of the Forces of Darkness to send a single orc when you wait around for them to make advance preparations before they attack, rather than being forced to use whatever can get there quickly.

 

And given you want the fair maiden over 6 meters away from Sir Knight, I question where you get the sizing for most bedchambers. 40' by 40' seems extreme.

 

One phase the Orc does NOT tries to capture the princess. A Job well done for any bodyguard.

Thanks for pointing out that the defense I proposed is so good that you should not try to go against it.

 

Sure...after the knight is peppered with daggers (or the Princess has been perforated), Sir Knight can congratulate himself on a job well done. As long as the Orc remains a threat, the defense has not completed its purpose.

 

The flat side of a sword' date=' is not that different from a stick. You can trip people with a stick. So you can trip people with the flat side of a sword, while still using the reach.[/quote']

 

This makes that 4m radius seem even sillier. First, to use the flat of the blade, you need to be closer than the extreme edge of the radius at which you can lunge to make an attack. Second, you are standing 4 meters away, you lash out and trip the Orc, and he lands "at any point within 2 meters of the attacker" - you dragged him at least 2 meters CLOSER by tripping him at the extreme edge of your radius?? Oh, and if he's moving, he generally skids the remainder of his declared movement, to a maximum of his half move.

 

By the way, this is also a great example of where hit locations don't apply - it's tough to trip someone with a smack to the head, so I assume you swing that blade at his lower legs to sweep his feet out from under him, yet you take no penalty for targeting his ankles, only the -1 OCV for a Trip.

 

Also a shove can be "crossing blades' date=' pressing the enemy backwards" just as easily (you see that very, very often in source material).[/quote']

 

Again, implying the Knight instantly moves 4 meters forward to cross blades with the Orc. Seems less than likely.

 

Aside from the fact that he already in the middle of making an action (half move), was aware that he would not be able to and that it would make "holding till X occurs" almost worthless: nothing.

But just to be certain I asked Steve Long:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php/89754-Aborting-against-a-held-action

 

Umm' date=' so based on Steve's answer you were wrong, the Orc can abort. Personally I think I would only have the aborter only lose his remaining half action, and not the remaining half action plus next full action as Steve rules. But the fact remains the orc can abort to a defensive action.[/quote']

 

Actually, that's a pretty generous interpretation of Steve's answer - the loss of the Orc's next phase as well is painful. That said, why can't the Orc "half move preparing to decide what to do with his remaining half move"? It seems reasonable that he could choose to Block or Dodge when the Knight attacks without aborting his next phase, and I would follow your logic, James, and allow the Orc to lose only his remaining half phase.

 

Then the foe won't get past him without an attack. Thanks for pointing out that my suggestion works. But I knew so from the very beginning!

 

The Knight could have attacked the Orc with his action to begin with, and avoided the whole "guard an area" issue entirely. The initial scenario posited, which you seem to ignore, is "the Orc survives a hit from the Knight, knows he won't likely weather another, so he walks past the Knight to the Princess. Which, by the way, he can do after being clocked in the guarded area. He need only make a Move By against Sir Knight ("However, the target character retains his full DCV if he moves into the area specifically to attack the character who’s guarding it and does so. After making some sort of attack against the guarding character, on

his next Phase the target character can continue moving through the guarded area without penalty.") Given he can move into the target area and attack the Knight, he can obviously get to within melee range of the Knight. Funny how he can't get closer than 4 meters if I accept your "guard an area doubles all ranges" logic, unless he chooses to attack directly. He has to suck up exactly the same attack he was going to suck up if Sir Knight attacked directly, although he does now have a -2 DCV penalty. He may as well take a -4 OCV penalty and make it a Multiple Move By - if he gets lucky, he also tags the Princess, and if not, she's now between him and the Knight.

 

Or, seeing Knight guarding the area, he might choose to enter that area (on Phase 10, thanks) and Block. If he succeeds, he gets to move past the Knight next phase (acting first for a successful block), and get an attack (even if it's a Move By/Through) on Her Highness.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Facing and Passing

 

However, to address Sean's original question, I think I would like to propose a change to Interpose. If a hero is defending someone in HtH combat they may try to interpose themselves between the attackers and the person being defended. The Hero can add 1 to the targets DCV for every 1 reduction to the hero's DCV up to half the hero's DCV. He may further increase the target's DCV by 1 for every 2 DCV reduction to the hero's DCV. Any attack made on the target that misses due to the interposition hits the hero instead. The target's DCV is reduced by 1 for every additional opponent after the first for all attacks made on the target.

 

I reckon this would get to the point of the defence - making opponents miss to the point of taking hits and ignoring your own defences.

 

Only issue here is that you can Interpose only if the target is adjacent. If you're 4 meters away, it seems like that attack would have a tough time hitting you instead.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Facing and Passing

 

Good thing the source material never has the hero needing to defend the poor Princess against TWO mooks!

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Facing and Passing

 

Then he does not has a usefull weapon.Any Relevant Weapon in the list has +1m Reach. So he guards a 4m Radius.The Shove IS the attack.There is no restriction to what you can do with your Held Action from "Guardign an Area".That requires the room with no obstructions (clibing up and down a table takes more time than just walking).And about [Pi] times [Raduis of Guarded Area+1] of movement (half a circles circumfence; about 15.7 for a 4m radius Area).Again:When he has a phase to go away' date=' you left him the room to do so. You stopped forcing him to abort every phase. Whatever reason you had for it*, he now can act freely because you stopped pressing your attack.If you want to prevent him from attacking the damsel, don't stop pressing the attack. Don't give him the room.*You could be running out of endurance. After all Dodge only costs 1, while you attack costs 1+STR/5. Or maybe (if this was a normal fight) you want him to act, so you could hit him when he was not full defense.[/quote']Earlier in the thread when the situation given was "knight attacks orc and misses (or hits and orc survives) and now orc can just stroll by the knight to get the PITA Princess" you said it was the knight's fault for attacking instead of taking defensive actions. Now in the situation you responded to in the quote where the knight takes all the optional defensive actions you suggested and the orc can still walk around him you claim it is the knight's fault for not "pressing the attack". You contradict yourself. If the knight attacks it is his fault, if the knight defends it is his fault. It seems it is always the knight's fault as long as it can support your argument...

[Netzilla]

Re: Facing and Passing

 

A couple general points:

 

If a house rule is being discussed, it seems that official Optional Rules that may cover the same situation should be viable alternatives.

 

Personally, I think this discussion has gotten a bit silly and skirts dangerously close to goalpost shifting due to all the scenario modificaitons going on. So, I'm going to posit a few specific scenarios and discuss how I think the knight might defend using the Cover an Area rule. If someone wants to posit a modified scenario please present it as a new scenario and address the below scenarios as written.

