New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 55
  1. - Top - End - #1
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    BlueKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2015

    Default The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    Recently I started reading TROS and its successor Song of Swords and playing around with the combat system and I wonder: why should the attacker not use all his dices in the first strike ?
    The answer that comes from old threads on the net is generally "because he would be undefended in the next exchange".
    But that doesn't make much sense to me, as to steal the initiative the defender needs to parry succesfully, so he needs to use at least equal dices to the attacker, as using less dices on the defense is too much of a risk.

    Supposing there are two swordmen with equal stats if the attacker uses all his dices the defender would have to use all of his to parry, then (if he's not unlucky) have a void exchange because nobody has dices, then make a full strike and so on.
    The supposed counter to the full strike seems to be the riposte move, but it has a cost of 2 dices, so by using it the defender sets himself to be hitten. In a game where the first strike is decisive.

    I'm probably missing something, but as the game is very old and niche finding info is quite hard.
    Any expert around here ?

  2. - Top - End - #2
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    WolfInSheepsClothing

    Join Date
    Jul 2011

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    So, in an exchange where one side has dice left and the other doesn’t, they automatically become the aggressor and now know they can execute a comparatively unopposed attack. Let’s look at two 13 dice combatants, and some things that could screw the “all in” attack. They won’t always, but they can - enough to make it a gamble with the attacker’s life.

    1. A shield. Lower DTN means you need less dice on average...so if he throws 13, a defensive throw of 9 will probably block the strike or muff it to the point it glances harmlessly off armor. The remaining 4 dice go into a high precision attack against a weak point on the now defenseless attacker.

    2. A riposte (counter) or a rota. If the party succeeds, it gets every one of the attackers successes back as more dice for the next exchange. Combined with a fencing blade or a long sword the defender would have the TN advantage as well. Low risk - if the attack gets through, it’s probably barely getting through and unless he’s completely unarmored the defender is fine. High pay off - if the dice go in y favor, suddenly you have 5-7 dice to fight a 0 die opponent with.

    3. Ovveruns and Masterstrokes - particularly in heavily armored combat. The defender puts just enough in to let the chain mail or plate have a good chance of making the attack irrelevant, then uses the attacking portion of the maneuver to get in for free.

    4. Full evasion. Will almost certainly avoid the blow and set the two combatants apart. Knowing what your “all in” opponent likes to do, come back in aggressive with a long extending thrust and leave enough dice to make it fast. Skewer him through the throat before his massive overhand chip comes down.

    And more....

    My bet is someone killed a few mooks with massive dice advantage and never had a near equal opponent punish them for the equivalent of taking giant sweeping slashes.

  3. - Top - End - #3
    Librarian in the Playground Moderator
     
    LibraryOgre's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    The Mod Ogre: Revived.
    The Cranky Gamer
    *It isn't realism, it's verisimilitude; the appearance of truth within the framework of the game.
    *Picard management tip: Debate honestly. The goal is to arrive at the truth, not at your preconception.
    *Mutant Dawn for Savage Worlds!
    *The One Deck Engine: Gaming on a budget
    Written by Me on DriveThru RPG
    There are almost 400,000 threads on this site. If you need me to address a thread as a moderator, include a link.

  4. - Top - End - #4
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Lacco's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Slovakia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    @Mark Hall: Thank you for that!

    @BlacKnight: I sent you a PM but let's discuss here since the topic is alive:

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Recently I started reading TROS and its successor Song of Swords
    Well, congrats to that! RoS is still my favourite system so good choice!

    It's also one of those I recommend to any GM that feels his combats are becoming a bit flat or just number crunching and to anyone who just has a writers' block.

    Of course, the system is quite old and there are are several open points, which are not really stated directly in the rules, but we'll get to them.

    Without further ado:

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    and playing around with the combat system and I wonder: why should the attacker not use all his dices in the first strike ?
    This is one of the questions that seem like they should have an easy answer, but in reality is complicated.

    First: it's actually a valid tactic to attack with a full amount of dice. There are moments, when this is not only good idea, but maybe even the only idea.

    When is it good idea?

    When the attacker is "wide open" (e.g. has no dice left due to wounds, fatigue, or other factors - you should try to maximize the damage and go for a quick kill in some cases; I'd suggest to use also the "extra damage" variant of cutting - using one CP die for +1 to damage; usable only once per cut attack).

    When you have number advantage (2 vs 1) and you know your partner is able to block potential attack.

    When you are low on dice as "last resort".

    Also: in second exchange (unused dice are lost).

    And yes, I know you asked for the opposite case. But this will be important later.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    The answer that comes from old threads on the net is generally "because he would be undefended in the next exchange".
    But that doesn't make much sense to me, as to steal the initiative the defender needs to parry succesfully, so he needs to use at least equal dices to the attacker, as using less dices on the defense is too much of a risk.
    And the answer is correct. Mostly. Because while in the core rules there is no direct explanation what to do in case attacker uses all his dice but retains initiative, there is an example in Companion, which shows that in such case there is a second exchange and the defender may take initiative.

    The "indirect" answer is: "there are two exchanges every round". Meaning that even if the character that defended in first exchange (and failed to gain initiative - e.g. via partial evasion, a tie) and has at least one die, he may launch an attack. According to the rules, you may launch attack even if you threw white ( = you chose to defend), but unless you -steal- initiative, your attack comes second.

    Emphasis on the word "steal" is important: what you talked about above was not stealing of initiative - it was the act of taking initiative and these are rather different. You take initiative based on success of certain manuevers (e.g. successful parry or block provide you with the initiative, as does a counter) but you can attempt to steal initiative when you decide to attack instead of defending and try to act faster than your opponent (something similar to iaido or quickdraw attempts at wild west duels).

    But back to the two exchanges: based on the rule, if the attacker has no dice left for second exchange, he can not attack, but you can still decide to attack - and since there is no "first" attack, your attack will land first. No problem there.

    So in case we have two completely identical characters, with the same weapons (including the same ATN/DTN) fighting in featureless arena... you are correct. It's basically a matter of luck and there is no reason to not use all dice. We both go "all in" and we'll see who survives.

    Luckily, this is only theoretical - in practice, the arenas are not featureless, the opponents are different and this style "put all dice here, attack, see who lives" will not be our issue in RoS. You never know - unless you have already watched someone fight - what are your opponent's stats (and even then - it's mostly guesswork). You will most of the time know what kind of weapon he uses (which tells you what kind of attacks and defence will/should they prefer), what armor he has (unless hidden), what school/proficiency he uses and what manuevers he has available.

    And especially - you don't know your opponent's Combat Pool size. And while you can estimate it, it will take at least first round to get your first estimate in - and that can be fatally wrong (it's a nice tactic called "dice scumming" - you keep one or two dice in your pool without using them for 2-3 rounds and then you use them as an unpleasant surprise when the opponent counts your dice).

    The opponents will not be identical. The weapons may be different. And the arenas... well, it will be fun.

    In the PM I mentioned several things you can try to teach your players to fight in different ways and to use advanced manuevers. If you wish to discuss those, just quote the PM.

    Quote Originally Posted by KineticDiplomat View Post
    So, in an exchange where one side has dice left and the other doesn’t, they automatically become the aggressor and now know they can execute a comparatively unopposed attack. Let’s look at two 13 dice combatants, and some things that could screw the “all in” attack. They won’t always, but they can - enough to make it a gamble with the attacker’s life.
    This is also something I mentioned in the PM: remember that you have countless NPCs. Players each have just one PC. So feel free to experiment - but RoS will force the players to play a bit safe with the dice.

    Quote Originally Posted by KineticDiplomat View Post
    1. A shield. Lower DTN means you need less dice on average...so if he throws 13, a defensive throw of 9 will probably block the strike or muff it to the point it glances harmlessly off armor. The remaining 4 dice go into a high precision attack against a weak point on the now defenseless attacker.
    Shields are great. While in D&D the bonuses are not so good, here the shield is your friend.

    Depending on where the player attacks - I usually ask the player to show me directly how they swing the weapon to know from which side the attack comes) - you can disregard more dice from defence: the shield provides a passive AV to torso/arm. Just hope they don't hit the head .

    Exception: favouring. If you study the favouring rules from Flower of Battle, you can position the shield before the attack comes. But I'd save that for later.

    With shield I would go for block open & strike. While the activation cost of 2 sounds bad, if you succeed, you get +1 die for each net success for your next attack: so with two opponents both using 13 dice it will look like this:
    PC: 13 dice for attack
    NPC: 10 dice for block open & strike, 2 dice activation cost.
    Depending on the luck the NPC can end up with 1-3 additional dice, giving them a nice start against a defenseless opponent.

    [QUOTE=KineticDiplomat;24552527]2. A riposte (counter) or a rota. If the party succeeds, it gets every one of the attackers successes back as more dice for the next exchange. Combined with a fencing blade or a long sword the defender would have the TN advantage as well. Low risk - if the attack gets through, it’s probably barely getting through and unless he’s completely unarmored the defender is fine. High pay off - if the dice go in y favor, suddenly you have 5-7 dice to fight a 0 die opponent with.

    Emphasis mine.

    Counter is one of my favourites. It works the best against large dice pool investments. While you do not get to choose the actual counter, most of the time it will not matter.

    Why? You get all the successes your opponent rolled. Not net successes: all successes.

    If they roll 7 successes, you get 7 dice to attack them.

    Spoiler: For other times
    Show
    One of the applicable tactics that works well with too defensive players is to open with a weak feint (they guess/check if it is a feint and overcommit to defence, decreasing their dice pool) and then make a powerful counter in second exchange.

    The successes from the counter go to the second round, where they add to the CP...


    Quote Originally Posted by KineticDiplomat View Post
    3. Ovveruns and Masterstrokes - particularly in heavily armored combat. The defender puts just enough in to let the chain mail or plate have a good chance of making the attack irrelevant, then uses the attacking portion of the maneuver to get in for free.
    I'd say that if you already have an overrun or masterstroke, you do not care much about someone who overcommits - the manuevers provide their net successes to second exchange, so you can easily use the whole dice pool.

    Quote Originally Posted by KineticDiplomat View Post
    4. Full evasion. Will almost certainly avoid the blow and set the two combatants apart. Knowing what your “all in” opponent likes to do, come back in aggressive with a long extending thrust and leave enough dice to make it fast. Skewer him through the throat before his massive overhand chip comes down.
    Full evasion resets the combat round, making it a good "irritate & strike" tactic.

    I'd personally go for full evasion with... let's say 75-80% dice he provides. If you succeed, you break away from the combat and we're back at the initiative. Do it few times and if you get lucky, you get even.

    What happens then is that you do not get hit, but he does not have dice for second exchange. It's a bit tricky, works badly with PCs, but may give a weaker NPC a good chance to get a good hit in.

    What KineticDiplomat proposes could be also varied with following (I use this for overly cautious, skilled rapier fencer/sword & board NPCs):
    1st round: white die, full evasion, let's see what he's got.
    2nd round: white die, confirm amount of CP by full evasion again.
    3rd round: white die. Steal initiative. Stab at arms for almost full dice pool (or go "Simultaneous Block & Attack", put less dice into defence), leave single die for second exchange.

    It's a bit tricky & will cost few dice, but he'll have no chance to fight back at this point.

    Most powerful hits to arms will make the enemy drop their weapon. Which means he swings with empty hands...

    Quote Originally Posted by KineticDiplomat View Post
    My bet is someone killed a few mooks with massive dice advantage and never had a near equal opponent punish them for the equivalent of taking giant sweeping slashes.
    That would be my guess too, but I think the OP mentioned only reading through the rules. I'm looking forward to the discussion of this fine game, gentlemen
    Call me Laco or Ladislav (if you need to be formal). Avatar comes from the talented linklele.
    Formerly GMing: Riddle of Steel: Soldiers of Fortune

    Quote Originally Posted by Kol Korran View Post
    Instead of having an adventure, from which a cool unexpected story may rise, you had a story, with an adventure built and designed to enable the story, but also ensure (or close to ensure) it happens.

  5. - Top - End - #5
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    BlueKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2015

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    Thank you for the answers!

    I'll try to explain my issue in detail.
    As I see it, the goal in combat is to make an attack using more dice than the defender can use on his defence.
    There are three stages in any exchange:
    1) Attack (attacker chooses)
    2) Defense (defender chooses)
    3) Feint (attacker chooses)

    The attacker has the last choice, but dices added with feint cost 2 dices each from the pool.
    But even considering that, the defender can't risk to see the attacker dice pool increase too much, so he has to commit dices to his defence with a wide enough margin to cover a possible feint.
    He doesn't know the attacker dice pool, sure, but he can estimate it to be similar to its own. If the attacker pool is way larger... well, the defender had no chance to begin with.

    But here comes the Counter to mix up things. With an activation cost of 2 dices, this maneuver allows to recover dices from a defence (actually from the attacker successes).
    This means that the defender can use more dices, knowing that they will (at least in part) come back.

    So what can the attacker do? If he uses a medium attack it will get countered, so he can:
    -use a weak attack, so that the counter activation cost eats away the benefits.
    -he uses all of his dices on the attack.

    But there's another problem: maneuvers like expulsion or block open and strike works the opposite of counter, giving an advantage to the defender basing on his own successes. So a weak attack can be stopped using enough dices to deter a feint, while still an advantage for the next exchange.

    Assuming both fighters use weapons with an ATN and DTN of 6, we can assume that half of the dices rolled are successes. Good fighters can have around 12 dices pools.
    A 6 dices attack can be upgraded in a 9 dices using a feint, so the defender (named Bob) will use a 9 dices expulsion, spending 11.
    The attacker (named Alan) won't feint and the result will be a succesful defence with 4.5 successes, which give a 4.5 penalty to the attacker and obliterate his chances of doing something next exchange.
    Now Bob has 1 dices against 6 of Alan, but the latter has to roll 10 to get a success. Bob can attack with his only dice, without much risk.

    If Alan had used more dices on his attack he would have reduced the threat of his feint, while giving more reasons to Bob to use a counter.
    8 dices attack -> 10 dices counter -> 4 dices back, thus 4 vs 4 dices left in the pool.
    If Alan had used less dices than Bob would have still used an expulsion, this time using less dices. While this leaves Alan with more dices in the pool, the penalty on rolls would still leave him at disadvantage.
    4 dices attack -> 8 dices expulsion -> 2 dices left for Bob and 8 for Alan, but the latter has a -4 penalty.

    Thus I conclude that Alan best option would be to go full attack, as it negates Bob the option of using special maneuvers with activation cost, unless he wants to risk.


    Of course this would change if DTN were to be lower than ATN. You mentioned shields, and I guess it would be easy to edit weapons to lower their DTN.
    In the example above, if Bob could use 7 dices instead of 9 to counter Alan's 6 dice attack and potential feint, he would still have 8 dices left (5+3 from the counter), more than the 6 left to Alan.
    But in that case, what could Alan do? Weaker attacks get expulsed, powerful attacks get countered.


