Jump to content

House Rule: Attack Penalty in exchange for reduced SR


Thyrwyn

Recommended Posts

On 2/13/2019 at 1:25 PM, Thyrwyn said:

Simply stated: I am considering allowing characters to take a penalty to their attack in order to resolve that attack sooner. I was considering -20% per SR.Since the attack roll represents a series of maneuvers, not a single swing/stab, this rule would represent the character rushing their blow, rather than waiting to create or exploit the best opportunity.(by character, I mean PC or NPC) Does -20% seem appropriate? How frequently would you, as a player, use that rule?

This is an interesting idea for modifying the rules as they stand, and I confess I'm a bit ambivalent about it.  The way the rules work is to preference people with longer reach and faster reflexes going before people lesss blessed in these areas.  This is suppsed to take the place of the random initiative systems of other RPGs.  What you are suggesting here sort of short circuits the natural order of things, but I can see some merit in it.  Sometimes you need to thrown caution to the wind and simply get that blow in first or everything will go to hell; I get it.

To this end, I would make a few suggestions.

First suggestion. You can only pull this stunt if you have a higher skill than your opponent.  It doesn't matter how you get a higher skill i.e. magic and passions can be in play, but you need to be better than them to pull this off.  On the other hand, I would also suggest that for the purposes of this trick, every other person they are fighting at the same time will reduce their effective skill by 20%, which accounts for the element of distraction.

Second suggestion.  IF you have a better skill, you can move faster by 1SR per 10% penalty you have, with the maximum SR being the (Higher Skill minus the Lower Skill/10) Round down.

Third suggestion.  If a character has a lower skill than their opponent, they can sort-of do it, but they have to attack at half skill, and it is an all-out attack i.e. they get no subsequent dodge or parry.  Yes, they are wide open and really taking their chances.  You see, that is what the situation really represents.  The reason for SR is because some people have longer weapons and faster reflexes, and in order to overcome that natural order, you have to do something unorthodox that throws caution to the wind, preferencing speed over every other concern.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Darius West said:

First suggestion. You can only pull this stunt if you have a higher skill than your opponent.

Tricky. Race conditions. When you declare an attack, you don't have an "opponent". Or, your opponent doesn't have a skill. After you declare, the opponent gets to declare either a parry or a dodge. They may have a higher parry skill than your attack, but a lower dodge, or vice versa. So you need to know, before you declare, whether they are going to oppose you and which skill they are going to use, and you need to know what their skill level is, and you do not get to know that. So the fact that the GM says "yes you can go early" or "no you can't go early" gives away privileged information.

Edited by PhilHibbs
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It really doesn't matter whether you're better than the other guy. You can always make a reckless lunge. The penalty should apply to parries made with the same weapon too, and maybe even to parries made with other weapons/shields. And definitely dodge. You're throwing your stance out the window to get a fast, possibly surprise (in the very immediate 'conversation of the blades' sense) hit in before something else drastic happens. Without your posture, it becomes hard to execute footwork and the parrying part of your weapon combo is probably out of position.

Sure, it should be and I think is, doubly risky against a better opponent, but anyone should be allowed to chance it, if you're introducing the option.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 2/20/2019 at 9:40 AM, PhilHibbs said:

When you declare an attack, you don't have an "opponent". Or, your opponent doesn't have a skill. 

I think when you declare an attack, you definitely have an enemy in mind, and that enemy does indeed have a skill, whether you know it or not.  I think this description is over-abstracting the rules process.

On 2/20/2019 at 9:40 AM, PhilHibbs said:

 After you declare, the opponent gets to declare either a parry or a dodge. 

 Agreed.

On 2/20/2019 at 9:40 AM, PhilHibbs said:

 They may have a higher parry skill than your attack, but a lower dodge, or vice versa. 

Agreed.

On 2/20/2019 at 9:40 AM, PhilHibbs said:

So you need to know, before you declare, whether they are going to oppose you and which skill they are going to use, and you need to know what their skill level is, and you do not get to know that.

Not quite.  What a player gets to do is make a statement of intent.  If their intent is an attack, then the opponent gets to parry or dodge.  If the player wants to launch a faster attack than their opponent they have to state that first, and the opponent still gets to choose their response subsequently.  I am not suggesting that they will know if they can do this before they attempt it, and it will be up to the GM to make the necessary adjustments based on the players' statement of intent.  For example, if the player needs to go 4SR faster, they will be losing 40% of their skill in the attempt, but the player won't know the exact penalty, merely that they are experiencing a penalty.  Much like IRL having attempted it, they may have a better idea of what the odds were after the event, assuming they survive.

On 2/20/2019 at 9:40 AM, PhilHibbs said:

So the fact that the GM says "yes you can go early" or "no you can't go early" gives away privileged information.

Given that nobody is going to try this move in the first round of combat, the notion that the information is privileged is moot.  Nobody tries to solve a problem before they know the problem exists in my experience.  As to knowing whether your opponent is better than you in skill, well, an experienced fighter will quickly figure that out just by studying their opponent, their age, their race, their gear, their moves, their reach etc.  It also doesn't matter so much as a lucky trollkin will impale an unlucky Balastor's knee one time in 100, as this is RQ. 

In terms of how to run this, the GM doesn't need to say anything prior to the player's statement of intent.  The GM may then ask for a clarification of "if they seem to be too good for you, will you just abort or still try?"  If the player says they will still try, the GM can then ask "How hard" will you try? Are you prepared to go all out, and potentially leave yourself wide open to a superior enemy, or will you hedge your bets and not leave yourself open, or somewhere in the middle?" The GM will of course need to say whether the opponent will parry or dodge, but once the rolls are made, it is all just narrative, with the penalty ascribed based on the players' responses, and the dice tell the story.  As a GM I really don't mind a player knowing their enemy is better than they are, it adds tension and risk.  Similarly, knowing an opponent is not as skilled as their character often leads to overconfidence and getting impaled by said trollkin.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Darius West said:

Given that nobody is going to try this move in the first round of combat, the notion that the information is privileged is moot.  Nobody tries to solve a problem before they know the problem exists in my experience.

I think the first round is absolutely when people will use this, to get a hit in first against the big guy with the huge halberd before he chops me in half. If I can take out a limb or knock him to the ground, then that could save my life.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

I think the first round is absolutely when people will use this, to get a hit in first against the big guy with the huge halberd before he chops me in half. If I can take out a limb or knock him to the ground, then that could save my life.

Yeah; if you can identify a Big Threat, it makes good tactical sense to preemptively neutralize said threat, before it can begin taking down your own team...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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...