Jump to content

Attack and Bite in the same round?


Recommended Posts

Is it possible for something like a Baboon to Attack with a spear and Bite in the same round? Does this fall under the rule of Attacking with both weapons OR Attack with one and Parry with the other in the same round?  Or would the Baboon be able to Attack with a spear, Attack with a bite, then also Parry or Dodge?

Sorry if this has been covered, I searched and was unable to find this information in the forums.

Cheers,

Toad

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Blacktoad said:

Is it possible for something like a Baboon to Attack with a spear and Bite in the same round? Does this fall under the rule of Attacking with both weapons OR Attack with one and Parry with the other in the same round?  Or would the Baboon be able to Attack with a spear, Attack with a bite, then also Parry or Dodge?

 

I would think that unless the rules stated otherwise one would use the rules of adding the two SRs and if they are 12 or less one should be able to use both. This might limit a beast from having two strikes and I have found nothing in the RQB RQ RiG or the WoD to contradict this. 

1 hour ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

 Only limit on parry and dodge is the -20% cumulative penalty. 

And if the critter is smart enough to not try a parry with its teeth might be another limit on this.

 

Edited by Bill the barbarian
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

I would think that unless the rules stated otherwise one would use the rules of adding the two SRs and if they are 12 or less one should be able to use both

Iirc this question came up with the dream dragon attacks. I can’t find the topic, but I believe it was answered in the core questions thread which is now locked, and unavailable for searching. My recollection was that unless stated other wise, you choose one of the attacks.
With the Dream dragon this changed from RQ2’s two attacks, to just one in RQG after the clarification.
Could be worth seeing how RQ2 handled number of baboon attacks? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

irc this question came up with the dream dragon attacks. I can’t find the topic, but I believe it was answered in the core questions thread which is now locked, and unavailable for searching. My recollection was that unless stated other wise, you choose one of the attacks.
With the Dream dragon this changed from RQ2’s two attacks, to just one in RQG after the clarification.

I remember that. Which is why I was surprised to not find it in the Well of Daliath @Scotty is this making the transition to WoD? So agreed,  but seeing as adventurers are allowed split attacks and attacking with two weapons I am sure  that if the dragon or baboon in question will follow the same rules* they can imitate adventurers and do multiple attacks as well.

Everyone should look at the WoD for the rules on splitting 2 Weapon Attacks. They are a little different then I remember and and a little different than I thought as they made the translation to RQG. Both weapons being split must be the same (this was the part that surprised me) and off hand penalties apply

Baboon: What iz rulez?

Dragon: Damn good eating! Who wants to imitate adventurers anyway!

Edited by Bill the barbarian
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

Everyone should look at the WoD for the rules on splitting 2 Weapon Attacks. They are a little different then I remember and and a little different than I thought as they made the translation to RQG. Both weapons being split must be the same (this was the part that surprised me) and off hand penalties apply

Yeah - RQG core book gives the proviso for splitting attacks that:

• You can have any split of the % so long as none of the attacks are brought below 50% - As a ruling I guess for simplicity sake you can just rule 50/50 split. Either way is workable depending on how much granularity you want I guess.

Regarding Two weapon attacks I seem to recall two approaches:

• Off hand weapon starts at 5% plus modifiers (in the core).

• Off hand weapon is 50% of your standard attack ( think I may have read that as an answer from Jason?) 

Edit: just checked WoD - off hand weapon only starts at 5% if you don’t have any preexisting skill in it. Other wise it’s 50% of your standard attack.
 


 

 

Edited by Paid a bod yn dwp
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

Iirc this question came up with the dream dragon attacks. I can’t find the topic,

 

Quote

but I believe it was answered in the core questions thread

Not asked there.

Quote

which is now locked, and unavailable for searching.

All of the Q&A have been transferred to the appropriate Q&A on the Well of Daliath, where not still in thread. Locked threads are still searchable if the content is there. The WoD is fully searchable:

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Scotty said:

 

Not asked there.

