Feinting Rule - what do you think?

[Roter Baron]

Instead of attacking normally the feinting character make as normal to-hit-roll including all modifiers (levels, bonus of the weopon, Martial Arts Maneuver etc.), The opponent does the same, also including all the levels that he might have and is allowed to use (it's not his phase so he might use block or has to use the levels as used in his last phase).

The we just see who made the roll and by what margin. The difference is - if in favour of the attacker) his bonus to OCV in his next phase. If it is zero or lower, he just wasted his attack.

 

Analyse Style could be a complementary Skill for both.

 

Thus, you can simulate a successful feint and (if you use hit locations) a kick to the groin or punch to the head n the next phase - usually very hard to do with -7 or -8. But if you (OCV 8, thus 19 or less) rolled a 8 and your opponent (OCV 7, 18 or less) rolled a 12 your in for a +5 the next round!

 

Maybe the to hit bonus should only be vs hit locations, making the feint a way to strike an aimed hit?

 

So, what do you think? It is surely only useful (or most useful) for experienced fighters with high OCVs because only they erae likely to make the roll by a high margin but feinting is something only experienced fighters would do.

 

Edited: since there actually are rule sfor feinting that I forgot about.This is a fourth option.

[Hyper-Man]

There are 3 different methods of modeling a Feint described in the 6e Hero System Martial Arts book (a way to use Sleight of Hand, an optional NEW Skill called Feint and a Power based approach via Drain).

 

HM

[Roter Baron]

Drain is quiet heavy on the mechanics, especially if you play a heroic campaign and "drains" quiet a lot of points for a "skill" that a good fencer should know about.

 

The other options are basically a complementary skill roll to your to-hit-roll but it does not take into consideration that a good fighter is harder to feint. It is all about Per-Rolls and Feint-Skill vy Feint-Skill.

 

I would thnk that someone who knows how to hit people also knows the tricks to hit someone and thus can counter these tricks better - without the need to buy another skill roll. Likewiese, some hawkeyed hero may be able to see a lot - but does he really see this trick coming?

[Tasha]

Also, you could do a feint with a presence attack. Using a good attack roll as extra dice in the Pre Attack (Perhaps 2pts the roll makes add 1d6 to the Presence attack).

[bluesguy]

Back when I was young, skinny, and fast (+30 years ago) I use to fence.  A good feint worked when you got into a rhythm of attack-parry-attack with your opponent where they thought they knew where your next attack would come from and then you would make a false attack or parry slightly differently and change your attack line.

 

The best way to model this is to use the martial arts packages that have a martial block and then some kind of counter strike.  You get pluses for the counter strike after a successful block.

 

Also Tasha's approach is a good one because it represents the idea that your opponent is 'startled' by your change in attack (from the rhythm of attack-parry-attack that has been built up).

[Lucius]

 

 

Good experienced fighters have high OCV. That's not just a number; that high OCV means that they know and use a lot of feints, sleights, and tricks.

 

Good experienced fighters have high DCV. That's not just a number; that high DCV means that they recognize and thwart a lot of feints, sleights, and tricks.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary on the other hand hasn't the faintest idea.

[NuSoardGraphite]

I prefer using the skill Sleight of Hand.  The Feint itself is a 1/2 phase maneuver, then the following attack is 1/2 phase.

[Christopher R Taylor]

I do like to abstract things a bit more so as to not penalize players whose imagination or personal fighting experience is less than others.  So: if you put your levels into OCV, you feinted or were clever, or powered through their defenses, or any of any of a dozen other options, but it worked.

 

That said, using a sleight of hand or presence attack to gain a one-phase advantage is a nice trick though.

[Sean Waters]

By this system, if you would have hit, then you get a bonus to your next attack.   That does not work for me as a player.  If hit, I want to cause damage this go.  Perhaps, +4 bonus to hit and, if you hit, you get the same bonus on your next attack.   

[Doc Democracy]

There are many reasons for a feint.  To improve your chance of hitting the person, to reduce their chance of hitting you, to improve your chance of a hit doing damage, or of hitting a particular location.  The proposed system, however, does not really add a lot - if the attacker has enough of an advantage to gain +5OCV he does not need to feint to improve the chance to hit, it does not reduce the chance of the opponent to hit and is likely to be able to hit most locations anyway.

 

My question is whether it would stack.  I can see the benefits of gaining position - I win the round gaining a +1, then a +2, then another +1 etc.  When I have gained enough position I use it for a strike to the head or vitals, having manouevred my opponent to the point that I can virtually choose a location.  Position should be fragile though and possibly lost at twice the rate it is gained.  By accumulating position I can improve the potential for doing damage and specifying locations.  It may also add colour to a fight.

 

I think that the combat system could do with a real look.  It is very simple and very old fashioned.  It is too easy for a fight to be a war of attrition, gambling round the SPD and CV combos to see who gets to zero first.  The problem with a balanced system is that, if done 'properly', things are so balanced that it is almost predictable.  :-)  (this is probably more a feature of supers than other genres)

 

 

Doc