    A couple of notes:
    -a player doesn't know the opponent dice pool, but he can make estimates. My thoughts above about optimal choices remain true even if the opponent has a larger dice pool. Sure, the opponent will have dice advantage, but that would be true whatever the player had done, so it doesn't make sense to do anything different.
    -terrain can make a difference, sure, but it should be an add-on, not a necessity.
    -the points you made about armor make me think that maybe toning down lethality a bit could be an improvement. If one could take some light wound without too much trouble than defending at dice disdvantage would be a more efficient option.

  6. - Top - End - #6
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Lacco's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Slovakia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Thank you for the answers!
    You are most welcome.

    I'm looking forward to discussing one of my favourite RPG systems.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    I'll try to explain my issue in detail.
    As I see it, the goal in combat is to make an attack using more dice than the defender can use on his defence.
    There are three stages in any exchange:
    1) Attack (attacker chooses)
    2) Defense (defender chooses)
    3) Feint (attacker chooses)
    Yes and no.

    The goal in combat is to survive, defeat the opponent and not get hurt too much (the order may vary: sometimes you just fight to kill, regardless of survival). If you are familiar with the combat as war vs. combat as sports dichotomy, this game lies definitely on the "combat as war" side. I will help a lot.

    Also: due to RNG element, larger dice investment does not necessarily mean success. But I accept that in theory, it gives higher probability of success.

    If we are talking about pre-roll decisions, I would add following:
    0a) Terrain Rolls (both may choose)
    0b) Stances (slower REF should choose first)

    Both are optional, but they do matter a lot, especially when fighting enemies with higher combat pools.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    The attacker has the last choice, but dices added with feint cost 2 dices each from the pool.
    Feint: 2 dice spent per one added. Yes.

    Also: Feint works miracles when used properly - but its advantage in theoretical exercises is not readily apparent. Think of it as psychological warfare. You throw a simple cut, your enemy responds with strong parry because they think it is a feint. It is not, he squandered a lot of dice - advantage: you.

    In a way, the combat system can be approached in multitude of ways: one of them is slowly and safely piling advantages on until your enemy no longer has ability to fight back.

    Also: dice MAY be added during feint. They do not have to. So you can be feinting a feint... in a way.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    But even considering that, the defender can't risk to see the attacker dice pool increase too much, so he has to commit dices to his defence with a wide enough margin to cover a possible feint.

    He doesn't know the attacker dice pool, sure, but he can estimate it to be similar to its own. If the attacker pool is way larger... well, the defender had no chance to begin with.
    Here I disagree: he has a chance.

    Spoiler: Personal Anecdote
    Show
    Just to prove the same point I once defeated a CP 14 rapier fencer with CP 8 peasant wielding a stick and a rock. In featureless arena. The lady tried a full-on attack, I went for full evasion. She missed spectacularly twice. I threw a rock, she got hit - CP 11. After some dancing she decided to go for another attack, I parried successfully, bashed her with 1 die. After first attack she barely got any dice left and went down easily.

    Do not underestimaty any enemy. As the rulebook states, you would not like a dagger in your gut: your character would neither.
    Fight for your life.


    For sake of your example, let's assume similar (+/-1 CP) pools. You never know at the beginning: and while theoretical discussion is worthy its value, the practice is far from theory in this case.

    And your players should be warned that assuming "similar" dice pools is a mistake - see "combat as war". Challenges will not be "balanced". They should not be.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    But here comes the Counter to mix up things. With an activation cost of 2 dices, this maneuver allows to recover dices from a defence (actually from the attacker successes).
    This means that the defender can use more dices, knowing that they will (at least in part) come back.
    Correct.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    So what can the attacker do? If he uses a medium attack it will get countered, so he can:
    -use a weak attack, so that the counter activation cost eats away the benefits.
    -he uses all of his dice on the attack.
    If it's the first round, he could also open with Beat. Which is actually extremely good maneuver.

    Or bind & strike, if he has a shield or off-hand weapon.

    Or double-strike.

    …well, too many options.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    But there's another problem: maneuvers like expulsion or block open and strike works the opposite of counter, giving an advantage to the defender basing on his own successes. So a weak attack can be stopped using enough dices to deter a feint, while still an advantage for the next exchange.
    Correct.

    You also have the extremely-dangerous-but-hard-to-pull Duck & Weave (which I have seen to work only twice per my career, but both times spectacularly).

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Assuming both fighters use weapons with an ATN and DTN of 6, we can assume that half of the dices rolled are successes. Good fighters can have around 12 dices pools.
    Again, good theoretical example and basis for experiment. I'll go with it even though it limits creativity a lot (after all, not everyone carries a bastard sword or cut&thrust…). But bear in mind that it's like playing chess only with pawns or playing rock-paper-scissors-lizard-Spock with only Spock.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    A 6 dices attack can be upgraded in a 9 dices using a feint, so the defender (named Bob) will use a 9 dices expulsion, spending 11.

    The attacker (named Alan) won't feint and the result will be a succesful defence with 4.5 successes, which give a 4.5 penalty to the attacker and obliterate his chances of doing something next exchange.

    Now Bob has 1 dices against 6 of Alan, but the latter has to roll 10 to get a success. Bob can attack with his only dice, without much risk.
    Let's keep with RoS' tradition of rounding down.

    I'm fine with this until we get to last paragraph.

    Assuming your example goes as planned, Bob has 1 die left and Alan has 6 - so far so good - but the advantage of Expulsion is that if Bob thrusts in second exchange, Alan gets a penalty of 4 dice (his blade is thrown off-center). So: Bob thrusts with 1 die (50:50 hit or miss) and Alan actually defends with 2 dice or attacks (Bob hits first if successful).

    Expulsion will have no effect on TN, so the underlined part is invalid.

    This exchange could have similar alternatives (let's explore!):

    Alan: 6 dice for thrust to belly!
    Bob: All rite mate! Expulsion with 9 dice!
    Alan: Gotcha! Feint & thrust! I'll go for the torso and add 3 dice!
    --- this means Alan's CP is brought to 0. He used all his dice - 6 for the attack, 3 to add dice to feint, 3 to pay for it ---
    Now they roll:
    a) Alan beats Bob (highly probable): based on your assumption he hits with 1-2 net successes, with completely average stats this is a level 1-2 wound; still manageable and if you go for a break in combat you could still get your full CP in some cases; a very lucky roll could mean "through the heart" instadeath.
    b) Tie: Alan retains initiative, but since he spent all his dice, Bob has 1 die to wound him in second exchange. If it hits, the same as above occurs.
    c) Bob beats Alan (least probable, but could happen due to RNG dice): Alan has 1 die to attack, same as before, expulsion has no additional effect this round but a GM could rule that the penalty will flow to second round, which gives Bob nice advantage.

    If I were Alan, I would do something else:
    Alan: 6 dice for thrust to belly!
    Bob: Ha! I know this trick! You'll feint! Expulsion with 9 dice! …that's 11 total…
    Alan: You guessed well but still fail! Feint & cut - I'll go for the arms! That's +1 to my CP. Oh, and your expulsion is now a standard parry! Let's see… I'll add just 1 die…1 set aside (8 CP spent, 5 CP remaining).
    Bob: I rolled 8 successes… damn, for nothing. Single die to attack, huh? Diagonal cut.
    Alan: Yeah, keep the initiative… you paid for it.

    Remember: expulsion works only against thrusts and weak cuts with 4 dice or less. Feint & cut can easily turn an expulsion into parry.

    Alan now has 5 dice (4 die advantage). If this is sword & board build, he can easily go for simultaneous block & attack or block open & strike. If it's longsword/greatsword build, evasive attack would be my choice (2 dice to attack, 3 to raise the TN) so that he has 1 die with TN 9 versus my 2 dice at TN 7.

    But I digress. Shall we continue?

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    If Alan had used more dices on his attack he would have reduced the threat of his feint, while giving more reasons to Bob to use a counter.
    Correct, in a way.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    8 dices attack -> 10 dices counter -> 4 dices back, thus 4 vs 4 dices left in the pool.
    If Alan had used less dices than Bob would have still used an expulsion, this time using less dices. While this leaves Alan with more dices in the pool, the penalty on rolls would still leave him at disadvantage.
    4 dices attack -> 8 dices expulsion -> 2 dices left for Bob and 8 for Alan, but the latter has a -4 penalty.

    Thus I conclude that Alan best option would be to go full attack, as it negates Bob the option of using special maneuvers with activation cost, unless he wants to risk.
    In this theoretical example constructed with specific averages in mind? Yes.

    In game? Not so much. There are too many variables for one approach to work.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Of course this would change if DTN were to be lower than ATN. You mentioned shields, and I guess it would be easy to edit weapons to lower their DTN.
    I wouldn't do so. See below.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    In the example above, if Bob could use 7 dices instead of 9 to counter Alan's 6 dice attack and potential feint, he would still have 8 dices left (5+3 from the counter), more than the 6 left to Alan.
    But in that case, what could Alan do? Weaker attacks get expulsed, powerful attacks get countered.
    …cut to arms? +1 die for the attack will move into 9:6 territory, which is pretty devastating.
    …disarm? Activation cost 1 for some weapons, still 7:6 (or 7:4 if Alan decides to counter; can't use expulsion in this case)
    …just straight up attack? 8:6 is good odds and it's not really possible for Alan to launch an attack without suffering a hit…
    If dice obey the 50% probability, this is actually a good way for Bob to win the match.

    So from viewpoint of risk management: if you can manage a set of powerful attacks, the opponent is less likely to be able to counterattack, but if dice fail you, you are most probably dead. So, full attack is a valid tactic, but not universal.

    It helps when the GM takes the opponents as people/characters. They also do not wish to die.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    A couple of notes:
    -a player doesn't know the opponent dice pool, but he can make estimates. My thoughts above about optimal choices remain true even if the opponent has a larger dice pool. Sure, the opponent will have dice advantage, but that would be true whatever the player had done, so it doesn't make sense to do anything different.
    -terrain can make a difference, sure, but it should be an add-on, not a necessity.
    -the points you made about armor make me think that maybe toning down lethality a bit could be an improvement. If one could take some light wound without too much trouble than defending at dice disdvantage would be a more efficient option.
    Correct: bolded part.

    Incorrect: underlined part. There is plenty you can do to even the field (e.g. stand on a table to gain height advantage, choose a weapon that will give you an advantage), including choosing the combat.

    Which is actually my major point: in RoS, you - or the players - have to choose their battles. If you are standing against a swordsman with equal CP, the same weapon and stats as you, without advantage… tell me, in RL: why would you do that?

    Aside from proving your abilities in sports (e.g. HEMA), this makes no sense.

    The system is built with this assumption in it. Breaking it down to maths will lead you to exactly what you found: if you have 25 dice and everybody has 10, you will crush anybody.

    Now if you took into account terrain rolls & terrain, added spiritual attributes and extended the experiment to different builds, weapons and armor sets… you would get a different beast. You would have to fight for survival, for love, for your country or your ideals, your oaths and maybe against a hated enemy…

    …the system is also meant to simulate as real duelling as possible. While there are certainly places where battle of attrition happens (especially when heavy armor gets into play), most of the time you get one or two smaller wounds and you are out (or give up). Or you get your Spiritual Attributes firing and fight through the pain. If your fingers get chopped off, most people will not continue the engagement (unless fighting for their life).

    Also, the lethality depends on your use of Armor and also Drama mechanic. Two naked guys with swords will chop each other easily, two scale-mail-clad characters will make a lots of smaller wounds before one falls dead of bleeding. And characters are able to spend Drama to decrease wounds by 2 levels, so there are safeguards against instadeath if the GM wishes to give the characters a fighting chance.

    Question: did you have any chance to test this system? Or are we talking pure theory so far? Only Core RoS or are we talking Flower of Battle?
    Last edited by Lacco; 2020-06-15 at 10:17 AM.
    Call me Laco or Ladislav (if you need to be formal). Avatar comes from the talented linklele.
    Formerly GMing: Riddle of Steel: Soldiers of Fortune

    Quote Originally Posted by Kol Korran View Post
    Instead of having an adventure, from which a cool unexpected story may rise, you had a story, with an adventure built and designed to enable the story, but also ensure (or close to ensure) it happens.

  7. - Top - End - #7
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    BlueKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2015

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    The goal in combat is to survive, defeat the opponent and not get hurt too much (the order may vary: sometimes you just fight to kill, regardless of survival). If you are familiar with the combat as war vs. combat as sports dichotomy, this game lies definitely on the "combat as war" side. I will help a lot.

    Also: due to RNG element, larger dice investment does not necessarily mean success. But I accept that in theory, it gives higher probability of success.
    Well, any theoretical discussion should focus on average results. The optimal choice is the one which gives the best chances.
    The RNG can screw anything, but if we counter any argument with "there's a chance that things will go different" then one could just select random maneuvers in combat and trust the RNG gods.


    Feint: 2 dice spent per one added. Yes.

    Also: Feint works miracles when used properly - but its advantage in theoretical exercises is not readily apparent. Think of it as psychological warfare. You throw a simple cut, your enemy responds with strong parry because they think it is a feint. It is not, he squandered a lot of dice - advantage: you.

    In a way, the combat system can be approached in multitude of ways: one of them is slowly and safely piling advantages on until your enemy no longer has ability to fight back.

    Also: dice MAY be added during feint. They do not have to. So you can be feinting a feint... in a way.
    The thing about feints is that the attacker is not actually feinting. He decides after the defender has committed if he wants to use feint or not.
    So he can calculate if it's convenient or not.
    From that my assuption that the defender will always have to overcommit. If he doesn't the attacker will feint.

    Here I disagree: he has a chance.

    Spoiler: Personal Anecdote
    Show
    Just to prove the same point I once defeated a CP 14 rapier fencer with CP 8 peasant wielding a stick and a rock. In featureless arena. The lady tried a full-on attack, I went for full evasion. She missed spectacularly twice. I threw a rock, she got hit - CP 11. After some dancing she decided to go for another attack, I parried successfully, bashed her with 1 die. After first attack she barely got any dice left and went down easily.

    Do not underestimaty any enemy. As the rulebook states, you would not like a dagger in your gut: your character would neither.
    Fight for your life.

    When I said the fighter with less dices had no chances I meant from a pure statistical point of view.
    In your example you were extremely lucky. And going full attack was actually the best choice for your opponent, the RNG gods just screwed with her.


    If it's the first round, he could also open with Beat. Which is actually extremely good maneuver.

    Or bind & strike, if he has a shield or off-hand weapon.

    Or double-strike.

    …well, too many options.
    Beat and Bind & Strike needs to roll more successes than the defender in order to work, so they don't solve the conundrum. A Beat that gets succesfully countered is no different than a countered cut.
    Double strike has some very interesting use, thinking about it.
    The attacker could just use 1 dice for each attack and the defender would have to overcommit to both, remaining with no dices or leaving one attack open to be feinted.