All of the Q&A have been transferred to the appropriate Q&A on the Well of Daliath, where not still in thread. Locked threads are still searchable if the content is there. The WoD is fully searchable:

Ah ok so regarding the OP’s original question, and with Scotty’s direction above, the answer is just one attack, unless it’s specifically called out in the creature description. 
 

Of course if you have a super skilful baboon that meets all the requirements then they can split their attacks, but they would have to designate which form of attack they’re using. 
 

But if you’re following the Two weapon attacks rule ( seems harsh to penalise baboons for having claws and teeth) then perhaps we should be allowing them one of those attacks as well providing there’s enough SR’s at their full %? After all a human warrior can make a weapon attack and a shield attack  at full shield  % ( though they loose the shield parry). What say you @Scotty

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Blacktoad said:

Is it possible for something like a Baboon to Attack with a spear and Bite in the same round? Does this fall under the rule of Attacking with both weapons OR Attack with one and Parry with the other in the same round?  Or would the Baboon be able to Attack with a spear, Attack with a bite, then also Parry or Dodge?

RQ Bestiary, Weapons, page 8:

Quote

Many creatures can attack more than once in a round: if so, unless specified otherwise, the creature uses both attacks at once, instead of working under the guidelines for two-weapon combat shown in the Combat chapter of the RuneQuest: Roleplaying in Glorantha rulebook.

Two-weapon combat was further clarified in Rune Fixes 2 – 18th March 2020

Baboons, page 29:

Quote

Note: Common tactic is to stab with a spear and close to use Claw or Bite. 

Looking at the ranges involved a baboon would use it's spear and it has a longer reach than claw, then bite, then rush its target to grapple and bite or claw. One attack and as many parry / dodge as available. Note that a baboon with a shield and spear can't claw.

The baboon tactics I use are: spear, then knockback, hoping for a knockdown then bite.

Edited by Scotty
Added to Q&A
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Scotty said:

The baboon tactics I use are: spear, then knockback, hoping for a knockdown then bite.

How does that play out? 

• Melee Round 1 - spear attack,

• Melee round 2 - knockback attack

• Melee Round 3 - bite

 

Or following two weapon attack rule:

• melee round 1 - spear attack, and knockback attack 

• melee round 2 - bite, and claw attack.


 

@Scotty Presumably unless we’re splitting attacks, or the creature description says otherwise, there’s a hard limit of two attacks per round (if two or more forms of attacks listed) following the two-weapon rule? So baboons would be able to use any 2 combinations of those attacks listed in a melee round?  

Would this be sensible general guidance? - Of course circumstantial practicalities, and Gm fiat always a consideration. 

 

 

Edited by Paid a bod yn dwp
Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

How does that play out?

It's entirely dependent on the situation. None of my players use two weapons, making combat quicker / easier. So dependant on the actions:

53 minutes ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

• Melee Round 1 - spear attack,

• Melee round 2 - knockback attack

• Melee Round 3 - bite

Depending on who the opponent is, baboons would only go for a knockdown if the target is the same size or smaller than them. The knockdown attempt  is usually augmented with their strength or Beast (both usually 80%, so normally i'd just roll). If they succeed and get the knockdown as well (usually 50/50 + plus an DEX augment, they might get a special) the next round is an aimed head/neck bite at SR12, otherwise carry on with a spear.

53 minutes ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

Or following two weapon attack rule:

• melee round 1 - spear attack, and knockback attack 

• melee round 2 - bite, and claw attack.

A single melee round spear at SR6 and Knockback attempt at SR12, would mean no parry or dodge. (I wouldn't do that).

The second round would only be a bite, as they've a two handed weapon, with the same damage as their claws. The bite does more damage.

53 minutes ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

Would this be sensible general guidance? - Of course circumstantial practicalities, and Gm fiat always a consideration. 