 

Orc: 2d6+1 HKA, OCV 4, DCV 3, SPD 3, PD 4, rPD 2, DEX 10, BODY 13, STUN 30, CON 15

 

Knight: 2d6+1 HKA, OCV 8, DCV 8, SPD 4, PD 6, rPD 6, DEX 15, BODY 15, STUN 40, CON 15

 

Princess: 2d6 NA (fist), OCV 3, DCV 3, SPD 2, PD 2, rPD 0, STUN 20, CON 10

 

Scenario 1:

A single orc bursts into the princess's chamber where Knight and Princess are having tea (fortunately the Knight is fully armed and armored; tea can be a very hazardous endevor). Knight stands and draws his sword, standing between the orc and the princess. The wall is on his left and the table they were having tea at is against the wall behind him. The bed is a couple meters to his right. Unless the orc goes over the bed, he'll pass within reach of the knight. The princess is behind the table. The knight uses his half-phase to declare that he is Covering the Area within his reach of 3m (2m base +1m sword). Phase 12 ends.

 

On Phase 3, the knight loses his held action and declares the same held action with a Full Phase.

 

On Phase 4, the orc attempts to slip past the knight to get to the princess. The knight's Cover maneuver is activated and he attacks. He needs to roll an 17- (99.5%) to hit. On average he'll do 8 Body and 24 Stun of which the Orc will take 6 BODY and 18 STUN. This leaves the orc Stunned.

 

On Phase 6, the knight can pretty much finish off the Stunned orc.

 

If the orc attempts to go over the bed, he still ends up next to the Princess and within reach of the knight (setting off the Cover) unless the table they were at is more than 3m long.

 

If the orc attempts to use a Move By to attack both the Knight and the Princess to avoid being at 1/2 DCV, he's instead at -2 OCV and -2 DCV. This makes his DCV worse against the Knight (3 - 2 = 1). In addition, the orc needs to roll 5- to hit the Knight (5%) and if he misses the Knight he automatically misses the Princess.

 

Scenario 2:

Same as above but we've got 3 orcs.

 

Phases 1 & 3 play out pretty much the same way unless the GM descides to give the knight no chance at all and has the other two orcs charge in to slaughter the princess after the door is bashed open by the first orc. The only difference is that on Phase 3 the Knight covers the area with a Multi-Attack manuever for a -4 to his OCV and half DCV.

 

On Phase 4 the orcs rush in. The knight's Multi-Attack goes off. He needs to roll 13- (84%) to hit each orc. There's pretty good odds he'll hit all three (nearly 60%). However, there is a reasonable (40%) chance that at least one will get by to menace the princess. So, the odds are worse for the knight (especially when the orcs are allowed to use kamikaze tactics), but he is facing 3 orcs instead of one and his odds of success aren't really unreasonable if you ask me.

 

Scenario 3:

Princess is being escorted by a lone knight through the woods when they are set upon by a band of 6 orcs. If the orcs want to kill the princess, the princess is dead (assuming she has no combat skills, is unmounted and thus must try to flee on foot). There is no way for a lone individual to stop that many opponents in an open area. They can attack from too many directions at once. Just 2 opponents flanking them makes it pretty much impossible to reliably defend the princess unless you're suggesting a rule that somehow allows the knight to defend all 6 hexes around the princess all by himself.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Facing and Passing

 

Personally, I think this discussion has gotten a bit silly and skirts dangerously close to goalpost shifting due to all the scenario modificaitons going on. So, I'm going to posit a few specific scenarios and discuss how I think the knight might defend using the Cover an Area rule. If someone wants to posit a modified scenario please present it as a new scenario and address the below scenarios as written.

 

Orc: 2d6+1 HKA, OCV 4, DCV 3, SPD 3, PD 4, rPD 2, DEX 10, BODY 13, STUN 30, CON 15

 

Knight: 2d6+1 HKA, OCV 8, DCV 8, SPD 4, PD 6, rPD 6, DEX 15, BODY 15, STUN 40, CON 15

 

Princess: 2d6 NA (fist), OCV 3, DCV 3, SPD 2, PD 2, rPD 0, STUN 20, CON 10

 

Scenario 1:

A single orc bursts into the princess's chamber where Knight and Princess are having tea (fortunately the Knight is fully armed and armored; tea can be a very hazardous endevor). Knight stands and draws his sword, standing between the orc and the princess. The wall is on his left and the table they were having tea at is against the wall behind him. The bed is a couple meters to his right. Unless the orc goes over the bed, he'll pass within reach of the knight. The princess is behind the table. The knight uses his half-phase to declare that he is Covering the Area within his reach of 3m (2m base +1m sword). Phase 12 ends.

 

On Phase 3, the knight loses his held action and declares the same held action with a Full Phase.

 

On Phase 4, the orc attempts to slip past the knight to get to the princess. The knight's Cover maneuver is activated and he attacks. He needs to roll an 17- (99.5%) to hit. On average he'll do 8 Body and 24 Stun of which the Orc will take 6 BODY and 18 STUN. This leaves the orc Stunned.

 

What is the chance the Orc takes a 3+ Stun Multiple, and what is the likelihood it takes 10 or 2, and is therefore fully capable of proceeding over the bed, where he has about a 75% chance to hit the Princess for an average of 8 BOD (leaving her at 0 assuming normal human BOD of 8) or Cover with a 50% chance, allowing him to negotiate for the princess' life?

 

The Orc also has the option of striking at the Knight, which allows him to leave the Knight's area on its next phase without being targeted, but he needs to weather the Knight's attack to do so. If the Orc can't weather a single attack, then the issue is already resolved - Knight can simply attack, and need not set up a zone of control around himself.

 

Scenario 2:

Same as above but we've got 3 orcs.

 

Phases 1 & 3 play out pretty much the same way unless the GM descides to give the knight no chance at all and has the other two orcs charge in to slaughter the princess after the door is bashed open by the first orc. The only difference is that on Phase 3 the Knight covers the area with a Multi-Attack manuever for a -4 to his OCV and half DCV.

 

How can he cover the area with a Muti-attack? As each Orc moves, he either attacks (uses his held phase) or he does not attack, and the orc walks past him.

 

Now, how about we use the "in the woods" setting with a single orc but, as posited by Sean in the first post, an orc that can likely weather the first hit from the Knight, and then walk around him to threaten the Princess? We started this off with a discussion about disengaging, not about a Knight delaying phases out of combat.

[Netzilla]

Re: Facing and Passing

 

What is the chance the Orc takes a 3+ Stun Multiple' date=' and what is the likelihood it takes 10 or 2, and is therefore fully capable of proceeding over the bed, where he has about a 75% chance to hit the Princess for an average of 8 BOD (leaving her at 0 assuming normal human BOD of 8) or Cover with a 50% chance, allowing him to negotiate for the princess' life?[/quote']

 

 

The odds of getting a 3+ on the Hit Location chart are significantly higher than the odds of only getting a 1 or 2. If you want the specific percentages, I can get them for you tomorrow.

