CSL and Abort

[steph]

Hi, yesterday in our Fantasy session, we had a rules discussion. I present the situation: One of the players plays a ranger who in a fight used his bow. An enemy who plays before him decides to attack him '' head shot '' with his mass. The ranger decides to abort to dodge and use his CSL with the sword to improve his DCV. We have the rule of not opening books during a session. But my question is this, with his bow in his hand, the ranger could use his CSL with the sword to help his DCV? I hope my question is clear

[Pegasus40218]

53 minutes ago, steph said:

Hi, yesterday in our Fantasy session, we had a rules discussion. I present the situation: One of the players plays a ranger who in a fight used his bow. An enemy who plays before him decides to attack him '' head shot '' with his mass. The ranger decides to abort to dodge and use his CSL with the sword to improve his DCV. We have the rule of not opening books during a session. But my question is this, with his bow in his hand, the ranger could use his CSL with the sword to help his DCV? I hope my question is clear

I'm far from a rules expert, but I would say that CSLs with the sword can't be used unless you're actually using your sword.

[Doc Democracy]

I am with Pegasus but I might be willing to be lenient and allow use of CSL with Sword for DCV if the opponent is actually using a sword....

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

The only stipulations mentioned on using a CSL to increase DCV are the "at least 3 points" and "same types" stipulations.  Rules-as-written, the CSL would apply. 

 

I can't say I see the logic behind making a skilled warrior become less competent at dodging just because he's not holding a metal stick.  Blocking of course, but blocking already keys off OCV. 

[Ninja-Bear]

If the levels were specially bought for sword (2 pt level) , then no. Else (I think you meant Mace instead of mass?) then yeah it’s good.

[steph]

3 hours ago, Ninja-Bear said:

If the levels were specially bought for sword (2 pt level) , then no. Else (I think you meant Mace instead of mass?) then yeah it’s good.

Yeah mace. Sorry language barrier. French native here. ?

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

5 hours ago, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

I can't say I see the logic behind making a skilled warrior become less competent at dodging just because he's not holding a metal stick.  Blocking of course, but blocking already keys off OCV. 

Stronger fluff-argument: 

A character with gun CSLs can apply those CSLs to DCV against ranged attacks.  Surely his defense against ranged attacks does not involve blocking, parrying, or otherwise defending himself with a gun.  It is clear he can benefit from improved DCV regardless of what he is holding or not holding.  Therefore, weapon CSLs cannot be taken to require the weapon be in use to provide DCV. 

[Doc Democracy]

5 hours ago, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

Stronger fluff-argument: 

A character with gun CSLs can apply those CSLs to DCV against ranged attacks.  Surely his defense against ranged attacks does not involve blocking, parrying, or otherwise defending himself with a gun.  It is clear he can benefit from improved DCV regardless of what he is holding or not holding.  Therefore, weapon CSLs cannot be taken to require the weapon be in use to provide DCV. 

 

Just playing Devil's Advocate, your use of an offensive weapon to reduce an opponent's ability to hit you does not necessarily involve blocking but it might require you to have the weapon in hand.  If you are chasing me and I have a gun, that I use to threaten or actually shoot at you, I can degrade your offensive capabilities.  If I did not have the weapon in my hand then I would not be as good at doing that.  #ItsNotAllAboutDodging

 

?

 

Doc

[Ninja-Bear]

6 hours ago, steph said:

Yeah mace. Sorry language barrier. French native here. ?

No problem. I assume autocorrect myself. Trust me I only can speak English and my wife wonders if i can only do that sometime. ?

[Brian Stanfield]

The rule on CSLs (in 6e at least) says that you can only increase DCV against attacks of the same type as the CSL. So a mace against a bow is HTH vs. Ranged, and doesn’t qualify. 

 

As for whether you must actually have the sword equipped to get the CSL, it seems to me that the skill level is related somehow to the sword itself, and a particular skill with the sword. Maybe it’s a flick of the wrist while facing off, or the way one stands with the sword, etc., that makes the character more protected than if he were using a different (i.e., less skilled) weapon. I guess this is ultimately a judgment call on the GM, but I don’t see getting those benefits of using a sword (as opposed to any other weapon) unless you’re actually armed with the sword.

[Netzilla]

My personal ruling regarding weapon-based CSLs in defense is that either the attacker or defender must be welding the weapon in question.  The knowledge behind the skill means you know how to use the weapon defensively as well as how to defend against the weapon.

 

In your specific scenario, neither party was wielding a sword, so the CSL would not apply.

[eepjr24]

From a rules standpoint I think the book is pretty clear on this situation. 