Overall, with creatures with multiple weapons, look at how they work when fighting, rather than focussing on the weapons and numbers.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Scotty said:

Overall, with creatures with multiple weapons, look at how they work when fighting, rather than focussing on the weapons and numbers.

Yes agree with playing what’s in front of you, but surely there’s a hard and fast limit to any combination? Guidance within which you improvise as you said?

Seems likely to me that unless stated otherwise, that limit is two attacks (sr permitting) following the two-weapon ruling? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So to return to the op question, following scotty answer in the Q&A thread - the only limitations on use of listed attacks are circumstantial, and Strike ranks. If the creature notes don’t say other wise, attacks on the same SR happen simultaneously (see p8 bestiary)

The Baboon could make a spear attack on SR 6, but there aren’t enough SR’s to also employ bite and claw attacks in the same melee round. However next round the baboon could drop the spear and choose to attack simultaneously with two claw attacks, and a bite (as there’s no rule to say otherwise. See p8 bestiary) -  provided of course it meets with the narrative and makes sense. Of course  that maybe a tall order, requiring a downed opponent etc.

Getting up personal, biting and clawing simultaneously, probably wouldn’t be possible in most combat circumstances, many gms would rule either one bite or one claw attack in a standard encounter, but there is potential for 2 claw attacks, and a bite in one melee round but it’s circumstantial. 

 

Its a funny beast RuneQuest. Lots of crunchy rules, but also lots of rulings not rules circumstances.

I had expected there to be a cap of two attacks as per standard pc’s, as it’s so specific in the rules, but that is apparently not the case. Have to admit to feeling that it’s an odd juxtaposition compared to how tight the rules are on standard PC attacks. 


 

 

 



 

 

Edited by Paid a bod yn dwp
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

The Baboon could make a spear attack on SR 6, but there aren’t enough SR’s to also employ bite and claw attacks in the same melee round. However next round the baboon could drop the spear and choose to attack simultaneously with two claw attacks, and a bite (as there’s no rule to say otherwise. See p8 bestiary) -  provided of course it meets with the narrative and makes sense. Of course  that maybe a tall order, requiring a downed opponent etc.

Absolutely agree with the first part. Personally though I wouldn't allow Baboon's multiple attacks, for the simple reason as why not apply it to humans? All the creatures that have multiple attacks have it stated in their descriptions. I think that the rule on Page 8 relates to those creatures that already have multiple attacks do so in the same SR unless noted otherwise, and not that it applies to all creatures. 

Although given that to knock someone down requires a Special on the Knockback, attacking with the spear and hoping to inflict a serious leg or abdomen would be a better option?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also remember if the defending player makes a special parry, then the weapon used to parry causes damage to the attacking weapon.  A PC in my game just skewered a Broo through the head after he specialed his Broadsword parry in response to the Broo's Headbutt attack.  In previous versions that extra attack may not have received a defensive roll, but in RQG the second attack can be defended with only a -20 defense.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Psullie said:

Personally though I wouldn't allow Baboon's multiple attacks, for the simple reason as why not apply it to humans? All the creatures that have multiple attacks have it stated in their descriptions. I think that the rule on Page 8 relates to those creatures that already have multiple attacks do so in the same SR unless noted otherwise, and not that it applies to all creatures. 

Yes I actually agree with you. That’s how I would have interpreted it too. But the answer given by Scotty is more open ended.

This has got me thinking, I’ve delved back into RQ2 and RQ3 for answers.

Heres the issues with RQG attack entires as I see them:

• The rule on p8 under “weapons” is clumsily written. If you compare it to the Dream Dragon entry which has many attacks listed on the same SR, taken literally the rule would mean the Dragon has 3 different attacks that can happen simultaneously (Same SR). There is no exception noted in the dragon description as required by the rule on p8, so all those attacks can happen simultaneously. Obviously that number of attacks would be overkill, so the rule on p8 must be incorrect, or they forgot to add the exception to the dragon description. 
 