    Let's keep with RoS' tradition of rounding down.

    I'm fine with this until we get to last paragraph.

    Assuming your example goes as planned, Bob has 1 die left and Alan has 6 - so far so good - but the advantage of Expulsion is that if Bob thrusts in second exchange, Alan gets a penalty of 4 dice (his blade is thrown off-center). So: Bob thrusts with 1 die (50:50 hit or miss) and Alan actually defends with 2 dice or attacks (Bob hits first if successful).

    Expulsion will have no effect on TN, so the underlined part is invalid.

    My mistake, I was using Blade of the Iron Throne as reference, where Expulsion works differently. In RoS it works as you said.


    This exchange could have similar alternatives (let's explore!):

    Alan: 6 dice for thrust to belly!
    Bob: All rite mate! Expulsion with 9 dice!
    Alan: Gotcha! Feint & thrust! I'll go for the torso and add 3 dice!
    --- this means Alan's CP is brought to 0. He used all his dice - 6 for the attack, 3 to add dice to feint, 3 to pay for it ---
    Now they roll:
    a) Alan beats Bob (highly probable): based on your assumption he hits with 1-2 net successes, with completely average stats this is a level 1-2 wound; still manageable and if you go for a break in combat you could still get your full CP in some cases; a very lucky roll could mean "through the heart" instadeath.
    b) Tie: Alan retains initiative, but since he spent all his dice, Bob has 1 die to wound him in second exchange. If it hits, the same as above occurs.
    c) Bob beats Alan (least probable, but could happen due to RNG dice): Alan has 1 die to attack, same as before, expulsion has no additional effect this round but a GM could rule that the penalty will flow to second round, which gives Bob nice advantage.

    If I were Alan, I would do something else:
    Alan: 6 dice for thrust to belly!
    Bob: Ha! I know this trick! You'll feint! Expulsion with 9 dice! …that's 11 total…
    Alan: You guessed well but still fail! Feint & cut - I'll go for the arms! That's +1 to my CP. Oh, and your expulsion is now a standard parry! Let's see… I'll add just 1 die…1 set aside (8 CP spent, 5 CP remaining).
    Bob: I rolled 8 successes… damn, for nothing. Single die to attack, huh? Diagonal cut.
    Alan: Yeah, keep the initiative… you paid for it.

    Remember: expulsion works only against thrusts and weak cuts with 4 dice or less. Feint & cut can easily turn an expulsion into parry.

    I didn't know you could invalidate Expulsion with Feint. That's really interesting.
    But it seems to make Expulsion a little useless.
    If you have no secondary weapon/shield to use Block Open & Strike what should you do against a weak attack?
    BotIT has the Overrun maneuver, which works similarly to Block Open & Strike, but it's not present in RoS.


    …cut to arms? +1 die for the attack will move into 9:6 territory, which is pretty devastating.
    …disarm? Activation cost 1 for some weapons, still 7:6 (or 7:4 if Alan decides to counter; can't use expulsion in this case)
    …just straight up attack? 8:6 is good odds and it's not really possible for Alan to launch an attack without suffering a hit…
    If dice obey the 50% probability, this is actually a good way for Bob to win the match.
    My question was about what Alan should have done to not get under in dices, not how Bob could have won once he had the advantage.
    Also, it's just me or striking to the arm seems too good? +1 dice for free, unless the opponent is armored only on the arms why should you aim at any other point?

    So from viewpoint of risk management: if you can manage a set of powerful attacks, the opponent is less likely to be able to counterattack, but if dice fail you, you are most probably dead. So, full attack is a valid tactic, but not universal.

    It helps when the GM takes the opponents as people/characters. They also do not wish to die.
    Yeah, but from the PoV of the players characters are just a series of numbers. If acting reckless makes you live longer (because you kill the opponent before he can kill you) cautios characters will act reckless, even if it makes no sense in fiction.

    Which is actually my major point: in RoS, you - or the players - have to choose their battles. If you are standing against a swordsman with equal CP, the same weapon and stats as you, without advantage… tell me, in RL: why would you do that?

    Aside from proving your abilities in sports (e.g. HEMA), this makes no sense.

    The system is built with this assumption in it. Breaking it down to maths will lead you to exactly what you found: if you have 25 dice and everybody has 10, you will crush anybody.

    Now if you took into account terrain rolls & terrain, added spiritual attributes and extended the experiment to different builds, weapons and armor sets… you would get a different beast. You would have to fight for survival, for love, for your country or your ideals, your oaths and maybe against a hated enemy
    Well, any RPG where PC's death is a real option works the same. The main selling point of RoS is it's combat system, from there the wish that "I roll to attack every single time" is not a thing (ok, technically you are doing that, but you get my point )

    Question: did you have any chance to test this system? Or are we talking pure theory so far? Only Core RoS or are we talking Flower of Battle?
    I hadn't the chance to try the system in practice, but maybe I will in short. I'm not using Flower of Battle, but I could try to get it if necessary.
    Anyway I'm thankful that I can clear my doubts before trying to run a campaign.

    But let's make the test we should have done since the beginning: if I have an optimized PC with Reflex 7 and a dice pool of 14, armed with sidesword and dagger, which strategy is always to assume offensive stance and attack first with a full dice Cut to the arm... can you make me a situation, in whatever terrain and against whatever opponent, where this tactics is going to backfire?

  8. - Top - End - #8
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Lacco's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Slovakia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Well, any theoretical discussion should focus on average results. The optimal choice is the one which gives the best chances.
    The RNG can screw anything, but if we counter any argument with "there's a chance that things will go different" then one could just select random maneuvers in combat and trust the RNG gods.
    I agree with the theoretical discussion and the premise of searching for optimal result in average situation - I was merely trying to point out that this average situation covers very small area. Something akin to traditional "spherical cows in vacuum" - a useful experiment (as it has proven so far to be even for me as I had to re-read some parts and found some additional ideas) which however does not show how bovine the issue actually is .

    Still, I'm glad we are doing this.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    The thing about feints is that the attacker is not actually feinting. He decides after the defender has committed if he wants to use feint or not.
    So he can calculate if it's convenient or not.
    From that my assuption that the defender will always have to overcommit. If he doesn't the attacker will feint.
    Now we enter RAI area:
    From what I understood the player should not have enough time to calculate. Basically - the attacker has as much time as it takes for the defender to collect and roll dice after stating their defensive maneuver. Which means there is enough time to make a quick decision, but not to calculate in depth. And the original idea for feints was that you could even spot them:
    ==(working from memory, away from books)==
    There is a skill, rather useful, called Body Language. IIRC, Companion states that you can use the skill in combat. As defender, you may pay 2 dice and roll PER/Body Language. If you suceed, you will determine if the opponent uses a feint (basically, he has to state feint before you state your defence). It also adds +1 die to your defensive manuever for each success, making a high-PER build with good Body Language a good choice for fencer.
    (again, need to check this; don't have the books with me now)

    Also, see the end statement below regarding actual roleplay.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    When I said the fighter with less dices had no chances I meant from a pure statistical point of view.
    In your example you were extremely lucky. And going full attack was actually the best choice for your opponent, the RNG gods just screwed with her.
    From purely statistical point of view and for our "naked swordsmen" - yes. I do not disagree with that.
    For my example: she was not wearing any armor beyond leather vest and her rapier was not suited for parry against the cudgel. So it was 50:50 calculation and luck. Had she chosen a different tactic, the results could be widely disproportionate. To quote one of my players (who described the combat system quite masterfully):

    Quote Originally Posted by Dienekes
    Mind you it's view of tactics are possibly different than what you want. The game has two levels of tactics, those on the individual fighting level and those on the entire encounter level. Which is true for every RPG, I suppose, but RoS definitely focuses more on the encounter tactics than the individual.

    Now there are individual tactics, certainly, most of the time you'll be attacking. But there is no simple "I attack" you have to choose what to aim for, how many dice to use in the attack and how many to hold back for your defense. It's very fun.

    But encounters are truly won or lost on the encounter level tactic level. If you enter a fight without a plan one or all of your players will probably die. Actually death is so frequent in this game that it has different rules on how to create every subsequent character in a campaign based on the deeds your previous character performed. In any case, entire encounters can be basically won or lost before a single dice has been thrown depending on if the players were clever enough to set an ambush, or if they missed all the GMs hints and stumbled into a combat they were not prepared for.

    While I love it, I'm certain others will find that too trying.
    In the example I stated, I did not win only due to luck. Of course, luck plays its role - but the difference was tactics. I knew what I was going to do - she did not. That's why she lost.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Beat and Bind & Strike needs to roll more successes than the defender in order to work, so they don't solve the conundrum. A Beat that gets succesfully countered is no different than a countered cut.
    Double strike has some very interesting use, thinking about it.
    The attacker could just use 1 dice for each attack and the defender would have to overcommit to both, remaining with no dices or leaving one attack open to be feinted.
    All combat rolls, with the exception of Toss and Stop Short, need to roll more successes than defender. RED-RED is actually another situation, where you do not have to roll more successes - you just have to hit first and hard enough.

    You could actually do a feint from double attack... or - depending on your GM, go for a bind or beat. Which adds a whole new layer. Double beat? With each beat offering the benefit of 2 shock per 1 die? Ideal opener for 2-weapon fighter against too defensive foe…

    …would not work so well for sufficiently aggressive opponent though.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    My mistake, I was using Blade of the Iron Throne as reference, where Expulsion works differently. In RoS it works as you said.
    Apologies also from my side. I am not as familiar with BoIT: I know the magic system (as I stole it and converted it for RoS), but I am unfamiliar with details of the combat system and intricacies of the system as such.

    Unfortunately, this is another point in favour of RoS - while I understand the attempt to streamline and simplify the combat, some of the more interesting points got lost.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    I didn't know you could invalidate Expulsion with Feint. That's really interesting.
    But it seems to make Expulsion a little useless.
    Not sure if this works in BoIT the same as in RoS. And in our theoretical case, Expulsion is easily defended against by preparing a feint-to-cut each round.

    Also, it's a bit of RAI: rules state expulsion can be used only against cuts of 4 dice & less or thrusts - so my interpretation is that it just works as parry when the opponent feints. This is actually something that worries most people about RoS - the rules have multitude of holes, which can be either houseruled based on common sense, but it's kinda something that pops up often.

    However, back to our case of expulsion being useless - let's step outside our clean test environment for a moment:
    Let's consider a rapier. ATN 7 for cutting, 5 for thrusting. Optimized for thrust damage - which is a category we ignore, but should be considered at least later. Why?
    If we take average characters and give them arming swords, they get ATN 6 for cutting, with ST+1 cutting damage.
    If we give one an arming sword and the other a rapier (ATN 5, ST+2 piercing) and set them on each other, we get different results.
    A successful hit with arming sword with exactly 1 net success will get you damage 6, which gets you a lvl 2 wound (Shock 4, Blood Loss 2, Pain 5-WP) - survivable if you keep your wits and manage to catch a break. With average attributes, this will actually cost you only 1 die in the long run.
    The same with rapier gives you damage 7, level 3 wound (Shock 7, Blood Loss 8, Pain 8-WP) which will take more than a half of your CP first exchange and 4 CP each round.

    The difference between Lv2 and Lv3 wounds is the difference between small wound that can be ignored and dealth with after the combat - and suddenly fighting for your life. And the decreased ATN of a rapier is very dangerous for unskilled opponent.

    Now if you have a rapier and are attacked by any light sword (other test variables remain the same), it's actually a good idea to use expulsion any time it is viable, as you need only 2 dice to score a level 3 wound. Provided the attacker stabs (e.g. sidesword/bastard sword are optimized for stabbing) - even due to countering - he can not switch to cutting and your expulsion (if successful) will cost him his life in the long run.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    If you have no secondary weapon/shield to use Block Open & Strike what should you do against a weak attack?
    BotIT has the Overrun maneuver, which works similarly to Block Open & Strike, but it's not present in RoS.
    In our test environment? Actually, I would go with a parry for 1,2-1,5x amount of dice - it would depend on the opponent.

    If we step outside theoretical bounds, there is always the possibility to wear armor on arms...and parry with an arm. You risk getting your arm hurt, but with TO 4 and mail sleeves you actually have a shot to defend. Although, I'd most probably not do that

    Overrun maneuver is present in RoS, but works as partial evasion combined with attack (net successes from evasion count as bonus dice for your attack); it's available for some proficiencies somewhere around ... I dunno? 12? Not sure about that. The TN for overrun is 7, which works good for heavy weapons with high DTNs.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    My question was about what Alan should have done to not get under in dices, not how Bob could have won once he had the advantage.
    Also, it's just me or striking to the arm seems too good? +1 dice for free, unless the opponent is armored only on the arms why should you aim at any other point?
    I admit, I got lost there.

    One possibility: 5+ die cutting attack. Meaning expulsion is out (in RoS), but feints are still possibility, while counters do not add much benefit.

    Also: as HEMA practitioner of limited experience, hitting arms is really the easiest (not easy at all with a skilled opponent, but it's your best shot!), so this models it really nicely. And you answered your question: armor and limited hit locations is the first of two answers.

    When you consider that many of the offered possilibites for armor cover shoulders (e.g. pauldrons, short sleeves), vambraces have nice cost/benefit ratio and most swords have AV value to protect fingers and wrist... you already have 2 or 3 of the 5 hit locations covered. Yes, a hit will hurt, but not nearly enough.

    Of course, if your opponent did not prepare well and is sleeveless and lacking vambraces, you should go for it. The same goes for legs: many players tend to ignore upper legs as target and therefore do not wear any armor besides leather pants.

    The second answer is "cutting at arms does not kill". Of course it does: if you rack enough blood loss, you just have to break the combat and circle around the enemy who will die slowly, but it's safer to just go for the blade-through-heart or decapitation once you soften the target.

    This all actually provides a gameplay decision. Again, see below.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Yeah, but from the PoV of the players characters are just a series of numbers. If acting reckless makes you live longer (because you kill the opponent before he can kill you) cautios characters will act reckless, even if it makes no sense in fiction.
    I understand where you come from, but I am afraid this is not the case. At least not with people I encountered.

    While some of the players will definitely try to go this way, you have several tools to persuade them otherwise. Consider the level 3 wound: it's almost debilitating in its effect. And we are not talking about level 5

    It's usually a matter for single wound to calm down players that try to act this way. Especially, if you - the GM - play the enemies as persons and not numbers.

    Let me explain:
    When we talk about our testing environment, the two average guys with average stats and "average" TNs, it's fine and dandy to think about numbers and not characters. But that should not be the experience you go for.

    RoS is a game about decisions. Do you go for quick kill and risk getting hurt by the opponent? Or do you let your less-skilled friend fight for his life for next 2-3 rounds? Do you take on the two swordsmen so that the others can level the field? Or do you play it safe even though someone might get hurt?