 

 

The Orc also has the option of striking at the Knight, which allows him to leave the Knight's area on its next phase without being targeted, but he needs to weather the Knight's attack to do so. If the Orc can't weather a single attack, then the issue is already resolved - Knight can simply attack, and need not set up a zone of control around himself.

 

 

In that case, the orc must survive 2 attacks (on 12 and 3) before his next action on 4.

 

 

How can he cover the area with a Muti-attack? As each Orc moves, he either attacks (uses his held phase) or he does not attack, and the orc walks past him.

 

 

The rules for Covering an Area do not restrict the type of maneuver or attack you're allowed to use. In fact they don't seem to require that you pick an attack type ahead of time either.

 

 

As to the orcs rushing in one at a time, are they really going to do that? It seems like they would all rush in at once. Just because, for the sake of playability, we must deal with each individual one at a time doesn't mean that it appears as such in-world. If they are actually rushing in, one after the other deliberately, how are they coordinating this? Do they stop to have a conference first or do orcs have an instictual knowledge of what other orcs will do and precicely when?

 

 

Now, how about we use the "in the woods" setting with a single orc but, as posited by Sean in the first post, an orc that can likely weather the first hit from the Knight, and then walk around him to threaten the Princess? We started this off with a discussion about disengaging, not about a Knight delaying phases out of combat.

 

 

As I stated before, the scenario's been altered so much that discussing it has been like trying to hit a moving target. However, the knight and orc didn't come into it until Sean's 4th post and he only posited an orc that "will stand little chance against the knight."

 

 

OK' date=' forget Superman, you have a Fantasy Hero Knight with the PITA Princess behind him and he is being attacked by an orc. The orc will stand little chance against the knight so walks round him and menaces the Princess. Assuming the Knight has acted he can not do anything about it, but, realistically, just walking past an opponent (or breaking off from an opponent) is not that straightforward.[/quote']

 

While there is a bit of wiggle room, "little chance" implies to me an orc that, if not easily one-shotted, is probably pretty easy to stun.

 

 

If the orc can ignore the knight's attack with relative impunity, then we're talking about something that has more than a "little chance" in my mind.

 

 

Trying to protect a non-combatant will put you at a dissadvantage. It's a threat multiplier. It takes something that had "little chance" to win and turns it into an actual threat, even if it's not a direct threat. It also takes something that is a mild threat, that you can probably beat in a Turn or so, and turns it into a serious problem. This is true in real life (even more so), in grenre fiction and in Hero.

 

 

Even if you adopt an "attack of opportunity" mechanic inHero, the knight and princess are still screwed against an orc that can ignore the knight's first attack, has brought several buddies or has unlimited room to manuever.

 

 

I assume you're not proposing a mechanic that garauntees the knight victory in all these situations.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Facing and Passing

 

Only issue here is that you can Interpose only if the target is adjacent. If you're 4 meters away' date=' it seems like that attack would have a tough time hitting you instead.[/quote']

I do think it would be hard to interpose if you are a long way away. However if you are between attacker and victim then you can declare that active defence stance. You can be seen to constantly move related to those people attacking the victim and getting in the way. You should be able to do this at the expense of taking hits you would never normally take and possibly making it more difficult to take offensive action (-1 OCV per attacker?)

[Sean Waters]

Re: Facing and Passing

 

I have looked at reach and I think Christopher is right: looking at pages 54 and 201 of 6.2. Learn something new every day. The 'reach' with a sword is 2m (which I can't actually see being built as part of the weapon build: I think it is just so we can have weapon length v weapon length rules) and so the potential covered area is 4m, subject, as Hugh says, to the GM using the optional rule and the optional option. The outside of a 4m radius circle is 25 point something metres, which halves to 12 metres That is too much to half move and cover, I will give you, but plenty for a move through, especially as the orc is using a weapon that gets him that extra +1m reach, so the Princess is not safe, the Knight has confined himself to a 4m circle and all is lost. Even if you use 9m (4.5 metres, to stay outside the reach) you still only need a 14 metre move through - not normally enough (unless the orc has extra move) but his battle axe gives him that extra 2m of reach, so it is!

 

Even this is sort of missing the point through, because we are assuming that the Knight knows that the orc is planning to ignore him and attack PP: more likely he will just assume that if stands in the way, the orc will attack him. Given that he is probably faster anyway, the point is if that first attack misses, the orc is then at no penalty at all for simply ignoring the Knight and attacking PP.

 

If there is more than one orc, I am not sure that the Knight can multi-attack: the first orc enters the area and attacks the knight, so gets no DCV penalty and the knight either ignores the attack or counter attacks or defends. If he counter attacks or defends, then his action is used up. He can not multi attack the other orcs as they are not in range at that time the attack goes off. As far as I know a multi attack is like a single discreet action: it does not somehow continues throughout the segment you act on.

 

Even if all the orcs try to slip past, so long as they do it one at a time (albeit in the same phase but on different DEX), the Knight can still only take the first one - that seems counter-intuitive: you would have thought it more difficult to deal with several people all rushing you at once than one at a time.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Facing and Passing

 

...also multiple attack is a combat maneouvre and I'm not sure that you can combine it with covering an area. I mean, I#d probably allow it but I'm not sure you can do it by the rules.

[Ninja-Bear]

Re: Facing and Passing

 

Has anyone considered the wounding optional rule (5er pg 414) for the orc? It says that a character who takes body for any reason must make an EGO roll at -1 for each 2 BODY done. It made no further effects, but if failed, then the ponly actions the character can take is neutral or defensive in nature-NO offensive manuevers. So with the the orc and knight scernio, we figured the Orc takes 8 BOD, that is a -4 to his ego roll. His EGO roll of 11- so he has to make a 7- to be able to attack the princess, does this seem fair? I think so. (I didn't scroll back so I'm sorry if the assumed number are off)

[Manic Typist]

Re: Facing and Passing

 

Returning to the original scenario....

 

Why should the Orc suffer an additional penalty (on top of the DCV penalty he would probably suffer) for trying to bypass the Knight, assuming that there is sufficient space and he has the movement to do so?

 

You try to run past me. I slash you with my sword. I may or may not deal a serious wound, but I've done nothing to physically prevent you from moving past me (I could have chosen to Block or Shove you instead), and I don't expect that I would suddenly become faster and gain another attack (AoO). As I've said before, I am at a disadvantage by having to protect the Princess, so so far I see nothing too objectionable.

 

Also, if the Knight is right next to the Princess, why can he simply not Block for her? He has the reach to completely cover her hex- isn't that sufficient? It doesn't matter how far away the Orc is when it attacks (it could be using a polearm, for instance)- the attack must arrive at the same hex as the Princess, and that is where the Knight Blocks.

 

I'm not sure if I buy the notion that it is more dangerous/difficult to disengage- from my experiences, it is (usually) pretty easy to disengage. Now, your opponent may choose to pursue you, but you didn't suffer any particular additional risk in the moment of backing away from the enemy.