 

First: (6e1, 69)

Quote

Unless the GM permits otherwise, a character can only allocate a CSL on a Phase when he uses an attack/power that CSL applies to. For example, if a character has a 3-point Combat Skill Level with his Blast, he can only assign that Level (for any purpose) on Phases when he uses his Blast.

 

So he is using a bow, he cannot assign sword levels at all that phase.

 

Second: (6e1, 69)

Quote

Characters can use one CSL costing 3 or more Character points against the same types of attacks (HTH or Ranged) for which the CSL could increase OCV. For example, a CSL with swordfighting could increase DCV in HTH Combat (against any type of HTH attack), but not in Ranged Combat.

 

So as far as using a sword CSL for DCV against a mace (or other HTH weapon), that is fine.

 

Edit: This is the same verbiage as 5e, in 4e the wording was more vague and could have been interpreted either way.

- E

Edited March 26, 2019 by eepjr24
Added 4e, 5e comment.

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

8 hours ago, eepjr24 said:

From a rules standpoint I think the book is pretty clear on this situation.

"Allocate" and "Benefit from" are distinct.  I read that as meaning that a character cannot reassign where the bonus is going without appropriate weapon/power in use, not that they cannot benefit from it without appropriate weapon/power in active use. 

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

14 hours ago, Doc Democracy said:

Just playing Devil's Advocate, your use of an offensive weapon to reduce an opponent's ability to hit you does not necessarily involve blocking but it might require you to have the weapon in hand.  If you are chasing me and I have a gun, that I use to threaten or actually shoot at you, I can degrade your offensive capabilities.  If I did not have the weapon in my hand then I would not be as good at doing that.  #ItsNotAllAboutDodging

 

?

 

Doc

Reasonable.  IIF IPE Blast, then. 

[archer]

I've always played it that you have to have a weapon equipped to use skill levels associated with that weapon.

 

My 2 cents:

 

He's learned a sword skill which allows him to dodge around with a sword without cutting himself or something else at random in his surroundings or getting his sword stuck in something...all without having to be particularly careful about it. That "not having to be particularly careful about it" is what gives him the DCV advantage from the skill levels. He moves fluidly and his skill allows the sword to move with him as if it is part of his body: he's not in any danger from his sword but his opponent still has to respect the sword and work around it in order to successfully attack.

 

The player can't use the sword levels to dodge when he's completely unarmed because the opponent isn't having to work around the player's sword in order to successfully attack. The opponent can just go in and swing unobstructed.

 

Similarly, the player hasn't paid points to learn how to dodge around with a bow without being particularly careful about it. If he isn't careful, he could snap the bow by whacking it against something or lose all the arrows out of his quiver. So his ability to dodge is more constrained than it would be if he had skill in knowing how to dodge while using a bow and arrows.

 

[eepjr24]

1 hour ago, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

"Allocate" and "Benefit from" are distinct.  I read that as meaning that a character cannot reassign where the bonus is going without appropriate weapon/power in use, not that they cannot benefit from it without appropriate weapon/power in active use. 

So wait, by your reading, I could have +2 with Swords. With sword in hand, I allocate my 2 levels to DCV. I switch to Bow and if someone attacks me hand to hand, I benefit from the DCV? 

 

That is also explicitly not legal. (6e1, pg 69):

 

Quote

A CSL (of any cost) applied to DCV is not Persistent (and cannot be made so except by buying the Skill Defense Maneuver at level IV; see 6E1 74); instead, the character must specify when he’s using the CSL (he cannot specify that he uses it “at all times”).

 

As a GM, you can read things however you want. But in the standard Hero rules environment, it's pretty clear.

 

- E

[dsatow]

We used to play 4e with the house rule, that levels less than 5 points couldn't be used for DCV and also assumes that the level was applicable for DCV (5 OCV only levels not withstanding).  The only exception to this is the 3 point level for martial arts which could be used to enhance martial arts DCV.

 

Given in 6th ed, I'd probably allow it even if they didn't have a sword in hand so long as the type of DCV (ranged vs. melee) matched.

[eepjr24]

36 minutes ago, dsatow said:

We used to play 4e with the house rule, that levels less than 5 points couldn't be used for DCV and also assumes that the level was applicable for DCV (5 OCV only levels not withstanding).  The only exception to this is the 3 point level for martial arts which could be used to enhance martial arts DCV.

 

Given in 6th ed, I'd probably allow it even if they didn't have a sword in hand so long as the type of DCV (ranged vs. melee) matched.

 

In my games, I would (and do) not, since CSL's are already very useful for the points that are being spent. I actually agree with the cost increases in 6e, generally, since the skill levels at the overall level are basically an MP of skill levels and CSL's are adding to OCV or DCV directly for the weapons and types of attacks that the character is most likely to use or they would not be buying them.

 

- E