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Well, any RPG where PC's death is a real option works the same. The main selling point of RoS is it's combat system, from there the wish that "I roll to attack every single time" is not a thing (ok, technically you are doing that, but you get my point )
    If you feel that it's about PC death, you're in for a surprise. A pleasant one

    I know what you mean - I never was more bored than when we fought a level 10 paladin (actually corrupt one… dunno how they are called) in D&D: attack, hit, attack, miss… of course, we the players made it fun, but the system just dragged us down.

    RoS is different. First few fights should be practice. Teach them how to divide CP, use cut, thrust, parry and block. Give each player a weaker opponent, give them some time to learn. Give them stupid bandits or unskilled recruits to fight. Or just drunk peasants. Be patient, explain, give free rerolls.

    And then you need to step outside your routine a bit. Shake your players to the core. I once found a webpage with one great piece of advice.

    Stand up.

    When using the combat in RoS, put down everything - you will not need it for a moment - and stand up at the table. Shout, move, give it energy. Show them how the enemy swings the axe or blocks their attacks with a shield.

    Do not give your players too much time to think or talk. They discuss strategy during combat? Ok, their characters discuss it too - and the enemy approaches while they do so.

    Forget about flashy stuff. Combat is deadly. Fight dirty.

    But fight as the NPC would fight.

    Forget about optimization. The NPCs are angry, scared, bloodthirsty or all of the mentioned. Some will just hack away. Some will toy with their prey. The first bandits they fight? They have a simple plan - "if they do not put down weapons, we kill them". No fancy tactics, no optimization.

    First serious fencer? Will fight first with his head, then with his hands and will know what to do.

    This is one of the things that gets often overlooked. The enemies are not some faceless orcs - they are almost all human and they do not wish to die. Use terrain, ambushes, reinforcements. Two bowmen on roof will teach them to carry shields or take cover.

    The third selling point for RoS, an unofficial one, would be the way it puts people in the mood. I'm not talking about the rush of "roll initiative" - oftentimes players switch off the roleplay and get all gamey, but in RoS they stay in character and fight like crazy, do mistakes their characters would do, and the combat flows.

    Make them fight for their lives - and then show them the Spiritual Attributes. When they earn their victory, you'll see it's different. It will not be a victory only for their characters, but for them as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    I hadn't the chance to try the system in practice, but maybe I will in short. I'm not using Flower of Battle, but I could try to get it if necessary.
    Anyway I'm thankful that I can clear my doubts before trying to run a campaign.

    But let's make the test we should have done since the beginning: if I have an optimized PC with Reflex 7 and a dice pool of 14, armed with sidesword and dagger, which strategy is always to assume offensive stance and attack first with a full dice Cut to the arm... can you make me a situation, in whatever terrain and against whatever opponent, where this tactics is going to backfire?
    Looking forward to hearing your actual experience. I'd suggest getting Flower of Battle: the additional information is priceless and the list of weapons and maneuvers will get a lot of use.

    Ok, test. How unfairly should I fight? "My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die." My Spiritual Attribute "Hatred: Count Rugen" fires up. That's somewhere from +1 to +5 dice to my CP… my Oath "I will not lose another fight" too… and my Destiny "To Defeat the Killer of My Father" will give me some dice for each roll…

    …ok, no Spiritual Attributes.

    Let's see… any opponent, terrain, ...really?


    Spoiler: Option 1: Bob
    Show
    Meet Bob
    CP 12, Reflex 5
    Toughness 5+
    Mail hauberk, coif, gloves (AV 3) (-1 CP)
    Battle axe (ATN 7 cut, heavy, DTN 9, ST+2 damage) and banded heater shield (DTN 5, AV 6, -0,5 CP)
    Total CP = 10

    Tactics:
    Defensive stance, block first attack, draw first blood in second exchange. Once the field levels, go for block open.
    Your attack: 16 dice with TN … I assume you meant "Arming Sword" as the "Side Sword"… the knightly side sword, not the courtly-renaissance blade?
    Alan: Cut with TN 6 for 17 dice. Assumed 8+ successes.
    Bob: Block with 10 dice, TN 5. Assumed 5+ successes.
    3 net = ST + 1 damage + 3 = around 8 cutting damage
    Which way did you cut?
    Axe hand: TN 5 + AV 3 for gloves = 8 = you scratch the armor
    Shield hand: TN 5 + AV 3 for gloves + AV 6 for shield… not even close.
    Tanking is actually a tactic. Risky one, but functional.
    Oh, second exchange: 4 dice cut against arms… that means actually 5 dice. 5 dice with TN 7 = most probably single success.
    Damage: ST + 2 + 1 net success = 7…
    Decrease the damage by toughness, leather armor? If I hit the fingers, Alan is safe due to the hilt - that’s 1 in 6 chance.
    Otherwise he just got level 1 wound, which is actually fine.

    You see, most level 1 hits to the arm do very little damage. Shock & pain tend to be around 4-WP, which means that average character can easily get hit and keep on fighting.

    But I had an axe.

    Hand axes cause additional shock: + (1 * Damage Level) Shock. In our case, just one die. Oh well, still - first blood.

    Had I rolled two successes on the TN 7…? I just evened the field, retain initiative and can start with bind & strike.

    And I forgot that battle axes are Long while arming swords are Medium (which gives me advantage until you hit me).

    So, a backfire? Not really, just a tough fight.


    Spoiler: Option 2: Bobb
    Show
    Meet Bob's brother Bobb.
    CP 12
    Leather armor (AV 2), TO 4.
    Longsword (held in both hands, ATN 6 for cutting, 7 for thrust, DNT 6, DMG ST +2 cut, ST +1 thrust)
    Aggressive stance.
    Evasive attack; upwards cut for 7 dice + 4 dice for evasive part.
    Evasive attack means the guy jumps back and cuts at the same time. The dice spent in addition to the attack increase both your and mine ATN. Yours by 1 per each die spent, mine by 1 per each 2 dice spent.
    Alan's TN is 10. Bobb's is 8.
    After we solve who hits first, fun starts.
    Alan will most probably get 1 or 2 successes, which means it will hit, but may cause at most level 1 or 2 wound, meaning Bobb's attack still hits.
    Pray I do not hit location 4: groin. Shock 9, pain 9-WP (drops by 5 after 1d6-1 minutes). If I do, it's game over for Alan, even at level 1.


    Spoiler: Option 3: Melinda
    Show
    We've had Bob and Bobb here. Meet Melinda, so we fulfill our diversity quota .
    Melinda has a leather armor, covering most of her body, a steel vambrace and pauldron.
    Melinda also a bastard sword, which gives her length advantage.
    CP 14, just like Alan's.
    Neutral stance, throws white die.
    14 dice vs your 16 dice.
    Melinda starts the duel while standing on top of stairs, giving her higher ground (+2). She'll also use these to make a terrain roll - push you back - so Alan loses balance.
    Which means, if she succeeds you have to roll knockdown or Alan takes a long fall down the stairs.
    Even if not, she still keeps the higher ground.
    And now. Alan goes for full attack (-1 for medium weapon attacking long one), she decides to attack too, stealing initiative.
    She uses 6 dice for the attack: thrust to the head (-1 CP). She pays 4 dice as activation cost for the stealing and uses 3 dice to increase your TN for the reflex roll.
    You lose the roll (predictably, she rolls her REF against 6, you against 6+4) and get hit with 3 successes. That's somewhere around 8 damage…that's level 4 head injury.
    Two options: Shock: All (you lose all your dice due to the big gap in your neck) or "Lose 1d6-1 of mental attributes, unconscious, CP-13... which actually gives you a fighting chance as you still have 4 dice to hit with!...before you fall down the stairs and most probably bleed from Blood Los 19).


    I could continue - for example, having a throwing dagger in one hand would be nice for an opener, two peasants with sticks would win the engagement as only one of them would die while the other bashes as crazy, a guy with two spears - one for throwing, one for poking, guy with penchant for countering or just sword-and-board guy that blocks and hacks…

    Using terrain to own advantage, stalling and provoking, chopping away with small wounds after good defence...., having higher endurance and just running around would be an option. Or just having a guy with bow nearby would change the whole thing: you can not parry an arrow, but you can evade both the arrow and the sword.

    A suggestion: test the combat. Here, in PbP, live - does not matter. Create a character, fully, and go for it. With a bandit. With two drunk guys. With a veteran soldier. See what you are getting your players into

    It's... not so clear and simple. But it's fun.

    I'll be happy to answer any questions and offer suggestions if you want them.
    Call me Laco or Ladislav (if you need to be formal). Avatar comes from the talented linklele.
    Formerly GMing: Riddle of Steel: Soldiers of Fortune

    Quote Originally Posted by Kol Korran View Post
    Instead of having an adventure, from which a cool unexpected story may rise, you had a story, with an adventure built and designed to enable the story, but also ensure (or close to ensure) it happens.

  9. - Top - End - #9
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    BlueKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2015

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    Well, first of all, thank you for the detailed answer.
    This exchange is really interesting and I'm getting a lot of hype about trying the system in practice.

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    Now we enter RAI area:
    From what I understood the player should not have enough time to calculate. Basically - the attacker has as much time as it takes for the defender to collect and roll dice after stating their defensive maneuver. Which means there is enough time to make a quick decision, but not to calculate in depth. And the original idea for feints was that you could even spot them:
    ==(working from memory, away from books)==
    There is a skill, rather useful, called Body Language. IIRC, Companion states that you can use the skill in combat. As defender, you may pay 2 dice and roll PER/Body Language. If you suceed, you will determine if the opponent uses a feint (basically, he has to state feint before you state your defence). It also adds +1 die to your defensive manuever for each success, making a high-PER build with good Body Language a good choice for fencer.
    (again, need to check this; don't have the books with me now)
    Playing without giving too much time to the players to think is something I've seen suggested for more than one game. Never tried it in practice, but I'm skeptical of how doable it is.
    Still, the idea is charming, so worth a try.


    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    From purely statistical point of view and for our "naked swordsmen" - yes. I do not disagree with that.
    For my example: she was not wearing any armor beyond leather vest and her rapier was not suited for parry against the cudgel. So it was 50:50 calculation and luck. Had she chosen a different tactic, the results could be widely disproportionate. To quote one of my players (who described the combat system quite masterfully):

    In the example I stated, I did not win only due to luck. Of course, luck plays its role - but the difference was tactics. I knew what I was going to do - she did not. That's why she lost.
    Assuming she had an ATN of 6 and you had a DTN of 5 on Total Evasion, she had a 20% chance of doing 5 or less successes, and even then you chances of matching her would have been 61% against 5 successes or 84% against 4. Your chances of getting 6 or more successes were 29%, and in that case it would have still no be enough for 58% of her rolls.
    In short her chances to not hit you in the first exchange was little more than 20%.
    What kind of tactic could have she used with an higher success ratio?

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    All combat rolls, with the exception of Toss and Stop Short, need to roll more successes than defender. RED-RED is actually another situation, where you do not have to roll more successes - you just have to hit first and hard enough.
    I've checked the rules and those also need the attacker to win the contest.
    I don't think there's any maneuver that does anything if you roll less successes than the opponent, hence why dice advantage is so important.


    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    Not sure if this works in BoIT the same as in RoS. And in our theoretical case, Expulsion is easily defended against by preparing a feint-to-cut each round.

    Also, it's a bit of RAI: rules state expulsion can be used only against cuts of 4 dice & less or thrusts - so my interpretation is that it just works as parry when the opponent feints. This is actually something that worries most people about RoS - the rules have multitude of holes, which can be either houseruled based on common sense, but it's kinda something that pops up often.

    However, back to our case of expulsion being useless - let's step outside our clean test environment for a moment:
    Let's consider a rapier. ATN 7 for cutting, 5 for thrusting. Optimized for thrust damage - which is a category we ignore, but should be considered at least later. Why?
    If we take average characters and give them arming swords, they get ATN 6 for cutting, with ST+1 cutting damage.
    If we give one an arming sword and the other a rapier (ATN 5, ST+2 piercing) and set them on each other, we get different results.
    A successful hit with arming sword with exactly 1 net success will get you damage 6, which gets you a lvl 2 wound (Shock 4, Blood Loss 2, Pain 5-WP) - survivable if you keep your wits and manage to catch a break. With average attributes, this will actually cost you only 1 die in the long run.
    The same with rapier gives you damage 7, level 3 wound (Shock 7, Blood Loss 8, Pain 8-WP) which will take more than a half of your CP first exchange and 4 CP each round.

    The difference between Lv2 and Lv3 wounds is the difference between small wound that can be ignored and dealth with after the combat - and suddenly fighting for your life. And the decreased ATN of a rapier is very dangerous for unskilled opponent.

    Now if you have a rapier and are attacked by any light sword (other test variables remain the same), it's actually a good idea to use expulsion any time it is viable, as you need only 2 dice to score a level 3 wound. Provided the attacker stabs (e.g. sidesword/bastard sword are optimized for stabbing) - even due to countering - he can not switch to cutting and your expulsion (if successful) will cost him his life in the long run.
    I went to read the rapier description in RoS and raised an eyebrow. "Rapiers are light weapons unsuited for parrying heavy swings"? I see somebody is confusing rapiers and smallwords, and even the latter can parry big swings.
    -3 to swing damage? So less damage than a punch?

    Ok, ramblings aside, why should you attack you a thrust at all? If the opponent is also attacking or is without dices, fine, but as first strike is sounds like you are asking to get expulsed.
    Considering that Evasive attack doesn't work with thrusts, aren't thrust-centric weapons a bad choice? Especially the rapier that can't really cut, to say nothing of having to defend against cuts (DTN 8! Come on!)

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    I admit, I got lost there.

    One possibility: 5+ die cutting attack. Meaning expulsion is out (in RoS), but feints are still possibility, while counters do not add much benefit.

    Also: as HEMA practitioner of limited experience, hitting arms is really the easiest (not easy at all with a skilled opponent, but it's your best shot!), so this models it really nicely. And you answered your question: armor and limited hit locations is the first of two answers.

    When you consider that many of the offered possilibites for armor cover shoulders (e.g. pauldrons, short sleeves), vambraces have nice cost/benefit ratio and most swords have AV value to protect fingers and wrist... you already have 2 or 3 of the 5 hit locations covered. Yes, a hit will hurt, but not nearly enough.

    Of course, if your opponent did not prepare well and is sleeveless and lacking vambraces, you should go for it. The same goes for legs: many players tend to ignore upper legs as target and therefore do not wear any armor besides leather pants.

    The second answer is "cutting at arms does not kill". Of course it does: if you rack enough blood loss, you just have to break the combat and circle around the enemy who will die slowly, but it's safer to just go for the blade-through-heart or decapitation once you soften the target.

    This all actually provides a gameplay decision. Again, see below.
    Still, a level 2 cut to the forearm is shock 5: it will probably lead to another succesfull hit in the next exchange, as the opponent would lack 5 dices from his pool.
    Of course if the opponent has armored arms but some other body part uncovered you go for that, but my point is that, given the advantages of hitting first, whatever strike is the easiest to accomplish is generally the best option.

