Melee Ranges

[Sir Erwin]

On 6/19/2024 at 6:57 AM, Luca Cherstich said:

Thinking again...

Defensive is not always the answer.

A Knifeman (Close Combat Weapon) should attack a Swordman (Normal Range weapon) has two opsions:

• Attacking at -5/+5 for 1 round and, in case of success, dealing damage and closing-up in Step 5.
• Defend at +10, -5/+5 = +5/+5 and, in case of success, NOT dealing damage and closing-up in Step 5. 

I'm very sorry if I'm sounding pedantic. I'm just trying to fully grok these rules as written before I worry about houserules or anything like that. In this scenario, would it make sense for the knifeman to deal damage since damage is dealt in steps 3-4, and closing in is done in step 5? He would still be at long range at the time damage is dealt.

Also, another point of confusion for me, the rules state that "A character wishing to move to a closer distance must first win their opposed Combat Action, at which point they close in..." (Melee Distances pg. 135)
Defend, dodge, and evade are all listed as Acts, and under the Action Classifactions list on page 137, Acts are non-Combat Actions. Does this mean that, if you have the intention to close the melee distance, you must choose an action explicitly listed as Combat?

[Morien]

41 minutes ago, Sir Erwin said:

Also, another point of confusion for me, the rules state that "A character wishing to move to a closer distance must first win their opposed Combat Action, at which point they close in..." (Melee Distances pg. 135)
Defend, dodge, and evade are all listed as Acts, and under the Action Classifactions list on page 137, Acts are non-Combat Actions. Does this mean that, if you have the intention to close the melee distance, you must choose an action explicitly listed as Combat?

The problem is with the phrasing of those categories on p. 137, I feel. After all, Defend is an Act, because it doesn't do damage, but all Acts are also under the general title of Combat Actions. I think there is a confusion between Combat Actions ("A Combat Action is anything a character chooses to do during a Combat Round.") and Combat Actions that are labelled as Combat ("An action used to damage or affect an opponent at Close Quarters or greater distance."). These two definitions are clearly not the same. Thus, an 'Act' is also a Combat Action, but it is also a Non-Combat Combat Action, to make it more confusing.

Frankly, it would have been better to use simply 'Actions' instead of 'Combat Actions' as the overall category, and have Act Actions, Brawling Actions, Combat Actions, ...

Anyway, I point to not only the above quotation in p. 137, but also to p. 132, where it is clear that "Combat Actions" are all actions that the Player-character might try that round, including moving, doing Acts, etc.

Edited June 23 by Morien

[Sir Erwin]

9 minutes ago, Morien said:

Anyway, I point to not only the above quotation in p. 137, but also to p. 132, where it is clear that "Combat Actions" are all actions that the Player-character might try that round, including moving, doing Acts, etc.

I see, that makes sense to me. In this case, it would make sense for a knifeman to Defend with the intention of closing in. 

 

Thank you for your response!

[Luca Cherstich]

On 6/20/2024 at 10:37 AM, Morien said:

2. RESOLVE actions in the order of opposed DEX rolls, if timing is important.

Regarding this note....I just realized that if "no.2" is meant for RESOLVING actions and not declarations, the example given on p.132 is wrong, as Setting Spears and Mounted Charge are parts of the same opposed roll, not two different unopposed rolls. Consequently the page as an error as it suggests 2 different ways of ordering the declarations...

By the way, I feel all of this is over-complicated.

I let players declare first and make my NPC acts in different ways (favourable or less favourable) according to how much they are or aren't competent.

I feel the mechanic is more important for the PC vs PC situations.

[Morien]

1 hour ago, Luca Cherstich said:

By the way, I feel all of this is over-complicated.

Agreed. I basically decided for the NPCs (but I don't tell the players), and they do their declaration at which point I am revealing mine. That being said, something like the lance charge ought to be pretty obvious (unless it is coming from the back/flank and is essentially a surprise in the chaos of combat), so Set Spear ought to be pretty quick and easy counter to that. A random bandit/peasant wouldn't know to do that, but a veteran Saxon warrior probably would, and a veteran Cymric armored footsoldier definitely would.

Whether DEX needs more oomph in the declaration phase, I am not sure. It already gives pretty nice boosts to the weapon stats.

[Luca Cherstich]

P.156-157, example, round five,  "2.Resolve Combat Action."

At a first view I thought this was an error....but I guess I've maybe spotted a non -explicitly said part of the Melee Ranges rules.

The Bandit attempts a Grapple attack Vs Sir Clydno, suffering -5 since Clydno is mounted, but he is not.

Now Sir Clydno uses a sword, which means "Normal Range".

Given the rules on p.146 ("distance") it is clear that Grapple is a Contact or Close Quarter attack. The rules on p.136 ("Close Quarters") say that Close Contact weapons at Normal Range suffer -5/+5. 

The Bandit should have suffered -10 (-5 for the footed Vs mounted and -5 for using cc attack at normal range).

Furthermore since Grappling is not working at Normal Range (as "Normal" is not mentioned among the allowed distances fro Grappling on p.146). This attack at -10 should Al's not automatically trigger a grapple, but only waste 1 round for getting from Normal to CC range.

HOWEVER the text not only suggests that the bandit suffers only -5 (and not -10) but he is successful and immediately gets into grapple without wasting 1 round.

Why? Is this a typo?

I feel it is not, because Sir Clydno is ignoring the bandit. I feel that this means that, if somebody ignores you, you can immediately get to him at the Range that you like, without firstly winning any round.

Even a knifeman (cc) can immediately get to a spearman (Long range) if the Spearman ignores him.

Maybe that's something  which should have been explicitly said on p.135.....but it is a logic consequence.

Edited June 29 by Luca Cherstich

[Morien]

1 hour ago, Luca Cherstich said:

I feel it is not, because Sir Clydno is ignoring the bandit. I feel that this means that, if somebody ignores you, you can immediately get to him at the Range that you like, without firstly winning any round.

Even a knifeman (cc) can immediately get to a spearman (Long range) if the Spearman ignores him.

Maybe that's something  which should have been explicitly said on p.135.....but it is a logic consequence.

Yep, because by ignoring the bandit, Sir Clydno allowed the bandit to set the Melee Range at the start of the unopposed resolution.