• The dragons 4 attack forms are taken directly from the RQ3 version. In RQ2 there were only two attack methods, and both could potentially be made in melee round. Further In RQ3 there is clear direction on how to use the 4 dragons attack methods, this helpful advice is omitted from RQG:
 

“ A Dragon has two attacks each round: it may either bite or breath flame for one attack, and either use claw or tail for the other. The bite will come 3 strike ranks after any other attacks being performed. When flying, a dragon only has a breath attack.”  - RQ3. 
 

The only mechanical difference here with RQ3 is that a second attack occurs 3 SR’s later. In contrast in RQG you add on the second attack’s SR to the first, or attack simultaneously if sharing the same SR. RQ3 also only allowed a maximum of 2 attacks, but you would have to sacrifice parry/dodge to make a second attack. Regardless of the mechanical differences between editions, you can still have those two dragon attacks, and maybe even 3 in RQG.  Though I suspect as with RQ2 and RQ3, two attacks are supposed to be the default.

The confusion with the dragon in RQG is that it has 3 attacks that can happen “simultaneously” if you are following the rules to the letter (see p8). I feel we’re definitely missing a little guidance in the dragons notes on how to use the attacks, particularly if you’re new to the game and unfamiliar with the rules.  
 

This all goes back to the baboons in RQG as well. In RQ3 they had (like humans) a maximum of two attacks:

“A common technique is to stab with the javelin, then bite 3 SR’s later. As with humans, if a baboon attacks twice, it waives any parry or dodge” - RQ3, Gloranthan Bestiary.

In RQG you do have this two attack limit (but missing the defensive penalty) for humanoids, so it feels fitting to apply that limit to baboons, which can also be player characters. 
 

In RQ2 (with which RQG shares the same combat notes) 

“A common technique is to stab with a spear and close to use claw or bite”

This translates in RQ2 to two attacks in a melee round ( like RQ3). Spear on SR 4, then claw or bite on SR12.

In RQG which shares the same tactical notes for baboons, the SR of the spear attack is changed to 6 (it was 4 in RQ2) So any follow up claw/bite has to occur the following round, which I’m not sure was intentional? Those notes specifically called out two attacks in a melee round in RQ2, in RQG there isn’t much point to them, its arbitrary, as you can obviously choose any attack you wish at the start of the melee round. I suspect that’s an oversight@Scotty?
The original design intention of allowing two attacks in a melee round has been lost. 


 

 

Edited by Paid a bod yn dwp
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

This translates in RQ2 to two attacks in a melee round ( like RQ3). Spear on SR 4, then claw or bite on SR12.

In RQG which shares the same tactical notes for baboons, the SR of the spear attack is changed to 6 (it was 4 in RQ2) So any follow up claw/bite has to occur the following round, which I’m not sure was intentional? Those notes specifically called out two attacks in a melee round in RQ2, in RQG there isn’t much point to them, its arbitrary, as you can obviously choose any attack you wish at the start of the melee round. I suspect that’s an oversight@Scotty?
The original design intention of allowing two attacks in a melee round has been lost. 

Checking out the baboons statistic in RQG, it’s dex has shot up to 3d6+6! When did they get so dextrous!? Surely a mistake?
 

Also the SR of 6 with the spear attack is in line with a baboon with a dex of 2d6+6, and not reflective of the stated 3d6+6 dex, which I’m pretty sure is how it should be if as I imagine baboons aren’t super dextrous.

Interestingly if we say the baboons dex is supposed to be 2d6+6, then all the sr calculations including weapon are in line with how they are calculated in RQ2.

Critically in RQ2 they have actually brought the overall spear attack SR down to 4 for the baboon so both attacks fit into the melee round. This doesn’t fit if you follow the standard way to calculate SR’s. Seems that it was purposefully manipulated contrary to the rules, so the baboon could get those two attacks in the melee round.