    Also, I'm interested in making a "cloack and sword" campaign, so shields and armor would be a little out of place. You can have a buckler or an heavy cloack, but that's it.
    That's why I'm so focused on the "naked swordmen" scenario: I need a symmetrical fight to work well.

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    I understand where you come from, but I am afraid this is not the case. At least not with people I encountered.

    While some of the players will definitely try to go this way, you have several tools to persuade them otherwise. Consider the level 3 wound: it's almost debilitating in its effect. And we are not talking about level 5

    It's usually a matter for single wound to calm down players that try to act this way. Especially, if you - the GM - play the enemies as persons and not numbers.

    Let me explain:
    When we talk about our testing environment, the two average guys with average stats and "average" TNs, it's fine and dandy to think about numbers and not characters. But that should not be the experience you go for.

    RoS is a game about decisions. Do you go for quick kill and risk getting hurt by the opponent? Or do you let your less-skilled friend fight for his life for next 2-3 rounds? Do you take on the two swordsmen so that the others can level the field? Or do you play it safe even though someone might get hurt?
    You have definetly hyped me here.
    It wouldn't be the first system that reads one way but plays in another.

    Anyway, while we are on this, let's theorycraft in a vacuum and see how far Alan the dicewaster goes on the spherical cow surface.

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    Ok, test. How unfairly should I fight? "My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die." My Spiritual Attribute "Hatred: Count Rugen" fires up. That's somewhere from +1 to +5 dice to my CP… my Oath "I will not lose another fight" too… and my Destiny "To Defeat the Killer of My Father" will give me some dice for each roll…
    You joke, but that was my idea had you asked me for a detailed character

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    Spoiler: Option 1: Bob
    Show
    Meet Bob
    CP 12, Reflex 5
    Toughness 5+
    Mail hauberk, coif, gloves (AV 3) (-1 CP)
    Battle axe (ATN 7 cut, heavy, DTN 9, ST+2 damage) and banded heater shield (DTN 5, AV 6, -0,5 CP)
    Total CP = 10

    Tactics:
    Defensive stance, block first attack, draw first blood in second exchange. Once the field levels, go for block open.
    Your attack: 16 dice with TN … I assume you meant "Arming Sword" as the "Side Sword"… the knightly side sword, not the courtly-renaissance blade?
    Alan: Cut with TN 6 for 17 dice. Assumed 8+ successes.
    Bob: Block with 10 dice, TN 5. Assumed 5+ successes.
    3 net = ST + 1 damage + 3 = around 8 cutting damage
    Which way did you cut?
    Axe hand: TN 5 + AV 3 for gloves = 8 = you scratch the armor
    Shield hand: TN 5 + AV 3 for gloves + AV 6 for shield… not even close.
    Tanking is actually a tactic. Risky one, but functional.
    Oh, second exchange: 4 dice cut against arms… that means actually 5 dice. 5 dice with TN 7 = most probably single success.
    Damage: ST + 2 + 1 net success = 7…
    Decrease the damage by toughness, leather armor? If I hit the fingers, Alan is safe due to the hilt - that’s 1 in 6 chance.
    Otherwise he just got level 1 wound, which is actually fine.

    You see, most level 1 hits to the arm do very little damage. Shock & pain tend to be around 4-WP, which means that average character can easily get hit and keep on fighting.

    But I had an axe.

    Hand axes cause additional shock: + (1 * Damage Level) Shock. In our case, just one die. Oh well, still - first blood.

    Had I rolled two successes on the TN 7…? I just evened the field, retain initiative and can start with bind & strike.

    And I forgot that battle axes are Long while arming swords are Medium (which gives me advantage until you hit me).

    So, a backfire? Not really, just a tough fight.
    I can't find any battle axe in the weapons list, there's the handed axe which is medium.
    How did Bob got initiative when is Block failed? And where did he got 4 dices, when he had used all 10 to block?

    Also, with sidesword I meant the Reinassance blade, but given that it's a thrust oriented weapon in RoS (even if it's actually well balanced, although some are more like rapiers), and having seen my doubts on these weapons above, I gladly switch it with an arming sword.

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    Spoiler: Option 2: Bobb
    Show
    Meet Bob's brother Bobb.
    CP 12
    Leather armor (AV 2), TO 4.
    Longsword (held in both hands, ATN 6 for cutting, 7 for thrust, DNT 6, DMG ST +2 cut, ST +1 thrust)
    Aggressive stance.
    Evasive attack; upwards cut for 7 dice + 4 dice for evasive part.
    Evasive attack means the guy jumps back and cuts at the same time. The dice spent in addition to the attack increase both your and mine ATN. Yours by 1 per each die spent, mine by 1 per each 2 dice spent.
    Alan's TN is 10. Bobb's is 8.
    After we solve who hits first, fun starts.
    Alan will most probably get 1 or 2 successes, which means it will hit, but may cause at most level 1 or 2 wound, meaning Bobb's attack still hits.
    Pray I do not hit location 4: groin. Shock 9, pain 9-WP (drops by 5 after 1d6-1 minutes). If I do, it's game over for Alan, even at level 1.
    Well, if Alan sees his opponent throwing the red dice he should go for Elusive attack too. 4 dices to increase enemy ATN to 10, but with 2 dices from the stance and 1 from the arm cut he loses only one dice.
    If he uses less dices he just make increase his chances to miss, without helping his defence in any way. He wants to roll all of his dices: his hope is to strike first and strike hard.

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    Spoiler: Option 3: Melinda
    Show
    We've had Bob and Bobb here. Meet Melinda, so we fulfill our diversity quota .
    Melinda has a leather armor, covering most of her body, a steel vambrace and pauldron.
    Melinda also a bastard sword, which gives her length advantage.
    CP 14, just like Alan's.
    Neutral stance, throws white die.
    14 dice vs your 16 dice.
    Melinda starts the duel while standing on top of stairs, giving her higher ground (+2). She'll also use these to make a terrain roll - push you back - so Alan loses balance.
    Which means, if she succeeds you have to roll knockdown or Alan takes a long fall down the stairs.
    Even if not, she still keeps the higher ground.
    And now. Alan goes for full attack (-1 for medium weapon attacking long one), she decides to attack too, stealing initiative.
    She uses 6 dice for the attack: thrust to the head (-1 CP). She pays 4 dice as activation cost for the stealing and uses 3 dice to increase your TN for the reflex roll.
    You lose the roll (predictably, she rolls her REF against 6, you against 6+4) and get hit with 3 successes. That's somewhere around 8 damage…that's level 4 head injury.
    Two options: Shock: All (you lose all your dice due to the big gap in your neck) or "Lose 1d6-1 of mental attributes, unconscious, CP-13... which actually gives you a fighting chance as you still have 4 dice to hit with!...before you fall down the stairs and most probably bleed from Blood Los 19).
    I was going to say "Alan should buy initiative back!", but then checked RoS and you can't buy initiative back there as you can do in BotIT.
    This leads to some interesting things: it's perfectly possible to throw white dice, then wait for the opponent attack and steal inititative. Even using 10 dices to get a quasi-guaranteed win in the initiative contest agaisnt an opponent with high perception leaves with 4 dices, plus 2 for stance and 1 for arm cut.
    The attacker could think of using Elusive Attack, but that leaves open to Counters, as it uses to many dices.
    So the attacker is doomed? The only winning move is to not play at all?

  10. - Top - End - #10
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Lacco's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Slovakia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Well, first of all, thank you for the detailed answer.
    This exchange is really interesting and I'm getting a lot of hype about trying the system in practice.
    I'm also glad.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Playing without giving too much time to the players to think is something I've seen suggested for more than one game. Never tried it in practice, but I'm skeptical of how doable it is.
    Still, the idea is charming, so worth a try.
    In practice, there are "learning curve" combats and "real" combats at my table.

    Learning curve combats start easy (enemies are easily defeated, use sub-par tactics and I hold back a lot), and are place for discussion & tactics talk. Players get all the time they need and we discuss optimal moves and I give advice freely.

    These usually cover:
    1st melee:
    - use same-length weapons, easy terrain, no fancy gimmicks
    - calculation & distribution of CP over a round (best practice: have two bowls per player, one with fresh dice, one for spent CP dice; hand over exactly their CP to them)
    - first initiative (best practice: hand them red d20 and white d6 or other dice that can be easily identified for the actual initiative throw; also it is good to actually have few "Initiative" tokens and hand them to the players/take it back so you do not get lost)
    - cut & thrust maneuvers from offensive & parry/block and evade for defensive maneuvers
    - damage & death
    Goal is to show them the ropes and teach them the CP mechanics.

    2nd melee
    - add feint & one other maneuver
    - length of weapon starts to be of use
    - introduce SAs

    3rd melee
    - initiative tricks
    - advanced maneuvers
    - body language trick
    - terrain rolls


    After each of these, a "real" combat should occur. Meaning one that is actually dangerous and while the opponent sticks to the mechanics you just learned, he will use them to harm the PCs.

    At this point, you need to use the GM's tools to set up the combat. The enemy is no longer the bumbling mook, it is a skilled fighter and will act so. You may also ask the players to stop giving advice/talking over each other - but usually this is not necessary. Once you tell the first player to
    throw down initiative and hold your hand above the table (go for the drama), they will usually go silent.

    You can also use a rule from RoS about hesitation. Should the player hesitate (I usually start counting down using 5 fingers, players tend to catch up) to provide an answer, they may only defend. It seems rough, so you should warn them beforehand - if two characters throw white/white, they may chat, intimidate each other, ridicule, discuss tactics or "groupthink" tactics - I'm fine with that. But once blades start swinging, combat should flow fast.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Assuming she had an ATN of 6 and you had a DTN of 5 on Total Evasion, she had a 20% chance of doing 5 or less successes, and even then you chances of matching her would have been 61% against 5 successes or 84% against 4. Your chances of getting 6 or more successes were 29%, and in that case it would have still no be enough for 58% of her rolls.
    In short her chances to not hit you in the first exchange was little more than 20%.
    What kind of tactic could have she used with an higher success ratio?
    She had ATN 5 (rapier), I had DTN 4 (full evasion ala RoS).

    She should have played to the strength of the build. Think about this:
    How do you know the opponents' CP? You test it.
    How do you test it? Careful defensive and offensive.
    Once you know the approximate CP, what can you do?

    From GM's perspective, it's again a thing about roleplaying opponents taking into account their capabilities, intellectual abilities, tactical thinking...etc.

    A simple peasant with CP 8 will know two tactics: run away & throw stones or bash bash bash. Had she gone for weak cut, the peasant would not guess a feint = she could have deceived him and wound him in first exchange. After all, his decision to run came after she produced the large amount of dice.

    Not before. Had she gone for cut for 4 dice, the peasant would try to parry for 5 and she could have either let it go, to see how many dice he has... or she could have gone for a feint with 4+4 (discard 4) dice to go straight for the kill. Both would be viable tactics. After she knew he had only 8 CP, her plan could have changed. A series of quick feints, few light wounds and he's down. Or bait him to overspend and go for a counter.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    I've checked the rules and those also need the attacker to win the contest.
    I don't think there's any maneuver that does anything if you roll less successes than the opponent, hence why dice advantage is so important.
    I think this is a difference between RoS vs. BoIT again.

    Toss & Stop Short do not require the attacker to win: both are basically opportunities to cancel an oncoming attack if you have the initiative (they do not give the opportunity to attack back, including stealing initiative!) for low dice investment (ideal if you overspent). For Stop Short, you only need 2 or 3 dice to increase opponents' TN that your respective attributes do not matter and for some builds it allows to actually gain some advantage in fight. At least in RoS. For Toss, you need to hold something in your hand (it is actually suggested that Toss could be repeatedly used with someone's cloak after a break in combat), but a single die is sufficient for it to be effective.

    Example: You and your opponent have both 10 CP and are dueling using renaissance sideswords & cloaks. You attacked for 9 CP, the opponent went for full evasion for 5 CP and it was a tie. Similar as above. Had you used your whole pool, you would be statistically dead. You still have one die. Now you have the initiative, but with 1 CP left you are afraid your opponent may launch an attack and hurt you easily. So you Toss your cloak for the 1 die. Your opponent may - according to the rules - either dodge or not. If he dodges, he may allocate dice vs. TN 7. If he does not, the roll is only on you, unresisted. Either way, the opponent loses exactly 1 die...and you retain initiative.

    The only limitation here is the amount of items you can toss.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    I went to read the rapier description in RoS and raised an eyebrow. "Rapiers are light weapons unsuited for parrying heavy swings"? I see somebody is confusing rapiers and smallwords, and even the latter can parry big swings.
    -3 to swing damage? So less damage than a punch?
    I usually refer to Flower of Battle when weapons are the topic. Of course, here we are talking about late-era rapiers that were mostly used for their point, not blade, with "fencers' grip", which disallows really powerful swing attacks and is best suited for lighter swordplay, not parrying axes and such. There is also the possibility of using "draw cut" maneuver, which adds +1 to damage for cuts, but I digress.

    In Flower of Battle, some weapons have the descriptor "heavy" and these are actually used for the higher DTN. Most swords still count as light, so for example sabers and longswords will still get the lower DTN.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Ok, ramblings aside, why should you attack you a thrust at all? If the opponent is also attacking or is without dices, fine, but as first strike is sounds like you are asking to get expulsed.
    Considering that Evasive attack doesn't work with thrusts, aren't thrust-centric weapons a bad choice? Especially the rapier that can't really cut, to say nothing of having to defend against cuts (DTN 8! Come on!)
    We are going in circles, but mostly because your opponent does not know your CP and does not know if he can afford to go for expulsion in first round. If you know you have a dice advantage, you may safely go for expulsion - if not, it's a risk but may be still worth it.

    Again: DTN 8 is for e.g. greatsword, or axes. A longsword vs. rapier gets still the DTN 6.

    Thrusting attacks often wound worse - they go deep, so the pain & shock values are often worse. Aiming for certain zones gets easier with thrusts. And you get your own benefit: if you go red-red, then with thrust your chances of landing first wound actually go up (REF+1).

    And oftentimes there is the advantage of length or lower ATNs in specialized weapons. See the ATN for axes as opposed to ATN for spears.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Still, a level 2 cut to the forearm is shock 5: it will probably lead to another succesfull hit in the next exchange, as the opponent would lack 5 dices from his pool.
    Of course if the opponent has armored arms but some other body part uncovered you go for that, but my point is that, given the advantages of hitting first, whatever strike is the easiest to accomplish is generally the best option.
    Can't disagree with these.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Also, I'm interested in making a "cloack and sword" campaign, so shields and armor would be a little out of place. You can have a buckler or an heavy cloack, but that's it.
    That's why I'm so focused on the "naked swordmen" scenario: I need a symmetrical fight to work well.
    Please define "work well". For now it looks like you need a combat system where the solution is not only "brute force 4 the win", but if there are other considerations, I'd like to know about them.

