[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: (TFT) Justifying an aspect of combat...

I justify it as both sides trying to kill eachother as quick as possible instead of dueling or fencing. I've always liked the "Harn" method of breaking combat down into four basic maneuvers: Strike, Counterstrike, Block and Dodge.

In Melee all figures are "Striking" or "Counterstriking" by default. Those with high dex are striking and those with lower dex are counterstriking.

Figures may Dodge or Block (parry) by the melee rules by choosing the defend or dodge options. They give up their attack to add 1 die to their attackers.

I can certainly see an argument that instead of adding 1 die a defender should make a dex roll.  To that effect, I really like Chris Brandon's idea. What I find particularly attractive to Chris' idea is that a sword's defensive qualities are respected (since they can block anything) and even moreseo if you take the "fencing" talent. 

However, I'd probably prefer to keep those seperate combat options, replacing the current dodge and defend options, instead of adding them as additional actions within the round. That way, the default system still works 90% of the time, since generally you'd want to just hack at eachother instead of getting fancy. Only those characters with the fencing talent (who have a pretty good chance of disarming their opponent before getting hurt) or characters waiting for a buddy to flank their giant opponent or characters about to enter extremely dangerous circumstances -- like charging a polearm or bowman -- are likely to choose "defend" or "dodge".

The interesting metagame aspect of this rule is it hurts high dex figures more than it helps them. Take an adjDex 18 character with a halberd. In the current system he can drop pretty much anyone at first contact since a) charging polearms go first and b) even if his opponent defends he can make an 18 pretty easily on 4 dice. Charge that same adjDex 18 halberdier against an adjDex 15 swordsman using Chris Brandon's system, and the halberdier is very likely to miss. A one on one fight will keep going back and forth like this with the halberdier charging, getting blocked, disengaging, charging, getting blocked, disengaging and so forth until someone drops or breaks a weapon.

--- On Tue, 9/2/08, Christopher Brandon <brandon@pokemon-seattle.com> wrote:

> From: Christopher Brandon <brandon@pokemon-seattle.com>
> Subject: RE: (TFT) Justifying an aspect of combat...
> To: tft@brainiac.com
> Date: Tuesday, September 2, 2008, 7:39 AM
> **After years of play, I just realized something. Combat is
> only based
> on your ability to hit, and it doesn't take your
> opponents Dex into
> consideration***
> In my home rules we allow a person who is the target of a
> successful
> attack to roll to parry if they are using a sword (not a
> foil or rapier)
> or a matching weapon in Melee(axe vs Axe, mace vs mace
> etc.)
> Alternatively they may dodge if they are not using a
> correct weapon to
> parry with. A player may only make one defense roll per
> turn in combat.
> So you get one attack roll and one defense roll per turn.
> Note: I do not allow for the dodging of arrows if the
> person firing is
> within 15 hexes of the target, but I do allow a dodge
> attempt if the
> weapon is a thrown one.
> This allows someone with a higher DX a chance to avoid the
> blow and
> makes combat interactive. I know some TFT purists dislike
> the extra die
> roll, but I think it makes combat more interactive and
> intense.    
> Cheers!
> Chris
> =====
> Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
> Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the
> message body
> "unsubscribe tft"
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"