Perhaps if generating a player baboon character this could be replicated ( along with correcting the baboons dex) by saying the baboon has some kind of cult or cultural affinity with the one-handed spear, letting the spear be a special case SR 0 weapon, instead of its listed SR 2? That would make sense of the RQ2 write up, and by extension also allow baboons in RQG get those 2 attacks in a melee round, as the combat notes allude to. Either that or break with convention and make the baboons second attack 3 strike ranks later (borrowed from RQ3, this same exception is made for the snow troll in the RQG bestiary).

 

Edited by Paid a bod yn dwp
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok thanks to Scotty and persistence from myself ( I intend to make a baboon character) we have finally got to the bottom (excuse the pun) of the baboons attacks

So to pull together the research and answer the OP, if you look at Scott’s reply above you will see that the SR’s have been calculated incorrectly in the RQG bestiary. If you follow Scott’s recalculation you get an average baboon that can attack twice in a melee round as per the baboon combat notes. 
 

  • The spear attack will be SR5, followed by the bite or claw attack on SR12.

In RQG any number of parries /dodges are possible as they don’t require strike ranks like they used to in past editions. But each parry/dodge can only be directed at one attack. Further parries/dodges after the first are subject to a minus 20% cumulative penalty. Unless there is an exception noted in the creatures combat notes.

Oh and apparently baboons are super dextrous, following the RQ3 write up.

I think it’s safe to say as a general guidance that creatures have 1 or 2 attacks, unless specified otherwise in the their combat notes. This was the case with the Dream Dragon in RQ2 and RQ3, and I see no reason to change that presumption, unless you are going for all out dragon carnage 🙂 

Edited by Paid a bod yn dwp
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

I think it’s safe to say as a general guidance that creatures have 1 or 2 attacks, unless specified otherwise in the their combat notes. This was the case with the Dream Dragon in RQ2 and RQ3, and I see no reason to change that presumption, unless you are going for all out dragon carnage 🙂 

...and I thought that was exactly what I said what  said way back when.... 🙂

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bill the barbarian said:

...and I thought that was exactly what I said what  said way back when.... 🙂

Heh heh yes! I think it was a combination of things that led us on a merry dance - the error with the baboon sr calculations, the dragon not having accompanying combat notes, and the interaction of those things with the rule under “weapons” on p8 of the bestiary.

Baboons were in a fluster! 🤪

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

...and I thought that was exactly what I said what  said way back when.... 🙂

we wouldn't be role-players if we didn't the long way to get back were we started

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

Heh heh yes! I think it was a combination of things that led us on a merry dance - the error with the baboon sr calculations, the dragon not having accompanying combat notes, and the interaction of those things with the rule under “weapons” on p8 of the bestiary.

Baboons were in a fluster! 🤪

Yes I can see now flicking through the RQG bestiary, the main design issue with the RQG  Bestiary is that it’s missing quite a few of the combat notes for creatures, that were originally included with creatures in previous editions (mostly the RQ3 ones)
 

For example the Lesser Hydra is missing it’s combat notes, as is the Dream Dragon. I haven’t checked the whole book but I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a few more missing. I feel that’s a shame as those kind of notes are really helpful for new comers to RuneQuest. We shouldn’t presume that new gamers know how a lesser hydra attacks with its many heads. Not everyone knows the story of the hydra, or has the previous knowledge of past RuneQuest editions. 
 

Sometimes a prompt like the combat notes is the spur newcomers need to grasp the concept of the creature, particularly with a crunchy game like RuneQuest. Be good if Chaosium could print future editions with all the combat notes included, particularly with the spirit of opening up the game to new comers (think starter set). Feel the absence of some combat notes in the bestiary are a presumption which isn’t helpful to newcomers. 