    As for the shields & armor... okay. I'd still allow some hidden vambraces/bracers (at least leather) and doublets. Light mail worn under additional layer of clothing.

    In those cases you should go for civilian swords (e.g. rapier, smallsword, sidesword, arming swords, backswords and short swords) at best, with cudgels, daggers and spears playing their own roles. What is the focus of the campaign? En Garde...?

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    You have definetly hyped me here.
    It wouldn't be the first system that reads one way but plays in another.

    Anyway, while we are on this, let's theorycraft in a vacuum and see how far Alan the dicewaster goes on the spherical cow surface.


    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    You joke, but that was my idea had you asked me for a detailed character
    Jokes aside, Inigo is actually playable easily in RoS. Including the scene where he gets gravely wounded yet defeats Rugen. He just runs on SAs (Spiritual Attributes) at the end of the combat.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    I can't find any battle axe in the weapons list, there's the handed axe which is medium.
    How did Bob got initiative when is Block failed? And where did he got 4 dices, when he had used all 10 to block?
    Again, Flower of Battle is my source for weapon stats.

    Bob got initiative when Alan ran out of dice, and Bob decided to go for it in second exchange.

    The 4 dice is a typo from first version of the rant where I gave him 14 CP as start. My mistake. Still, 2 dice at TN 7... 1 success could be possible.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Also, with sidesword I meant the Reinassance blade, but given that it's a thrust oriented weapon in RoS (even if it's actually well balanced, although some are more like rapiers), and having seen my doubts on these weapons above, I gladly switch it with an arming sword.
    A bit.
    Cut & Thrust may be what you are looking for (as "renaissance sword" - the ones with fancy finger guards that are used for cutting but are light and single-handed).
    They also get the nice ATN/DTN combo of 6 for everything, very balanced weapon.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Well, if Alan sees his opponent throwing the red dice he should go for Elusive attack too. 4 dices to increase enemy ATN to 10, but with 2 dices from the stance and 1 from the arm cut he loses only one dice.
    If he uses less dices he just make increase his chances to miss, without helping his defence in any way. He wants to roll all of his dices: his hope is to strike first and strike hard.
    The example was meant: Bob keeps aggressive stance, throws white. In this case, Alan may go for Evasive attack, but it is more likely that he goes for straight attack, and Bob does not mind his attack landing second.

    So it goes:
    Both have aggressive stance
    Alan RED, Bob WHITE
    Alan attacks.
    Bob decides to go for evasive attack, not stealing initiative = his attack lands second.
    Jumping back gives him a good chance Alan will actually miss = advantage Bob.

    It's not a 100% plan (nothing actually is), but aside from Alan getting extremely lucky with 5+ successes, it's a good plan.

    Of course, an experienced player/character will notice an aggressive stance with white die and will get suspicious.

    But again, this is mainly a desperate "save myself" reaction. Imagine following situation:

    You are fighting a foe armed with a sword, who - obviously - goes for the kill, disregarding his own safety, and throws everything into the combat. You do not have personal investment in the combat (save for "defend your life" which gives you no dice). Do you continue the fight? And if yes, what do you do? Throw everything in and hope for success?

    I know it sounds like metagaming (for the GM), but if an NPC sees a ridiculous amount of dice, they will either flee or go for desperate measures. If they see a normal amount, they will fight according to the rules.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    I was going to say "Alan should buy initiative back!", but then checked RoS and you can't buy initiative back there as you can do in BotIT.
    This leads to some interesting things: it's perfectly possible to throw white dice, then wait for the opponent attack and steal inititative. Even using 10 dices to get a quasi-guaranteed win in the initiative contest agaisnt an opponent with high perception leaves with 4 dices, plus 2 for stance and 1 for arm cut.
    The attacker could think of using Elusive Attack, but that leaves open to Counters, as it uses to many dices.
    Flower of Battle suggest a different solution to stealing initiative - activation cost depends on your proficiency, not opponent's PER. It moves between 5 and 3 CP. Both of you may then add dice to your REF from your combat pool for the roll of "who hits first" - meaning that if the opponent spends all his dice as Alan did, he opens himself to this more than if he left few dice behind.

    It also suggests you add length penalties to REF rolls for determining who hits first...

    And yes, it is perfectly possible to do the "iaido" thing where the hero waits for opponents' attack and then moves in to attack faster. After all, it's all a valid tactic...

    As you can see, the system is quite complex: and we haven't even gotten to Twitching (Zwerchcopteeeer! you hide few dice into your hand before attacking via cut, the opponent must defend successfully - after the attack you declare twitch, show your hand - if you have more dice than your enemy has successes, you actually keep initiative, attack the opposite side and add double the dice to your next attack) or favouring (oooh... let's see: you send your GM a note about your character holding shield in specific area to cover it better and pay some dice... if the enemy attacks the area you are focusing, your dice investment gets doubled for purposes of defence)...

    ...so many options.

    Yet often what works best is the easy approach. Defend well, attack weak, keep dice in reserve to scam the opponent, search for opening.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    So the attacker is doomed? The only winning move is to not play at all?
    To answer your question: Yes. And no.

    The system simulates real combat - which means there is always a chance for failure, wound and death. The last one can be postponed via Drama mechanic if things get out of hand, but players should be ready their backsides will get kicked - and that wounds take time to heal. In BoIT the Mending magic helps speed up healing (to days instead of weeks), but players need to take care not to get hit too much.

    So in a way, yes. The attacker is only postponing their inevitable death by fighting. As we all do.

    On the other hand, the winning move is this:

    "My name is Inigo Montoya..." I have proficiency of 12 (as fencing master) and Reflex 7. And +5 dice from my Hatred (six-fingered fencer) SA, +5 from my Loyalty (defending my friends), +5 from my Oath (avenge my father's killer), +5 from my Conscience (I am fighting for the right thing), totaling at 39 CP.

    Why do you fight when you have no investment in the outcome...?

    And yes, that fight is the climax of the adventure, but your players should know by then that they need to fight mainly when it matters. Choose your fights. Decide which ones to take, which ones not.

    So maybe the other winning move is to have Charlie knock out Alan from behind when he faces off Bob - after all, Alan is not Bob's antagonist, just a guy who wants to fight. But if Alan is actually the second-in-command of the Antagonist, Bob should have an SA that will help him with the fight.

    BTW, if you want to run a practice combat outside your player group, I think I can arrange one
    Call me Laco or Ladislav (if you need to be formal). Avatar comes from the talented linklele.
    Formerly GMing: Riddle of Steel: Soldiers of Fortune

    Quote Originally Posted by Kol Korran View Post
    Instead of having an adventure, from which a cool unexpected story may rise, you had a story, with an adventure built and designed to enable the story, but also ensure (or close to ensure) it happens.

  11. - Top - End - #11
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    BlueKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2015

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    Sorry for the delay, I was quite busy in the last days.
    But I also recovered Flower of Battle, so something good has happened.

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    She had ATN 5 (rapier), I had DTN 4 (full evasion ala RoS).

    She should have played to the strength of the build. Think about this:
    How do you know the opponents' CP? You test it.
    How do you test it? Careful defensive and offensive.
    Once you know the approximate CP, what can you do?

    From GM's perspective, it's again a thing about roleplaying opponents taking into account their capabilities, intellectual abilities, tactical thinking...etc.

    A simple peasant with CP 8 will know two tactics: run away & throw stones or bash bash bash. Had she gone for weak cut, the peasant would not guess a feint = she could have deceived him and wound him in first exchange. After all, his decision to run came after she produced the large amount of dice.

    Not before. Had she gone for cut for 4 dice, the peasant would try to parry for 5 and she could have either let it go, to see how many dice he has... or she could have gone for a feint with 4+4 (discard 4) dice to go straight for the kill. Both would be viable tactics. After she knew he had only 8 CP, her plan could have changed. A series of quick feints, few light wounds and he's down. Or bait him to overspend and go for a counter.
    Let's see: with a DTN of 7 on the parry, the peasant had a 30% chance of doing 3 or more successes. With 8 dices, the fencer would have done 5+ successes in 56% of the cases. So around 13% chance for the fencer to fail.
    Which is better than the previous case, but it relies on the opponent using a sub-optimal tactic.

    The main problem I have with this is that the dice pool is, in the end, an abstract mechanic.
    I'm not really sure of how to represent real moves and real behaviours with it.
    For example you can say the peasant doesn't know feints exists, but on the same token I could say he should go full evasion anyway, because he's agaisnt a clearly superior opponent and can't afford to not use its best defensive option.

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    I think this is a difference between RoS vs. BoIT again.

    Toss & Stop Short do not require the attacker to win: both are basically opportunities to cancel an oncoming attack if you have the initiative (they do not give the opportunity to attack back, including stealing initiative!) for low dice investment (ideal if you overspent). For Stop Short, you only need 2 or 3 dice to increase opponents' TN that your respective attributes do not matter and for some builds it allows to actually gain some advantage in fight. At least in RoS. For Toss, you need to hold something in your hand (it is actually suggested that Toss could be repeatedly used with someone's cloak after a break in combat), but a single die is sufficient for it to be effective.

    Example: You and your opponent have both 10 CP and are dueling using renaissance sideswords & cloaks. You attacked for 9 CP, the opponent went for full evasion for 5 CP and it was a tie. Similar as above. Had you used your whole pool, you would be statistically dead. You still have one die. Now you have the initiative, but with 1 CP left you are afraid your opponent may launch an attack and hurt you easily. So you Toss your cloak for the 1 die. Your opponent may - according to the rules - either dodge or not. If he dodges, he may allocate dice vs. TN 7. If he does not, the roll is only on you, unresisted. Either way, the opponent loses exactly 1 die...and you retain initiative.

    The only limitation here is the amount of items you can toss.
    I checked RoS and the Toss maneuvers says "If you win each success in the margin cause him to lose..."
    Stop Short says "If the attacker wins, then his opponents lose dices..."

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    I usually refer to Flower of Battle when weapons are the topic. Of course, here we are talking about late-era rapiers that were mostly used for their point, not blade, with "fencers' grip", which disallows really powerful swing attacks and is best suited for lighter swordplay, not parrying axes and such. There is also the possibility of using "draw cut" maneuver, which adds +1 to damage for cuts, but I digress.

    In Flower of Battle, some weapons have the descriptor "heavy" and these are actually used for the higher DTN. Most swords still count as light, so for example sabers and longswords will still get the lower DTN.
    This is more a problem of terminology, I think, as nobody can agree what exactly a rapier is, what a sidesword is and so on.
    Anyway, I think the Cut and Thust sword from RoS or the Sidesword from FoB are nice and balanced, and other weapons could be "skins" of those.
    For example I could use the Sidesword stats for a rapier, to make a thrust oriented weapon that can still cut.

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    We are going in circles, but mostly because your opponent does not know your CP and does not know if he can afford to go for expulsion in first round. If you know you have a dice advantage, you may safely go for expulsion - if not, it's a risk but may be still worth it.

    Again: DTN 8 is for e.g. greatsword, or axes. A longsword vs. rapier gets still the DTN 6.

    Thrusting attacks often wound worse - they go deep, so the pain & shock values are often worse. Aiming for certain zones gets easier with thrusts. And you get your own benefit: if you go red-red, then with thrust your chances of landing first wound actually go up (REF+1).

    And oftentimes there is the advantage of length or lower ATNs in specialized weapons. See the ATN for axes as opposed to ATN for spears.
    The bonus to REF for thrusts sounds really interesting, but I can't find it on the handbooks. Any chance you remember from where it was? It's not in the hit location tables neither the initiative section.

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    Flower of Battle suggest a different solution to stealing initiative - activation cost depends on your proficiency, not opponent's PER. It moves between 5 and 3 CP. Both of you may then add dice to your REF from your combat pool for the roll of "who hits first" - meaning that if the opponent spends all his dice as Alan did, he opens himself to this more than if he left few dice behind.

    It also suggests you add length penalties to REF rolls for determining who hits first...

    And yes, it is perfectly possible to do the "iaido" thing where the hero waits for opponents' attack and then moves in to attack faster. After all, it's all a valid tactic...

    As you can see, the system is quite complex: and we haven't even gotten to Twitching (Zwerchcopteeeer! you hide few dice into your hand before attacking via cut, the opponent must defend successfully - after the attack you declare twitch, show your hand - if you have more dice than your enemy has successes, you actually keep initiative, attack the opposite side and add double the dice to your next attack) or favouring (oooh... let's see: you send your GM a note about your character holding shield in specific area to cover it better and pay some dice... if the enemy attacks the area you are focusing, your dice investment gets doubled for purposes of defence)...

    ...so many options.

    Yet often what works best is the easy approach. Defend well, attack weak, keep dice in reserve to scam the opponent, search for opening.
    Yeah, reading through FoB and there are many options that improve the game a lot. That rule for stealing initiative is really neat and does a lot against the alpha strike tactic.

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    To answer your question: Yes. And no.

    The system simulates real combat - which means there is always a chance for failure, wound and death. The last one can be postponed via Drama mechanic if things get out of hand, but players should be ready their backsides will get kicked - and that wounds take time to heal. In BoIT the Mending magic helps speed up healing (to days instead of weeks), but players need to take care not to get hit too much.

    So in a way, yes. The attacker is only postponing their inevitable death by fighting. As we all do.

    On the other hand, the winning move is this:

    "My name is Inigo Montoya..." I have proficiency of 12 (as fencing master) and Reflex 7. And +5 dice from my Hatred (six-fingered fencer) SA, +5 from my Loyalty (defending my friends), +5 from my Oath (avenge my father's killer), +5 from my Conscience (I am fighting for the right thing), totaling at 39 CP.

    Why do you fight when you have no investment in the outcome...?
    Well, with all those dices I would go full attack


    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    BTW, if you want to run a practice combat outside your player group, I think I can arrange one
    At this point I'm mostly convinced, but why not?

  12. - Top - End - #12
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Lacco's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Slovakia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Sorry for the delay, I was quite busy in the last days.
    But I also recovered Flower of Battle, so something good has happened.
    No problem, been busy too.

    And will have to keep my answers short this time

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Let's see: with a DTN of 7 on the parry, the peasant had a 30% chance of doing 3 or more successes. With 8 dices, the fencer would have done 5+ successes in 56% of the cases. So around 13% chance for the fencer to fail.
    Which is better than the previous case, but it relies on the opponent using a sub-optimal tactic.
    Interestingly, sub-optimal tactics are what both players and NPCs indulge in quite often. You may see for yourself.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    The main problem I have with this is that the dice pool is, in the end, an abstract mechanic.
    I'm not really sure of how to represent real moves and real behaviours with it.
    For example you can say the peasant doesn't know feints exists, but on the same token I could say he should go full evasion anyway, because he's agaisnt a clearly superior opponent and can't afford to not use its best defensive option.
    Consider this:
    REFlex represents your ability to react quickly - basically, to act in combat as fast as possible.

