Jump to content

Multiple attack and Combined Attack


Ninja-Bear

Recommended Posts

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?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 77
  • Created
  • Last Reply
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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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?

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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."

Link to post
Share on other sites

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! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...