[Netzilla]

Re: Facing and Passing

 

Even this is sort of missing the point through' date=' because we are assuming that the Knight knows that the orc is planning to ignore him and attack PP: more likely he will just assume that if stands in the way, the orc will attack him. Given that he is probably faster anyway, the point is if that first attack misses, the orc is then at no penalty at all for simply ignoring the Knight and attacking PP.[/quote']

 

Well, that isn't the only assumption being made in this scenario. We're also assuming that the orc is willing to risk taking a potentially lethal hit in order to ignore the knight and attack the princess. In real life and genre fiction, that's the kind of thing that takes serious bravery or fanaticism to accomplish, both of which are rare traits.

 

However, the Cover an Area tactic doesn't rely on the orc ignoring the knight at all (nor does just plain holding an action). It simply makes it riskier for the orc to do so, which I believe is what was requested originally (that moving past/through a real threat be risky). Now, it's possible for the knight to miss or for the orc to take minimal damage, but the orc shouldn't know how likely that is and thus should behave as if the knight is a real threat. Either the orc acknowledges the threat of the knight and advances with appropriate caution or he charges past the real threat in kamikaze-like fashion to attack the non-combatant increasing his odds of taking a lethal blow in return.

 

If there is more than one orc, I am not sure that the Knight can multi-attack: the first orc enters the area and attacks the knight, so gets no DCV penalty and the knight either ignores the attack or counter attacks or defends. If he counter attacks or defends, then his action is used up. He can not multi attack the other orcs as they are not in range at that time the attack goes off. As far as I know a multi attack is like a single discreet action: it does not somehow continues throughout the segment you act on.

 

Even if all the orcs try to slip past, so long as they do it one at a time (albeit in the same phase but on different DEX), the Knight can still only take the first one - that seems counter-intuitive: you would have thought it more difficult to deal with several people all rushing you at once than one at a time.

 

The rules for Covering an Area do not restrict the type of maneuver or attack you're allowed to use. In fact they don't seem to require that you pick an attack type ahead of time either.

 

As to the orcs rushing in one at a time, are they really going to do that? It seems like they would all rush in at once. Just because, for the sake of playability, we must deal with each individual one at a time doesn't mean that it appears as such in-world. If they are actually rushing in, one after the other deliberately, how are they coordinating this? Do they stop to have a conference first or do orcs have an instinctual knowledge of what other orcs will do and precisely when?

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Facing and Passing

 

I think the example has gone past its usefulness - we are talking about the example and changing it to better fit our perspective rather than the key issue we began with.

 

That idea is that, if you are defending something and an opponent is confident of surviving a hit from you, they can simply walk past you and attack the defended object. It doesn't really matter what the context is or relative merits of the combatants. From the rules, it would seem apparent that this is the case.

 

Manic Typist has a workable solution for a complete defence option. An area can be guarded that can quite easily encompass the defended object and block any attack that arrives there - each phase refreshing the block back to even OCV vs OCV and taking -2 penalties for subsequent blocks. Ultimately, however, the defender will roll an 18, fail and the defended object will be exposed to attack etc. This option buys time, which may be all that is needed.

 

Given a determined attacker then the rules do not appear to provide an alternative that will prevent that opponent, who can take at least one hit, reaching the defended object. We have discussed options that would appear satisfactory if there is one attacker but if there is more than one, becomes virtually useless.

 

Can we agree on those points without relating back to knights and orcs? Or do I have it wrong somewhere?

 

 

Doc

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Facing and Passing

 

I have looked at reach and I think Christopher is right: looking at pages 54 and 201 of 6.2. Learn something new every day.

 

Yeah - was completely new to me too.

 

Checked with Steve on the interpretation of covering an area. (http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php/89765-Guarding-an-area?p=2332342#post2332342)

 

 

The 'reach' with a sword is 2m (which I can't actually see being built as part of the weapon build: I think it is just so we can have weapon length v weapon length rules) and so the potential covered area is 4m' date=' subject, as Hugh says, to the GM using the optional rule and the optional option. [/quote']

 

What guarding an area does for you is add 1m to your effective reach to work out the radius guarded. So a man with a sword has an effective reach of 2m and can guard an area with a 3m radius. That makes more sense to me than guarding an area double the effective reach and it has significant impacts on move requirements. My original calculation of between 9 and 12m is more like it.

 

Still more than a half move but well in the regions of other attack options...

 

Doc

[Netzilla]

Re: Facing and Passing

 

Returning to the original scenario....

 

Why should the Orc suffer an additional penalty (on top of the DCV penalty he would probably suffer) for trying to bypass the Knight, assuming that there is sufficient space and he has the movement to do so?

 

You try to run past me. I slash you with my sword. I may or may not deal a serious wound, but I've done nothing to physically prevent you from moving past me (I could have chosen to Block or Shove you instead),

 

Yep. Personally, I would model the line of scrimmage as all the linemen using the Cover an Area rules to trigger a Push maneuver against anyone who tried to get past and sack the quarterback.

 

and I don't expect that I would suddenly become faster and gain another attack (AoO).

 

That's always been my conceptual problem with the AoO concept.

 

As I've said before, I am at a disadvantage by having to protect the Princess, so so far I see nothing too objectionable.

 

Also, if the Knight is right next to the Princess, why can he simply not Block for her? He has the reach to completely cover her hex- isn't that sufficient? It doesn't matter how far away the Orc is when it attacks (it could be using a polearm, for instance)- the attack must arrive at the same hex as the Princess, and that is where the Knight Blocks.

 

Certainly valid tactics in my mind. Not foolproof but I don't think anyone should be expecting that. After all, why bother having dice otherwise?

 

I'm not sure if I buy the notion that it is more dangerous/difficult to disengage- from my experiences, it is (usually) pretty easy to disengage. Now, your opponent may choose to pursue you, but you didn't suffer any particular additional risk in the moment of backing away from the enemy.

 

Well, it is generally accepted wisdom that turning your back to an opponent/giving them an uncontested shot is a bad idea. This does presume that the attacker has the time & means to make good on that attack. Unfortunately, the only modern examples of single combat we have are in artificial sporting environments which necessitate a certain level of artificiality. I have seen in boxing, MMA and other one-on-one bouts cases where one opponent does actually turn around and run back a few steps to create distance. This is typically done in response to a flurry from the attacker and works pretty well unless the runner is backed into a corner. However, this is unarmed combat and often these contests have rules against striking an opponent in the back of the head or spine. Nothing I've seen suggests that the attacker would have been able to attack those areas if they wanted as they're typically committed to their existing attack and not prepared and balanced to extend their attack enough to hit the fleeing foe but appropriate grains of salt do need to be applied.

[Netzilla]

Re: Facing and Passing

 

I think the example has gone past its usefulness - we are talking about the example and changing it to better fit our perspective rather than the key issue we began with.