I may have to start a separate thread to note which creatures are missing combat notes, which could serve the basis of an errata. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

Yes I can see now flicking through the RQG bestiary, the main design issue with the RQG  Bestiary is that it’s missing quite a few of the combat notes for creatures, that were originally included with creatures in previous editions (mostly the RQ3 ones)
 

For example the Lesser Hydra is missing it’s combat notes, as is the Dream Dragon. I haven’t checked the whole book but I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a few more missing. I feel that’s a shame as those kind of notes are really helpful for new comers to RuneQuest. We shouldn’t presume that new gamers know how a lesser hydra attacks with its many heads. Not everyone knows the story of the hydra, or has the previous knowledge of past RuneQuest editions. 
 

Sometimes a prompt like the combat notes is the spur newcomers need to grasp the concept of the creature, particularly with a crunchy game like RuneQuest. Be good if Chaosium could print future editions with all the combat notes included, particularly with the spirit of opening up the game to new comers (think starter set). Feel the absence of some combat notes in the bestiary are a presumption which isn’t helpful to newcomers. 

I may have to start a separate thread to note which creatures are missing combat notes, which could serve the basis of an errata. 

yeah, and it's a problem for older players too

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/18/2021 at 5:08 AM, Scotty said:

A single melee round spear at SR6 and Knockback attempt at SR12, would mean no parry or dodge. (I wouldn't do that).

I didn't understand this statement about "no parry or dodge" since, AFAICT, you always get parry and dodge (at -20% cumulative) in RQG? I don't know RQ3 but it looks like it might have been Scotty still playing with these old rules:

Quote

The only mechanical difference here with RQ3 is that a second attack occurs 3 SR’s later. In contrast in RQG you add on the second attack’s SR to the first, or attack simultaneously if sharing the same SR. RQ3 also only allowed a maximum of 2 attacks, but you would have to sacrifice parry/dodge to make a second attack.

(emphasis mine)

So I think with RQG you can attack as many times as you can (split attack and/or special monster ability), and dodge/parry as many times as you want (at a cumulative penalty), right?

 

On 3/18/2021 at 11:16 AM, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

Its a funny beast RuneQuest. Lots of crunchy rules, but also lots of rulings not rules circumstances.

Yep. This creates a weird disconnect for me sometimes.

 

On 3/19/2021 at 4:50 AM, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

So to pull together the research and answer the OP, if you look at Scott’s reply above you will see that the SR’s have been calculated incorrectly in the RQG bestiary. If you follow Scott’s recalculation you get an average baboon that can attack twice in a melee round as per the baboon combat notes. 

Oh good investigating! So the average Baboon has SR (1+2+2)=5 (instead of 6) with a short spear? And unarmed attacks are (1+2+4)=7 (instead of 8 ) ?

Personally I wouldn't, by default, allow attacking twice per round with both hands, for the same reason I wouldn't allow humans to roll for punch twice per round because they have two arms. You need a >100% skill in unarmed combat and then you can split the attack. Some monsters may have some special ability that lets them do multiple attacks without splitting skills, but Baboons don't have that AFAICT. Baboons therefore could attack twice with a spear if they have a good skill (SR5 and SR10), but they wouldn't have enough SRs to attack twice with unarmed attacks.

For a spear attack followed by a claw attack in the same round, I may be OK using the dual-weapon rules (but with the second weapon being an unarmed attack... I would ignore the bits about off-hand attacks though since that doesn't apply to punching/kicking/biting IMHO). So a human could do a Spartan-kick move where they strike with a sword or axe and then do a knockback with a kick... but it's likely they don't have enough SRs. The average Baboon, with his high DEX and low SR spear, just barely has enough: SR5+SR7=SR12. But he doesn't have enough to do a claw attack followed by a bite in the same round (SR7+SR7 goes above the 12 SRs). That's fine, especially since I may rule that biting requires grappling first anyway.

 

12 hours ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

I may have to start a separate thread to note which creatures are missing combat notes, which could serve the basis of an errata. 

Combat notes are super helpful for newcomers, yes, so that would be awesome!

Edited by lordabdul
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...