Ninja-Bear Posted March 22, 2018 Report Share Posted March 22, 2018 Ok folks on another thread people debated multiple attack versus combined attack. Since I’m now using CC, combined attack is one area that could have used some more words. I think I have the gist of multiple attack whereas it was Sweep under the old rules with multiple move bys rolled together. However combined attack? One thing that confuses me is that under multiple attack, if the power uses strike maneuver, then it’s a combined attack however isn’t move by considered a form of Strike maneuver? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmjalund Posted March 22, 2018 Report Share Posted March 22, 2018 a combined attack is an attack that used two or more of your powers against a single target. you cannot use two of the same power as part of a combined attack unless you have bought it twice! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ninja-Bear Posted March 22, 2018 Author Report Share Posted March 22, 2018 Ok then I was correct that multiple attack is the old sweep? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ninja-Bear Posted March 22, 2018 Author Report Share Posted March 22, 2018 Iow if I want to punch several times, I use multiple attack not combination. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Surrealone Posted March 23, 2018 Report Share Posted March 23, 2018 1 hour ago, Ninja-Bear said: Ok then I was correct that multiple attack is the old sweep? It would help immensely if you would cite what you mean by 'the old sweep'. Are you talking 4e? 5er? Specifics such as the actual RAW verbiage to which you're referring would be invaluable, here ... since we don't have Telepathy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ndreare Posted March 23, 2018 Report Share Posted March 23, 2018 Yes Multiple Attack is basically the old sweep from 5th Ed and earlier. Ninja-Bear 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Surrealone Posted March 23, 2018 Report Share Posted March 23, 2018 4 minutes ago, Ndreare said: Yes Multiple Attack is basically the old sweep from 5th Ed and earlier. Not quite. 5th Ed. Sweep is only for HTH maneuvers. Multiple Attack is for ANY attack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ndreare Posted March 23, 2018 Report Share Posted March 23, 2018 Just now, Surrealone said: Not quite. 5th Ed. Sweep is only for HTH maneuvers. Multiple Attack is for ANY attack. I never realized Sweep was melee only. I used to let my players use it with ranged attacks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ninja-Bear Posted March 23, 2018 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2018 49 minutes ago, Ndreare said: Yes Multiple Attack is basically the old sweep from 5th Ed and earlier. Yes I’m thinking Fifth particularly. Well Surrealone I failed my activation roll. ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ninja-Bear Posted March 23, 2018 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2018 Thanks guys, I now understand it better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ninja-Bear Posted June 25, 2018 Author Report Share Posted June 25, 2018 Quick follow up. Which modifiers do I use with a multiple Move By? Do I just use the multiple attack rules or do I use the worst of both maneuvers? Mainly do I count my first -2 on the second target as MA or on the first as in Move By. TIA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cantriped Posted June 25, 2018 Report Share Posted June 25, 2018 IIRC you combine all relevent CV modifiers as appropriate. In that regard, Multiple Attack functions more like a Combat Modifier (like Spreading An Attack) than a Combat Maneuver in that you are always performing another Combat Maneuver with it; even if that maneuver is just a simple Strike using Strength or Blast. With a Multiple Move By using Strength and a CV of 6 to attack twice; the CV modifiers should be: [OCV] + [Move-By] + [Multiple-Attack] = 6 + (-2) + (-2 × 1) = OCV 2. ([DCV] + [Move-by]) ÷ [Multiple Attack] = (6 + (-2)) ÷ 2 = DCV 2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghost-angel Posted June 25, 2018 Report Share Posted June 25, 2018 You add up all the modifiers and apply them to all attacks. The -2 for each target after the first applies to all attack Rolls, the -2 for Move-By applies to all attack rolls. You're modifier is -4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ninja-Bear Posted June 26, 2018 Author Report Share Posted June 26, 2018 And the 1/2 DCV for Multiple Attack supersede -2 DCV for Move By, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucius Posted June 26, 2018 Report Share Posted June 26, 2018 6 hours ago, Ninja-Bear said: And the 1/2 DCV for Multiple Attack supersede -2 DCV for Move By, right? As I understand it, first you subtract the -2, then you halve it. So if DCV is 6 you subtract 2 to get 4, then halve that to get DCV 2. Lucius Alexander If I have 2 palindromedaries and subtract 1 and then halve what's left I get - something that looks like half a camel? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ninja-Bear Posted June 26, 2018 Author Report Share Posted June 26, 2018 3 hours ago, Lucius said: As I understand it, first you subtract the -2, then you halve it. So if DCV is 6 you subtract 2 to get 4, then halve that to get DCV 2. Lucius Alexander If I have 2 palindromedaries and subtract 1 and then halve what's left I get - something that looks like half a camel? Egads I hope not! I re-read the wording again in CC and it says you take the least favorable modifiers. That to me doesn’t imply add or use both modifiers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ninja-Bear Posted June 26, 2018 Author Report Share Posted June 26, 2018 Oh and to add on. When you grab, you’re at -2 DCV unless successful, then you you’re at 1/2 DCV of your full DCV not 1/2 DCV from you reduced DCV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eepjr24 Posted June 26, 2018 Report Share Posted June 26, 2018 Bad news, Bear. (Sorry, I could not resist) 6e2, 37 Quote DCV CHECKLIST 1. Determine base DCV (character’s DCV Characteristic). 2. Add any applicable Combat Skill Levels the character wishes to use to increase his DCV. 3. Apply any modifiers for the particular weapon, armor, or shield the character uses. 4. Apply any modifiers for the particular Combat Maneuver or Martial Maneuver the character uses. 5. Apply any Combat Modifiers. 6. Apply any other modifiers. 7. Apply any modifiers that halve DCV (or otherwise reduce it by a fraction or percentage). A character’s DCV can only be halved once, regardless of how many “halving” modifiers he’s subject to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ninja-Bear Posted June 26, 2018 Author Report Share Posted June 26, 2018 Ouch- ok then, that’s brutal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unclevlad Posted June 26, 2018 Report Share Posted June 26, 2018 Could be worse. Most things in 5 and 6 are going to be penalties, I think, so halving after them actually means the penalties are mitigated somewhat. For the most part this is the most common approach in all systems I've known, as long as the sources are separate. The norm is "apply all modifiers." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ninja-Bear Posted June 26, 2018 Author Report Share Posted June 26, 2018 Not sure how air could be worse. We went front a -2 DCV to -2 then 1/2 DCV. I have a feeling the 1/2 in the DCV checklist is for things like Enviromental penalties and being Prone though the checklist doesn’t say it. I’m going to stay with the replacement idea above thread for my game anyways. Thanks again all! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unclevlad Posted June 26, 2018 Report Share Posted June 26, 2018 It'd be worse to change the order around. Can argue that any 1/2 DCV penalty is actually a bad idea, in that it penalizes the "more skilled." Someone with a 10 DCV takes a -5; some brick with a 5, is only taking a -2. This is poor rules construction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ninja-Bear Posted June 26, 2018 Author Report Share Posted June 26, 2018 True! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghost-angel Posted June 27, 2018 Report Share Posted June 27, 2018 I hate that Multiple Attack halves DCV. It's something so basic that it should just be part of the system, it circles back around to "If Linked is a Limitation, using two non-Linked Attacks should also be allowed normally." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmjalund Posted June 27, 2018 Report Share Posted June 27, 2018 i think 1/2 DCV is used to represent restricted mobility, so limiting the effectiveness of defensive maneuvering Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.