 

Moving target. Kind of like the orc is...

 

That idea is that, if you are defending something and an opponent is confident of surviving a hit from you, they can simply walk past you and attack the defended object. It doesn't really matter what the context is or relative merits of the combatants. From the rules, it would seem apparent that this is the case.

 

The only thing I question is what basis the opponent is using for that confidence. However, that's outside the scope of the rules and up to the GM to determine. If I'm a player, I would expect the opponent to consider me the primary threat over the non-combatant and for the opponent to react accordingly, baring any clues to think otherwise.

 

Manic Typist has a workable solution for a complete defence option. An area can be guarded that can quite easily encompass the defended object and block any attack that arrives there - each phase refreshing the block back to even OCV vs OCV and taking -2 penalties for subsequent blocks. Ultimately, however, the defender will roll an 18, fail and the defended object will be exposed to attack etc. This option buys time, which may be all that is needed.

 

Situationally dependent. Perhaps the guards are on their way. Perhaps the hero has a higher SPD score and will get the occasional opportunity to actually attack without risking the non-combatant. Perhaps the opponent is close enough to equal that the hero does stand a real risk of losing before help/an attack opportunity arrives. Of that last situation are desperation tactics and true heroics made.

 

Given a determined attacker then the rules do not appear to provide an alternative that will prevent that opponent, who can take at least one hit, reaching the defended object. We have discussed options that would appear satisfactory if there is one attacker but if there is more than one, becomes virtually useless.

 

If not virtually useless (that depends on too many unknown variables: relative capability, time until help arrives, etc) then certainly far more risky. Of course, I would expect that to be the case.

 

Can we agree on those points without relating back to knights and orcs? Or do I have it wrong somewhere?

 

Seems reasonable.

 

In most examples I can think of in fiction of this kind of scenario this almost always ends up with either the protector forcing the attackers to deal with him rather than the non-combatant or the villains use the distraction of the protector to capture both. Forcing the attackers to deal with the protector really seems to fall under the purview of role-playing and PRE (the classic "Who dies first?!" PRE attack), not really combat maneuvers. I really can't think of too many situations where a single hero was able to stop multiple attackers getting past him on open terrain. I've seen several cases of a couple bad guys getting by while the hero is swamped. I've also seen a lone hero attack and kill multiple mooks running at him in a single instant: Innigo Montoya finally encounters the 6-fingered man and 3 of his guards in a hallway, the three guards all charge simultaneously and Montoya cuts each one down as they come into range. I don't know how you would model that exept with a held action into a Multi-Attack (aka Sweep).

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Facing and Passing

 

At least two of us seem to be on the same page.

 

That was the first point of Sean's OP. Given that situation, is there a need for something more rules-y? I suggested a change to the Interpose rules - you could see that being used as a defender does his utmost to defend against multiple attackers - taking hits aimed at him and the defended object that would usually never hit him and possibly having a chance to hit back.

 

That would get away from the detail of HERO manoeuvres and back to a more narrative style - the guard stance would allow the defender to choose how far he risks his own safety to defend another. It would add a rules option to those that exist.

 

Do we need something along those lines? That was the second point in Sean's OP.

 

 

Doc

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Facing and Passing

 

The odds of getting a 3+ on the Hit Location chart are significantly higher than the odds of only getting a 1 or 2. If you want the specific percentages' date=' I can get them for you tomorrow.[/quote']

 

I don't see the exact percentages as all that relevant. If any attack can be assumed to prevent the Orc acting at all, the issue goes away. The Orc does not have the option of taking any action, so it cannot walk around the Knight and attack the Princess. The issue to be addressed, if I understand Sean correctly, is that "Defender" (Knight in our example) has taken his action in the phase. He is in melee combat with "Attacker" (Orc in our example), and outclasses Attacker. Attacker now has an action (he is not so inconsequential that a single attack ends his threat entirely). Attacker decides he cannot likely defeat Defender. So he decides, instead, to walk away from the melee he is already engaged in, walk over to a Noncombatant (our Princess) and attack that target, or Cover it, or otherwise use that person as a hostage. Defender has already acted in the phase, and therefore has no ability to act in response to Attacker walking straight past him to engage in combat with Noncombatant.

 

The crux of the question is whether there should be some penalty or impediment to Attacker simply breaking off combat from Defender and walking away to attack Noncombatant, or whether we are happy that Attacker can just walk away from/past Defender to attack the softer target.

 

In that case' date=' the orc must survive 2 attacks (on 12 and 3) before his next action on 4.[/quote']

 

Why should the Orc move on 12, rather than delay like Knight is? It depends on the scenario and his goals. If Orc just wants to survive, he can simply run - Knight has given him what he wants. If his goal is to kill Knight or kill Princess, his choices will be different. Perhaps he just says "Stupid Knight" and throws a javelin/dagger or fires a bow or crossbow at his actual target while Knight bounces around his 3 or 4 meter radius. Maybe he has to make an INT roll to process the fact that Knight just stands there scanning the area rather than engaging in combat (or Knight gets a PRE attack to confuse poor Orc).

 

The scenarios set out have been attempts to illustrate the issue. The responses seem to be attempts to change the issue so the question of "there is no penalty or chance of failure for disengaging from melee and walking past an armed opponent in combat" is eliminated, rather than addressed. NinjaBear's wounding suggestion falls into that category.

 

The rules for Covering an Area do not restrict the type of maneuver or attack you're allowed to use. In fact they don't seem to require that you pick an attack type ahead of time either.

 

It's an extension of delaying your action, which provides a specific benefit (halving that defender's DCV) at the cost of restricting your choices (attacking someone who enters the area). From my simple read, you can choose any attack and maneuver, within that scope (can't block or dodge, for example, or just fly away).

 

As to the orcs rushing in one at a time' date=' are they really going to do that? It seems like they would all rush in at once. Just because, for the sake of playability, we must deal with each individual one at a time doesn't mean that it appears as such in-world. If they are actually rushing in, one after the other deliberately, how are they coordinating this? Do they stop to have a conference first or do orcs have an instictual knowledge of what other orcs will do and precicely when?[/quote']

 

The alternative is that they are all rushing in simultaneously. How are they synchronizing that? Do they count down to their charge so they are all synchronized, or do all Orcs have a hive mind allowing them to act with perfect timing? I think the answer is somewhere between the orcs neatly timing a joint charge where all three move in perfect harmony, and the orcs neatly lining up in sequence to move in on half second increments. The reality is that they are not precise enough to do either, and they charge in at more or less random time increments.

 

As I stated before, the scenario's been altered so much that discussing it has been like trying to hit a moving target. However, the knight and orc didn't come into it until Sean's 4th post and he only posited an orc that "will stand little chance against the knight."

 

While there is a bit of wiggle room, "little chance" implies to me an orc that, if not easily one-shotted, is probably pretty easy to stun.