    Your proficiency with the weapon represents both your skill to wield the weapon, wound your opponent with it, but also use it for defence.

    Now together, they represent how much you can actually do in single moment of combat. When considering traditional white-red situation, where an attacker swings his sword and the other blocks it with shield, taking into account human speed of movement, you do not have too much time to do anything besides some footwork, a feint, thrust and return to your guard to receive opponent's blow.

    With higher CP, you are able to do more and you are able to do better. You are able to hit harder, more efficiently, to catch opponent's blade or redirect his own energy for your own attack.

    CP is an abstract value, but what you do with it represents combat much better than anything else I have ever seen (Burning Wheel comes second).

    Like in reality, you can put all into one powerful swing - and if it connects, you will most probably crush the opponent - but if you miss, you overextend yourself and can not do anything to protect against his blow. And if his attack connects, you may be sent staggering back, holding your wounds instead of your weapon.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    I checked RoS and the Toss maneuvers says "If you win each success in the margin cause him to lose..."
    Stop Short says "If the attacker wins, then his opponents lose dices..."
    Correct.
    If you win, he loses dice, you retain initiative.
    If you lose, you lose initiative.

    But at that moment, the opponent can not announce an attack (so you are safe while you use it; do not use during RED-RED).

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    This is more a problem of terminology, I think, as nobody can agree what exactly a rapier is, what a sidesword is and so on.
    Anyway, I think the Cut and Thust sword from RoS or the Sidesword from FoB are nice and balanced, and other weapons could be "skins" of those.
    For example I could use the Sidesword stats for a rapier, to make a thrust oriented weapon that can still cut.
    If you plan on using mainly civilian swords, you can also make modifications to ATN/DTN/DMG stats (usually a +1/-1) to create different subtypes.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    The bonus to REF for thrusts sounds really interesting, but I can't find it on the handbooks. Any chance you remember from where it was? It's not in the hit location tables neither the initiative section.
    It's actually my memory going wrong. The paragraph is the description of Thrust maneuver, page 64. Also FoB, page 39.

    It's +1 to REF if you use thrust and opponent uses cut and you tie for initiative (so it's a tiebreaker, not a bonus).

    Will have to remember this one for my next game.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Yeah, reading through FoB and there are many options that improve the game a lot. That rule for stealing initiative is really neat and does a lot against the alpha strike tactic.

    Well, with all those dices I would go full attack
    Who wouldn't?

    ...well, maybe someone who wants to toy with the BBEG.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    At this point I'm mostly convinced, but why not?
    No problem. Here or shall I set up a separate thread?

    Also: if you plan on playing by post (as opposed to live table), there is an option to first go through the fight mechanically and to narrate it afterwards. Blow-by-blow combats are better for live tables.
    Call me Laco or Ladislav (if you need to be formal). Avatar comes from the talented linklele.
    Formerly GMing: Riddle of Steel: Soldiers of Fortune

    Quote Originally Posted by Kol Korran View Post
    Instead of having an adventure, from which a cool unexpected story may rise, you had a story, with an adventure built and designed to enable the story, but also ensure (or close to ensure) it happens.

  13. - Top - End - #13
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2015

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    What is RED and WHITE?

    I know what colours are but what does that actually mean here? I don't have the rules for Riddle of Steel (or the mass combat rules in Flower of Battle) but I have been able to figure out most of it from context. These I am still confused about.

  14. - Top - End - #14
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Lacco's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Slovakia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cluedrew View Post
    What is RED and WHITE?

    I know what colours are but what does that actually mean here? I don't have the rules for Riddle of Steel (or the mass combat rules in Flower of Battle) but I have been able to figure out most of it from context. These I am still confused about.
    Initiative throw.

    Initiative in RoS works differently from D&D.

    You have two combatants (a duel). Each player takes a red & white die.

    Red represents your character decides to attack (goes offensive).

    White represents your character decides to defend (goes defensive).

    You have both in your hands, pick one. On GM's command you both throw a die on the table.

    It's a double-blind system for designating who is the attacker and who is defender, and for determining initiative (imagine "initiative" as a token that says "your attack will hit first").

    There are three possible results:
    White-White - both are defensive. You circle your opponent, waiting for an opening. Initiative stays undetermined.
    Red-White - attacker vs. defender. Standard situation. One of the characters attacks, the other defends. Initiative goes to the attacker.
    Red-Red - two attackers. Both attacking at the same time. Boooy, this will be messy. A roll is required to see who hits first, initiative stays with the one who either hit last or has dice remaining in his pool. If both are out of dice, initiative resets (new round, you throw down again).

    Does that make sense now?

    In practice, it gets a bit more messy (you can buy/steal initiative), but these are the basics.
    Call me Laco or Ladislav (if you need to be formal). Avatar comes from the talented linklele.
    Formerly GMing: Riddle of Steel: Soldiers of Fortune

    Quote Originally Posted by Kol Korran View Post
    Instead of having an adventure, from which a cool unexpected story may rise, you had a story, with an adventure built and designed to enable the story, but also ensure (or close to ensure) it happens.

  15. - Top - End - #15
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2015

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    I'm trying to decide if that is really cool or excessively complicated. Maybe a bit of both. Anyways thanks.

  16. - Top - End - #16
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    DruidGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    I'd heard of TRoS before but never actually looked into it before seeing this thread.

    As a fan of melee characters in RPGs, I generally despair that while spell casters get five thousand options, melee defaults to 'hit things.' If you are lucky you may get an option or two, but it is generally gated.

    This looks a welcome change.

    My question is how fast does combat actually run? Does it take 5 minutes to run a round or is it relatively fast?

  17. - Top - End - #17
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Lacco's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Slovakia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cluedrew View Post
    I'm trying to decide if that is really cool or excessively complicated. Maybe a bit of both. Anyways thanks.
    It's a bit of both.

    From experience: it runs better than it reads. Especially the initiative throw is quite dramatic stuff as opposed to initiative rolls.

    You do not have to keep numbers in mind (the value is binary has/does not have initiative), so it flows a bit better. The double-blind selection provides a level of strategic uncertainty, as well as good dramatic mechanic.

    When combat starts, you grab your two dice (I tend to have a pair of red/white dice for my players, they keep it in front of them) and get ready to fight. Less bookkeeping.

    Quote Originally Posted by Corvus View Post
    I'd heard of TRoS before but never actually looked into it before seeing this thread.

    As a fan of melee characters in RPGs, I generally despair that while spell casters get five thousand options, melee defaults to 'hit things.' If you are lucky you may get an option or two, but it is generally gated.

    This looks a welcome change.

    My question is how fast does combat actually run? Does it take 5 minutes to run a round or is it relatively fast?
    Welcome!

    Bad news: melee characters still default to "hit things" or "poke things". And RoS has no working magic system.

    Good news: the system gives melee characters a lot of options. Poke things with rapier is different than poke things with halberd. There are multiple different tactics and approaches, including (but not limited to) power attacking, feinting, going for bleeding damage, knocking out opponents, aiming for unarmored parts, exhausting them (a viable tactic, especially against heavily-armored opponents), ...

    Best news: melee combat (and ranged combat) definitely delivers the excitement and fun. And it runs pretty good.

    Word of warning: the "best" system arrangement is split between 3 books in RoS (+ ported magic from BoIT). BoIT simplified some things, so it may be good idea to start there.

    To answer your question:

    Combat is usually handled via series of skirmishes between two to three combatants. There the system shines.

    A duel between two players can be done fairly quickly, assuming some familiarity with the rules. You are done with a combat within the 5 minutes (I'd average somewhere at 2 minutes per round at the beginning). I can run a combat with 5 players (who know what they are doing) vs 8 opponents in 15 minutes, moving from one to another, switching quickly between bouts and skirmishes and narrating what happens while counting dice for my next opponent.

    The advantage is, that you narrate the combat as it flows. The only part where it slows down - in the beginning - are the damage tables. You need to orient yourself there very quickly not to slow down the combat too much, but there is also a handy program for that available.

    As BlacKnight also observed, some of the ideas take time getting used to - especially the idea of CP and the fact you can not just narrate the combat - the actions of players narrate it.

    But if you are like me and dreamed of a system, where swordplay actually matters, where wounds are something to avoid, where a high quality steel sword is a treasure and where players actually enjoy fighting bandits, RoS can deliver.
    Call me Laco or Ladislav (if you need to be formal). Avatar comes from the talented linklele.
    Formerly GMing: Riddle of Steel: Soldiers of Fortune

    Quote Originally Posted by Kol Korran View Post
    Instead of having an adventure, from which a cool unexpected story may rise, you had a story, with an adventure built and designed to enable the story, but also ensure (or close to ensure) it happens.

  18. - Top - End - #18
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    BlueKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2015

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    Here we are again. Sorry for the delay and thank you for your time.

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    Correct.
    If you win, he loses dice, you retain initiative.
    If you lose, you lose initiative.

    But at that moment, the opponent can not announce an attack (so you are safe while you use it; do not use during RED-RED).
    I'm not sure the opponent can't attack during Stop Short or Toss. The latter requires him to dodge, so if he attacks you can make an unopposed roll.
    But Stop Short allows him to use his Ref in the contested roll, so nothing stops him from attacking.
    And considering that you can't parry his attack, only hope that he loses enough dices due to your move...


    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post

    It's actually my memory going wrong. The paragraph is the description of Thrust maneuver, page 64. Also FoB, page 39.

    It's +1 to REF if you use thrust and opponent uses cut and you tie for initiative (so it's a tiebreaker, not a bonus).

    Will have to remember this one for my next game.
    Interesting.
    Incidentally, I think that the Shock values for thrusts are too high, or the values for cuts are too low.
    If you thrust while the opponent cuts you are not going to stop him just by sticking your sword in his belly.

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post

    Who wouldn't?

    ...well, maybe someone who wants to toy with the BBEG.
    That sounds like a reversed trope of the villain that can't take the hero seriously

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post

    No problem. Here or shall I set up a separate thread?

    Also: if you plan on playing by post (as opposed to live table), there is an option to first go through the fight mechanically and to narrate it afterwards. Blow-by-blow combats are better for live tables.
    I think we can do it here.
    If you don't mind I would make a fight that could happen in a campaign I'm playing in as a player, with another system.

    The setting is the Attack on Titan's one, but it doesn't matter if you don't know it.
    My character, Oscar, is a young noble that joined the Survey Corps under a false name for various reasons that I won't explain here.
    Short story: he's now out in the wilderness with his squad and he wants to take a certain book from captain Valzer.
    So, for the sake of our simulation, one evening Oscar finds the captain alone at some distance from the camp and, failing to get the books with words, he unsheathes his sword and threatens the captain.
    A fight is thus inevitable.

    Relevant Oscar's stats:
    Spiritual: passion 4 (being recognized by his father), passion 3 (becoming a great soldier). In this case passion 4 could fire, for background reasons to long to explain, while passion 3 obviously is out. I don't know if being directly in contrast with the situation gives some malus.
    ST: 5 AG: 7 TO: 4 EN: 5 HT: 3
    WP: 4 WIT: 7 MA: 3 SOC: 5 PER: 5
    Ref: 7 Aim: 6 knckdown: 5 Knockout: 6 Move: 8
    Sword and Cut: 8 Dagger: 3 Handgun: 3
    Combat Pool: 15
    Gifts: minor Accuracy
    He has a cut and thrust sword. His goal is to retrive the book, possibly without killing the captain.

    Regarding captain Valzer, I'll leave her to you if you like.
    She's an experienced soldier and known for being resourceful. But probably she hasn't trained for fighting against human opponents with swords (as titans requires completely different weapons and tactics), so she can't brute force this situation.
    She would probably not carry swords here, but for the sake of the simulation she could have a sword (or even 2) of the kind used in the setting. Those are heavy one handed blades specialized for cutting, so I think the longsword stats could work for them.
    Being cyinical and determinated I doubt she would hesitate in killing Oscar, if necessary to protect the book.
    Last edited by BlacKnight; 2020-06-28 at 11:07 AM.

  19. - Top - End - #19
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Lacco's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Slovakia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Here we are again. Sorry for the delay and thank you for your time.
    No problem. I don't get into much discussions lately, and RoS is still my favourite RPG, so I do not consider it a wasted time.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    I'm not sure the opponent can't attack during Stop Short or Toss. The latter requires him to dodge, so if he attacks you can make an unopposed roll.
    But Stop Short allows him to use his Ref in the contested roll, so nothing stops him from attacking.
    And considering that you can't parry his attack, only hope that he loses enough dices due to your move...
    Actually, the opponent can't attack. This was explained in Companion: when using Stop Short or Toss, the opponent does not declare his maneuver, therefore he can not launch his own attack. In Toss, he may choose to dodge or not, but nothing else. In Stop Short he does not get any choice.

    Only when the situation is Red/Red, Stop Short and Toss work exactly as you stated (he launched an attack already).


    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Interesting.
    Incidentally, I think that the Shock values for thrusts are too high, or the values for cuts are too low.
    If you thrust while the opponent cuts you are not going to stop him just by sticking your sword in his belly.
    To be honest, never got stabbed so no real experience to extrapolate from. But in a way you are correct: when attacking belly area, you can hit the sides, which has only single level (disregarding the amount of actual damage you roll): you pierced a flank and there is only little shock and almost no blood loss.

    So if the opponent is cutting, he will hit you.

    This is valid for most level 1-2 wounds: if you go red-red and you do not hit hard enough, you may get hit easily - and a smart opponent will definitely use the option to increase cut damage by 1 for 1 die (if you hit, it's like an automatic success... and if you do not, it's quite possible the single die would not make a difference).

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    That sounds like a reversed trope of the villain that can't take the hero seriously
    It's actually possible to make several "troperific" villains. One of my players was actually very combat savvy (he knew the rules quite well and could work the system) and played a ranger/tracker whose weapon of choice was a hatchet and knife, and another was playing an overconfident fencer.

    They met a leader of enemy army when they infiltrated his outpost - and decided "to hell with stealth, let's kill this guy". He was actually quite adept fencer (CP around 17) and was considered a "boss" encounter, meaning he got his own SAs.

    You know the trope when the enemy is actually overjoyed they finally get to fight someone and then are a bit disappointed? I pulled it off perfectly. He was able to counter anything they threw at him (some luck involved, but mainly tactics, longer weapon, good DTN and they were already fatigued) and after three hectic rounds where I split dice between their attacks and went mostly defensive I pulled off a full evasion, went into aggressive stance and stated "Well. Not bad. My turn now."