 

I think in context the "little chance" phrase is intended to say "regardless of how long he might last, it is virtually certain that the Knight will eventually prevail". That could be "Knight is so vastly superior that his attacks will virtually always hit, one shot will inevitably slay the Orc instantly, the Orc has virtually no chance of striking the Knight and even if he does, the Knight's defenses are such that he will take no appreciable harm". It could be "Knight's defenses are sufficient that he can weather the Orc's blows and gradually wear him down, though the battle will likely last for hours". It could be anything in between.

 

In the context of the rules issue I believe Sean wished to discuss, it must be a situation where, whether gradually or rapidly, the Knight is virtually certain to defeat the Orc in straight up combat, but the Orc can sufficiently weather the Knight's attacks that it is viable for him to act after the Knight has acted, such that he can follow the rules as written, walk around/past the Knight engaging him in melee combat and engage the Princess in combat/threaten the Princess instead.

 

If the orc can ignore the knight's attack with relative impunity' date=' then we're talking about something that has more than a "little chance" in my mind.[/quote']

 

There's a lot of "little chance" scenarios. Can the Orc ignore the attack with relative impunity? Well, let's say Knight and Orc both do 2d6 damage. It's the maximum they can do. Knight has 12 rDEF and is enchanted to provide him an 18 base PD. Orc is similarly enchanted, but has only 10 rDEF. Orc has no hope of defeating Knight, absent a series of lucky rolls managing to exceed Knight's 30 defenses and get enough STUN past to KO him. Eventually, Knight will get enough BOD through to Orc with rolls of 11 or 12 to kill him.

 

Orc can ignore many attacks with impunity, and has little or no chance of victory.

 

That's an extreme example, but I don't think "one attack will take the Orc out of the fight" is the only reasonable interpretation of "the Orc has little chance of defeating the Knight in straight up combat".

 

Trying to protect a non-combatant will put you at a dissadvantage. It's a threat multiplier. It takes something that had "little chance" to win and turns it into an actual threat' date=' even if it's not a direct threat. It also takes something that is a mild threat, that you can probably beat in a Turn or so, and turns it into a serious problem. This is true in real life (even more so), in grenre fiction and in Hero.[/quote']

 

In real life, can you just walk past a person you are in combat with, and he is unable to respond to impede you in any way? Is that the case in genre fiction? I don't think Sean is suggesting the potential for the noncombatant to be threatened doesn't place the Hero at a disadvantage, but that it seems off that a character can simply walk straight past an armed opponent to get at whatever else he wants beyond that person, whether that's a soft target, the Doomsday McGuffin or just the window seat on the bus.

 

Even if you adopt an "attack of opportunity" mechanic inHero' date=' the knight and princess are still screwed against an orc that can ignore the knight's first attack, has brought several buddies or has unlimited room to manuever.[/quote']

 

Well, if we return to Christopher's suggestion that I can use a Shove or a Trip maneuver, I can slow or halt that opponent's movement as he tries to pass. The AoO mechanic in d20 has the similar drawback that, if you are willing to suffer the attack, you can bypass the opponent.

 

I assume you're not proposing a mechanic that garauntees the knight victory in all these situations.

 

I think the proposal is a mechanic that removes the guarantee the Orc can walk straight past an armed combatant.

[Netzilla]

Re: Facing and Passing

 

At least two of us seem to be on the same page.

 

[obligatory internet argument]The page you're on is wrong! The page I'm on is obviously right without any proof needed or offered! [/obligatory internet argument]

 

That was the first point of Sean's OP. Given that situation, is there a need for something more rules-y? I suggested a change to the Interpose rules - you could see that being used as a defender does his utmost to defend against multiple attackers - taking hits aimed at him and the defended object that would usually never hit him and possibly having a chance to hit back.

 

Interesting but seems a relatively radical change. That's not neccessarily a bad thing, of course. I do wonder if this could be handled by using the Multi-Attack rules to effectively 'sweep' the Interpose so that it works against multiple attackers. That certainly requires some interpretation. Do you halve DCV before or after you chose your DCV penalty? I would lean toward "before". So, if you're the 8 DCV knight, you use Interposing to lower your DCV to 4, gaining +4 OCV (12). You then halve that for Multi-Attack down to DCV 2 (you're now a sitting duck). You then declaire the number of attackers you're going to try to stop (say 3) and take apporpirate OCV penalties (-4, back down to 8). So, now you're 8 OCV and 2 DCV against all 3 attackers. Then comes the question of if you also then add in the penalties for Multiple Block if that's what the knight tries to do.

 

No matter how you go about it, the Interposing rule appears to have been written with one attacker in mind and requires some form of 'house rule' to apply it to multiple attackers. I can't really say which I'd prefer and would probably have to play test both (or at least crunch some numbers) before I could decide either way.

 

That would get away from the detail of HERO manoeuvres and back to a more narrative style - the guard stance would allow the defender to choose how far he risks his own safety to defend another. It would add a rules option to those that exist.

 

Do we need something along those lines? That was the second point in Sean's OP.

 

Personally, I think allowing a combination of Multi-Attack and Cover an Area handles multiple attackers a bit more cleanly and also allows the defender to appear threatening so that's how I'd probably handle it in my campaign. So, I don't think a completely new manuever (like AoO) is really needed, just a house interpretation of how two rules interact.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Facing and Passing

 

Why should the Orc suffer an additional penalty (on top of the DCV penalty he would probably suffer) for trying to bypass the Knight' date=' assuming that there is sufficient space and he has the movement to do so?[/quote']

 

He suffers no penalty whatsoever by the rules as written. He can walk by the Knight, close enough to brush against him, with no threat and no penalty unless the Knight has a held action (which includes using Guard an Area) to act against the opponent casually walking past him.

 

You try to run past me. I slash you with my sword. I may or may not deal a serious wound' date=' but I've done nothing to physically prevent you from moving past me (I could have chosen to Block or Shove you instead), and I don't expect that I would suddenly become faster and gain another attack (AoO).[/quote']

 

You can't do any of those things unless you held an action to do so. If you did, you needed to commit to the specific action up front or we make DEX rolls to see whose action goes first. If I win, I'm out of range of your slash/block/shove before you implement it. If you have no held action, tough luck - I walk past you, and maybe give you a kiss on the cheek on my way by - you have no ability to take any action opposing me.

 

I'm not sure if I buy the notion that it is more dangerous/difficult to disengage- from my experiences' date=' it is (usually) pretty easy to disengage. Now, your opponent may choose to pursue you, but you didn't suffer any particular additional risk in the moment of backing away from the enemy.[/quote']

 

We're not discussing backing away from the attacker, but walking straight past him. Is that also casually simple and risk-free?

 

The interpretation that any attempt to stop someone else's movement requires an action (held or otherwise) is the status quo - if the opponent has taken his action, then I can walk around him with impunity in my action (6 meter half move) then attack him at the completion of the circle. Or I can just walk straight past him - nothing he can do to impede me until he gets another action. The question posed is whether that status quo should be altered and, if so, in what manner? Maybe this loss of verisimilitude is an acceptable/unavoidable compromise to make the game playable, and it just sucks to be that easily accessed noncombatant or the fellow expected to protect same.

[Netzilla]

Re: Facing and Passing

 

I don't see the exact percentages as all that relevant. If any attack can be assumed to prevent the Orc acting at all' date=' the issue goes away. The Orc does not have the option of taking any action, so it cannot walk around the Knight and attack the Princess. The issue to be addressed, if I understand Sean correctly, is that "Defender" (Knight in our example) has taken his action in the phase. He is in melee combat with "Attacker" (Orc in our example), and outclasses Attacker. Attacker now has an action (he is not so inconsequential that a single attack ends his threat entirely). Attacker decides he cannot likely defeat Defender. So he decides, instead, to walk away from the melee he is already engaged in, walk over to a Noncombatant (our Princess) and attack that target, or Cover it, or otherwise use that person as a hostage. Defender has already acted in the phase, and therefore has no ability to act in response to Attacker walking straight past him to engage in combat with Noncombatant.[/quote']

 

 

Well, no attack is going to be 100% likely to stop the orc. Otherwise, why roll dice? The point is, is the tactic likely enough to be successful to bother relying on it. At a certain level of parity, there is no way for the knight to reliably stop the orc, no matter what house rules are added.

 

 

However, the scenario as given, the knight attacks first, misses and the orc then walks passed, is presuming that the knight has failed on 2 levels. First, the knight chose to go on the offensive rather than defending his charge, which is always going to be risky. Unless the knight is supremely confident he can either drop the foe immediately or make himself enough of a threat that the orc will concentrate on defending himself against the knight. The latter requires role-playing to be involved (the orc must at least believe that the knight's attacks have the potential to cause serious injury, if not death) rather than a specific maneuver. The second point of failure is that the knight failed to drop, stun or scare the orc with that first attack. That basically illustrates why going on the offensive and failing to focus on protecting his charge is a stupid tactic on the part of the knight. I don't think that any bodyguard would argue otherwise (first protect your charge). So, I view the original scenario as rather loaded against the knight even if that wasn't the intention.

 

 

The crux of the question is whether there should be some penalty or impediment to Attacker simply breaking off combat from Defender and walking away to attack Noncombatant, or whether we are happy that Attacker can just walk away from/past Defender to attack the softer target.

 

 

Regardless of rules, why does the orc think this is a smart tactic? What makes the orc think the knight won't cut him down before he can actually off the princess. Presumably, if the attack missed, the orc is not casually ignoring the knight. What is the orc's mindset that allows him to know the knight can't attack again without the orc having knowledge of the initiative system?

 

 

Why should the Orc move on 12, rather than delay like Knight is? It depends on the scenario and his goals. If Orc just wants to survive, he can simply run - Knight has given him what he wants. If his goal is to kill Knight or kill Princess, his choices will be different. Perhaps he just says "Stupid Knight" and throws a javelin/dagger or fires a bow or crossbow at his actual target while Knight bounces around his 3 or 4 meter radius. Maybe he has to make an INT roll to process the fact that Knight just stands there scanning the area rather than engaging in combat (or Knight gets a PRE attack to confuse poor Orc).

 

 

You pretty much answered your own question, it's situationally dependent. Does the knight have back-up on the way? Does the orc? Too many variables are unknown to know who wins the stand-off. However, we do know that if the knight initiates action and misses, it gives the orc the opportunity to slip past him and attack the princess, assuming the orc isn't too busy keeping his own head attached to his shoulders to basically ignore the knight (role-playing again). Whether the knight will risk that or not is, again, dependent on the situation and if he can afford the stand-off.

 

 

The scenarios set out have been attempts to illustrate the issue. The responses seem to be attempts to change the issue so the question of "there is no penalty or chance of failure for disengaging from melee and walking past an armed opponent in combat" is eliminated, rather than addressed. NinjaBear's wounding suggestion falls into that category.

 

 

That is why I tried to explicitly define various scenarios; so that we can all be discussing the same thing and not inadvertently shift the goalposts.

 

 

It's an extension of delaying your action, which provides a specific benefit (halving that defender's DCV) at the cost of restricting your choices (attacking someone who enters the area). From my simple read, you can choose any attack and maneuver, within that scope (can't block or dodge, for example, or just fly away).

 

 

So, that seems to suggest that you can choose a Multi-Attack as a response.

 

 

The alternative is that they are all rushing in simultaneously. How are they synchronizing that? Do they count down to their charge so they are all synchronized, or do all Orcs have a hive mind allowing them to act with perfect timing? I think the answer is somewhere between the orcs neatly timing a joint charge where all three move in perfect harmony, and the orcs neatly lining up in sequence to move in on half second increments. The reality is that they are not precise enough to do either, and they charge in at more or less random time increments.

 

 

This, then, falls into the question of are they "simultaneous enough" to be susceptible to a Multi-Attack. After all, a Multi-Attack isn't perfectly simultaneous either. The mechanics alone suggest that the attacks occur in sequence as if one misses, all subsequent attacks miss. Considering the genre trope of the hero cutting down charging foes one after the other, my own interpretation is that yes, the 3 orcs charging will be "simultaneous enough".

 

 

I think in context the "little chance" phrase is intended to say "regardless of how long he might last, it is virtually certain that the Knight will eventually prevail". That could be "Knight is so vastly superior that his attacks will virtually always hit, one shot will inevitably slay the Orc instantly, the Orc has virtually no chance of striking the Knight and even if he does, the Knight's defenses are such that he will take no appreciable harm". It could be "Knight's defenses are sufficient that he can weather the Orc's blows and gradually wear him down, though the battle will likely last for hours". It could be anything in between.

 

 

A battle lasting hours implies a certain degree of parity to me. Any time you've got foes that can last that long against each other it either implies that they are pretty closely matched or that one is concentrating solely on defense, which means he will never get the chance to 'just walk past' as he's too busy blocking and dodging.

 

 

In the context of the rules issue I believe Sean wished to discuss, it must be a situation where, whether gradually or rapidly, the Knight is virtually certain to defeat the Orc in straight up combat, but the Orc can sufficiently weather the Knight's attacks that it is viable for him to act after the Knight has acted, such that he can follow the rules as written, walk around/past the Knight engaging him in melee combat and engage the Princess in combat/threaten the Princess instead.

 

 

There's a lot of "little chance" scenarios. Can the Orc ignore the attack with relative impunity? Well, let's say Knight and Orc both do 2d6 damage. It's the maximum they can do. Knight has 12 rDEF and is enchanted to provide him an 18 base PD. Orc is similarly enchanted, but has only 10 rDEF. Orc has no hope of defeating Knight, absent a series of lucky rolls managing to exceed Knight's 30 defenses and get enough STUN past to KO him. Eventually, Knight will get enough BOD through to Orc with rolls of 11 or 12 to kill him.

 

 

Orc can ignore many attacks with impunity, and has little or no chance of victory.

 

 

Again, seems more a case of parity than "little chance" if the orc is so capable of weathering the knight's attacks as to make it totally impossible for the knight to do serious harm in a single shot. If the orc knows the knight can't at least potentially drop (or at least stun) him right away, then why should there be a penalty for the orc to ignore the knight? After all, in that situation, no matter how much of an OCV bonus the knight gets or DCV penalty the orc takes, it doesn't matter. For the knight to have a chance of protecting his charge, he must have some way to make himself a threat. The knight, in such a situation, would be better off attempting a grab to restrain the orc than he would be trying to hit it with his sword, because there's no way for the sword to do enough damage to stop the orc by the conditions you've just imposed.

 

 

That's an extreme example, but I don't think "one attack will take the Orc out of the fight" is the only reasonable interpretation of "the Orc has little chance of defeating the Knight in straight up combat".

 

 

I'm not say that "one attack will...", but that "one attack can..." A single attack needs to have that potential to be a valid tactic. If the knight doesn't see it that way, he'll chose something other than trying to damage the orc as a tactic (such as a Grab, a Push or a Trip). If the orc thinks he can safely ignore the knight then he ignores the knight and risks getting attacked. If the orc is right, then the knight is screwed but that still doesn't explain why the orc considers himself so invulnerable or the knight so ineffectual.

 

 

In real life, can you just walk past a person you are in combat with, and he is unable to respond to impede you in any way? Is that the case in genre fiction? I don't think Sean is suggesting the potential for the noncombatant to be threatened doesn't place the Hero at a disadvantage, but that it seems off that a character can simply walk straight past an armed opponent to get at whatever else he wants beyond that person, whether that's a soft target, the Doomsday McGuffin or just the window seat on the bus.

 

 

"Walk past", no. "Slip passed", yes. There are plenty of examples in real life and fiction of one person slipping passed another due to a failed attack. That's a pretty common description of how people escape superior foes.

 

 

Well, if we return to Christopher's suggestion that I can use a Shove or a Trip maneuver, I can slow or halt that opponent's movement as he tries to pass. The AoO mechanic in d20 has the similar drawback that, if you are willing to suffer the attack, you can bypass the opponent.

 

 

Indeed.

 

 

I think the proposal is a mechanic that removes the guarantee the Orc can walk straight past an armed combatant.

 

 

One has been provided. Yes, it requires that the defender be ready to stop the orc from doing so (having not just attacked and missed) or that the orc perceives the defender be enough of a threat as to want to concentrate on defending himself (the knight either has the potential to Stun the orc in one hit and the orc has a sense of self-preservation). Changing either case (the knight blows his action, can't hurt the orc or the orc doesn't care about being hurt) makes the knight's failure much more likely. Quite frankly, I think it should, and I think that is where the crux of the disagreement lays.

[Manic Typist]

Re: Facing and Passing

 

Well' date=' it is generally accepted wisdom that turning your back to an opponent/giving them an uncontested shot is a bad idea. [/quote']

 

Which is why I said disengage, not turn my back on.

 

 

You can't do any of those things unless you held an action to do so. If you did, you needed to commit to the specific action up front or we make DEX rolls to see whose action goes first. If I win, I'm out of range of your slash/block/shove before you implement it. If you have no held action, tough luck - I walk past you,

So far, I don't see a problem. We have the Speed Chart in hero. There are Segments and Phases. If I have already used my Phase on a specific Segment, then I have to wait until the next Segment in order to Abort my next Phase (someone up thread I believe mistakenly claimed that you have to wait until your next Phase after you act to do so- my understanding is that you cannot use up two Phases in one Segment, but you can use your current Phase in one Segment and your future Phase in the next Segment).

and maybe give you a kiss on the cheek on my way by - you have no ability to take any action opposing me.

Well in that case, you've just used your action to make a DEX roll to do that. Princess is safe.

 

 

The interpretation that any attempt to stop someone else's movement requires an action (held or otherwise) is the status quo - if the opponent has taken his action, then I can walk around him with impunity in my action (6 meter half move) then attack him at the completion of the circle. Or I can just walk straight past him - nothing he can do to impede me until he gets another action. The question posed is whether that status quo should be altered and, if so, in what manner?

 

Why should the status quo, in this situation, be changed? I'm open to hearing why, but so far all I've heard is that it SHOULD be changed.... without a reason as to why. Does it not match genre or reality? No.... you attack me, I avoid your attack and run around and attack the Princess. That seems perfectly realistic- you are still recovering from your swing while I've already moved the other direction- you'll be running after me even as I begin my attack on her, but that's just the narrative we construct out of Phase 4 and Phase 8 put together. This is not new to HERO.

 

Is it frustrating? Perhaps, if you find failing to defeat your opponent with a particular blow or being at a tactical disadvantage frustrating. It could be, in a certain context (i.e. GM is beating up on you or something but that is really far outside the bounds of the issue).

 

Give that it IS the status quo, and that it SEEMS to mimic reality and fiction reasonably well within the Speed Chart.... why should we change it? Why is it broken that the Orc can bypass the Knight who has already used his Phase that Segment?

[JamesG]

Re: Facing and Passing

 

"Walk past"' date=' no. "Slip passed", yes. There are plenty of examples in real life and fiction of one person slipping passed another due to a failed attack. That's a pretty common description of how people escape superior foes.[/quote']

 

"Slip passed", to me, implies a chance of failure. I think that is what is missing here. Since there is no chance that the character can fail to "slip past" someone, it seems more like walking past them.

 

And maybe that is what we need, a chance that the character can fail to slip by, more than we need rules for attacks of opportunity. Here is an idea: "If a character wants to move past an enemy within that enemy's melee range , he must win an opposed DEX roll. The moving character can add his base DCV as bonus to his DEX roll, the enemy can add his base OCV. Both characters can add any applicable Combat Skill Levels currently allocated to CV to improve their DEX roll. Failure to win the DEX opposed roll means the enemy has impeded your movement and you must stop. In order to do this, the enemy must have freedom of action (ie not Grabbed, Entangled, Stunned, etc.) but it does not require an Action by the enemy."

 

The wording probably needs to cleaned up, but I think you get what I mean. We also probably need to add something so that low STR characters can not easily impede high STR ones. Maybe if the mover can win a contest of STR using his casual STR vs. the full STR of the enemy he is not impeded.

 

The in game impact of this will be agile characters will have a much greater chance of "slipping past" an opponent than those not so agile, which mimics the source material well. Those who are not so agile would be better off going around the range of enemy's weapons rather than walking into the teeth of them.