    They went on full evasion and fled.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    I think we can do it here.
    If you don't mind I would make a fight that could happen in a campaign I'm playing in as a player, with another system.
    It will be a bit tricky to estimate the threat level, but I'll just make assumptions and you can correct me if I'm wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    The setting is the Attack on Titan's one, but it doesn't matter if you don't know it.
    My character, Oscar, is a young noble that joined the Survey Corps under a false name for various reasons that I won't explain here.
    Short story: he's now out in the wilderness with his squad and he wants to take a certain book from captain Valzer.
    So, for the sake of our simulation, one evening Oscar finds the captain alone at some distance from the camp and, failing to get the books with words, he unsheathes his sword and threatens the captain.
    A fight is thus inevitable.
    I actually do not know the setting.

    One thing: a fight is not inevitable - in this case Intimidation checks are good thing as you can either make the opponent step aside, or make him defensive (if you roll high enough) and even make him lose some dice if you get too good a roll.

    But let's assume the captain is determined not to step back and goes for her sword.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Relevant Oscar's stats:
    Spiritual: passion 4 (being recognized by his father), passion 3 (becoming a great soldier). In this case passion 4 could fire, for background reasons to long to explain, while passion 3 obviously is out. I don't know if being directly in contrast with the situation gives some malus.
    ST: 5 AG: 7 TO: 4 EN: 5 HT: 3
    WP: 4 WIT: 7 MA: 3 SOC: 5 PER: 5
    Ref: 7 Aim: 6 knckdown: 5 Knockout: 6 Move: 8
    Sword and Cut: 8 Dagger: 3 Handgun: 3
    Combat Pool: 15
    Gifts: minor Accuracy
    He has a cut and thrust sword. His goal is to retrive the book, possibly without killing the captain.
    Correction: these are not Passions, but Drives. The latter could be interpreted as Oath.

    If you are directly opposing your SA, you can lose points you have in it (e.g. if you swore an oath to become a great solder and run away from first battle even though your side is winning), but you do not take penalties from SA. There is one exception: anti-destiny.

    For the captain, I'd go with schiavona, arming sword or backsword - longswords are not single-handed by default (your choice, if you actually wish to go against a longsword, no problem there - but she'll go two-handed, as it makes sense without a shield).

    I have built her as relatively experienced, on par with starting character in some ways. She'll get an SA (oath: to protect the book at all costs).

    Advantages are on your side. Question: do soldiers wear any armor in this setting?

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    She's an experienced soldier and known for being resourceful. But probably she hasn't trained for fighting against human opponents with swords (as titans requires completely different weapons and tactics), so she can't brute force this situation.
    She would probably not carry swords here, but for the sake of the simulation she could have a sword (or even 2) of the kind used in the setting. Those are heavy one handed blades specialized for cutting, so I think the longsword stats could work for them.
    Being cyinical and determinated I doubt she would hesitate in killing Oscar, if necessary to protect the book.
    Very well, to arms then.

    ...

    Captain Valzer seems unfazed by your threats, but she draws her blade and steps back into guard only moment after you do, ready to receive you.

    OOC: In this case, we are on relatively even meadow, in the middle of forest. There is a shallow brook just few steps to the side, and trees are just few yards behind each of combatants.


    Choose stance (Neutral for me; I choose first as your REF is higher)
    Throw initiative.
    Call me Laco or Ladislav (if you need to be formal). Avatar comes from the talented linklele.
    Formerly GMing: Riddle of Steel: Soldiers of Fortune

    Quote Originally Posted by Kol Korran View Post
    Instead of having an adventure, from which a cool unexpected story may rise, you had a story, with an adventure built and designed to enable the story, but also ensure (or close to ensure) it happens.

  20. - Top - End - #20
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    DruidGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post



    Welcome!

    Bad news: melee characters still default to "hit things" or "poke things". And RoS has no working magic system.
    Unfortunately in most systems it boils down to roll to hit, roll for damage for melee. At least D&D 4e gave melee characters options, but apparently us pleb melee players aren't allowed options, only the magic users are allowed that. Lack of magic is a bit sad, but you'd want a low level, gritty magic system.

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post


    But if you are like me and dreamed of a system, where swordplay actually matters, where wounds are something to avoid, where a high quality steel sword is a treasure and where players actually enjoy fighting bandits, RoS can deliver.
    Yeah, that is the kind of thing I have been looking, though maybe on the more complex side of things than I (or the group I play with) are used to. I'd actually considered doing a system of my own that allowed more options for melee characters, based on elements from various systems I've played over the years with eventually a low level magic system as well. I want a s system where spear and shield is actually one of the better choices, not inferior to swords (which are always overvalued). But I'll have to have a look through the system here and see how it goes.

    It sounds like it could be a good mix for a Dark Sun campaign, though you'd have to do a bit of work adapting races and introducing a magic and psionic system.

  21. - Top - End - #21
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Lacco's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Slovakia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Corvus View Post
    Yeah, that is the kind of thing I have been looking, though maybe on the more complex side of things than I (or the group I play with) are used to. I'd actually considered doing a system of my own that allowed more options for melee characters, based on elements from various systems I've played over the years with eventually a low level magic system as well. I want a s system where spear and shield is actually one of the better choices, not inferior to swords (which are always overvalued). But I'll have to have a look through the system here and see how it goes.
    While the system is complex and deep, it works well in practice. And I am always surprised when DnD players (especially those who play 3.5) think the system is clunky/too complex: I find DnD's system quite distracting and while I love it in theory, I find it hard to run smoothly in practice.

    Quote Originally Posted by Corvus View Post
    It sounds like it could be a good mix for a Dark Sun campaign, though you'd have to do a bit of work adapting races and introducing a magic and psionic system.
    In this case: go with Blade of the Iron Throne. There are some changes to the combat system, but overall it looks a bit streamlined. On the other hand - it has a working magic system, which works pretty well with the Dark Sun setting from what I have heard.

    Magic is of the dark variety, with Taint mechanic providing a reverse mana mechanic (the more Taint you accrue, the less dice you have for casting spells), there are no real utility spells (like cleaning clothes), but it allows you to rain fire and lightning on people, hypnotize them to believe their swords are snakes (and it could happen they get bitten and die), causing pain - it is of the eldritch variety, so it should work well.
    Call me Laco or Ladislav (if you need to be formal). Avatar comes from the talented linklele.
    Formerly GMing: Riddle of Steel: Soldiers of Fortune

    Quote Originally Posted by Kol Korran View Post
    Instead of having an adventure, from which a cool unexpected story may rise, you had a story, with an adventure built and designed to enable the story, but also ensure (or close to ensure) it happens.

  22. - Top - End - #22
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    BlueKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2015

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    Actually, the opponent can't attack. This was explained in Companion: when using Stop Short or Toss, the opponent does not declare his maneuver, therefore he can not launch his own attack. In Toss, he may choose to dodge or not, but nothing else. In Stop Short he does not get any choice.

    Only when the situation is Red/Red, Stop Short and Toss work exactly as you stated (he launched an attack already).
    I've recovered the Companion and those maneuvers work differently there.
    Is there a summary that lists all maneuvers across core + companion + flower of battle?
    Otherwise I would have to make one by myself, or use BotIT to have everything on one book (hoping it doesn't have 2 or 3 expansions too!)

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    To be honest, never got stabbed so no real experience to extrapolate from. But in a way you are correct: when attacking belly area, you can hit the sides, which has only single level (disregarding the amount of actual damage you roll): you pierced a flank and there is only little shock and almost no blood loss.

    So if the opponent is cutting, he will hit you.

    This is valid for most level 1-2 wounds: if you go red-red and you do not hit hard enough, you may get hit easily - and a smart opponent will definitely use the option to increase cut damage by 1 for 1 die (if you hit, it's like an automatic success... and if you do not, it's quite possible the single die would not make a difference).
    My issue with this is that it seems hard to get a "double death", while in reality, when fighting with thrust oriented swords, it was a common occurence.
    This could be solved by increasing blood loss and reducing shock for puncture wounds.

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    It's actually possible to make several "troperific" villains. One of my players was actually very combat savvy (he knew the rules quite well and could work the system) and played a ranger/tracker whose weapon of choice was a hatchet and knife, and another was playing an overconfident fencer.

    They met a leader of enemy army when they infiltrated his outpost - and decided "to hell with stealth, let's kill this guy". He was actually quite adept fencer (CP around 17) and was considered a "boss" encounter, meaning he got his own SAs.

    You know the trope when the enemy is actually overjoyed they finally get to fight someone and then are a bit disappointed? I pulled it off perfectly. He was able to counter anything they threw at him (some luck involved, but mainly tactics, longer weapon, good DTN and they were already fatigued) and after three hectic rounds where I split dice between their attacks and went mostly defensive I pulled off a full evasion, went into aggressive stance and stated "Well. Not bad. My turn now."

    They went on full evasion and fled.
    Ahah, tha's a nice story.
    My players tend to get lucky and beat opponents over their capabilities, who knows that maybe going low could change things?

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    Correction: these are not Passions, but Drives. The latter could be interpreted as Oath.

    If you are directly opposing your SA, you can lose points you have in it (e.g. if you swore an oath to become a great solder and run away from first battle even though your side is winning), but you do not take penalties from SA. There is one exception: anti-destiny.
    I'm not sure I understand what the difference is between these.
    A passion is linked to a certain person. Ok, easy enough.
    An oath is, well, an oath.
    So drives are... a residual category for things that don't fit in any other category?
    A drive is defined as "a worthy cause that they would die for and (probably) kill for because they believe it to be extremely important".
    How is that different from any other spiritual attribute?

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    For the captain, I'd go with schiavona, arming sword or backsword - longswords are not single-handed by default (your choice, if you actually wish to go against a longsword, no problem there - but she'll go two-handed, as it makes sense without a shield).

    I have built her as relatively experienced, on par with starting character in some ways. She'll get an SA (oath: to protect the book at all costs).

    Advantages are on your side. Question: do soldiers wear any armor in this setting?
    The swords used by soldiers in AoT setting are heavy and meant to cut through titan skin at high speed, as they use the 3DMG, a special equipment with harpoons and wires linked to their body to go around swinging like Spider-Man.
    A video is probably more explicative: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfPrwJiZViQ
    Notice that no one is wearing 3DMG at the moment.
    I imagine the swords have a balance center quite far from the hilt, which make them not the best for dueling.
    If we go for one handed weapons I think any cut oriented blade could do it, as long as the ATN is not too good. Schiavona, backsword or even saber are the best fit.
    Soldiers in the setting don't wear armor, because well... anime logic. (to be fair they should wear not armor, but something akin motorcycle vests, to protect themselves from bad falls.)


    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    Very well, to arms then.

    ...

    Captain Valzer seems unfazed by your threats, but she draws her blade and steps back into guard only moment after you do, ready to receive you.

    OOC: In this case, we are on relatively even meadow, in the middle of forest. There is a shallow brook just few steps to the side, and trees are just few yards behind each of combatants.


    Choose stance (Neutral for me; I choose first as your REF is higher)
    Throw initiative.
    Oscar knows being defensive won't do him any good in this situation.
    He assumes aggressive stance, points his sword at the captain and makes a step forward.
    I take Red dice for initiative.

  23. - Top - End - #23
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Lacco's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Slovakia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    I've recovered the Companion and those maneuvers work differently there.
    Is there a summary that lists all maneuvers across core + companion + flower of battle?
    Otherwise I would have to make one by myself, or use BotIT to have everything on one book (hoping it doesn't have 2 or 3 expansions too!)
    There is a list of maneuvers (with ACs and minimal proficiency, per proficiency), done by a third party. Check trosfans.com, somewhere down in Downloads section. However, I am not aware of a summary - I've used the cards that were available on Driftwood Publishing page, updated them with FoB and Companion data, but that was long ago and I now only have them in paper form (with most of them already lost somewhere in space and time, I assume).

    If I were you, I'd most probably use BoIT - it has everything in one book.

    I've been trying to compile a complete ruleset for some time, but I've lost my work some time ago and then decided to start from a scratch with different RPG. But it takes a lot of time.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    My issue with this is that it seems hard to get a "double death", while in reality, when fighting with thrust oriented swords, it was a common occurence.
    This could be solved by increasing blood loss and reducing shock for puncture wounds.
    There was a ruling somewhere (I do not remember the exact location, but will try to find it for you), that if the difference between rolls is 1 or 2, the attack still manages to hit.

    On the other hand, if you fight carefully (i.e. try to save your skin) and defensively, it's not uncommon for both to receive few smaller wounds before someone strikes true... and then, if you fail to get medical attention...

    If you wished to actually model reality a bit more closely, you could also define which wounds are internal and require surgery (or lead to death) and which can be simply closed with enough bandages and skill in First Aid.

    Meaning: if you get a stab wound in your belly, the First Aid skill may only halve the bleeding, not completely close it, as opposed to a deep cut on arm.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Ahah, tha's a nice story.
    My players tend to get lucky and beat opponents over their capabilities, who knows that maybe going low could change things?
    You must let me know how it works for you. And I would suggest you first try the ruleset as it is, maybe for a one-shot. When I first wanted to play RoS, my group said "Why don't we stick to DnD and Shadowrun?"... well, we quickly generated few characters and I sent them to an abandoned house in the middle of winter storm (lockdown, so that I don't have to think of additional stuff), which served as hideout to few bandits... who were actually returning next day. And had numbers advantage.

    They managed to put the puzzle pieces together, so when the bandits came, PCs were prepared and crushed them. And then ate horsemeat porridge. Do not ask.

    Spoiler: Another story
    Show
    I've had a player who had the anti-Destiny of "Through my heroic death I am destined to repair the bad reputation of my people, the Savaxen!". Savaxen are local viking raiders. Whenever he did a heroic deed, he got a Destiny Point, but I ruled that once he reaches 5 points, something dramatic will happen. He agreed - after I promised I'll give him the chance to fight destiny. Also: you can keep your Destiny low by burning the points for advancement.

    Which is funny, because he did the following:

    After several dozens of games, the party finds out there is an army coming to take certain city - and people are turning on their ally, local prince. His character suddenly decides to stand up on a table in the middle of town square and shout "Maybe you die if you fight! And maybe you survive! But I promise you, if you stand with me, I, Ragnar, will fight for you and die with you!"

    ...cue me, smiling and handing him 4 points to total it to 5. He understood the notion, because he went pale immediately.

    After several dozens of games, the heroes returned to the city - to defend it. He brought a small army of Savaxen warriors to fight on their side - berserkers, raiders, hunters... lead the charge, brought down a half-giant and then decided to go 1:1 with enemy leader.

    At that point, he had 5 points in Destiny - I slowly added them and he did not notice until it was too late. And it started to burn.

    He went to fight one of the best swordsmen - CP somewhere around 20 - with penalty of -5 per ROLL... so -10 per round.

    And he landed the first blow.

    And even the second.

    He was on fire - and used every advantage he had.

    He died heroically - and fulfilled his destiny. Woke up in afterlife and was given the chance to go back - but only if he accepts a new destiny.

    "To walk in steps of his forefathers and to save those who will come to hate him."

    Woke up. Penalty - gone. One of his eyes - gone. Proceeded to utterly destroy the leader of opposing army.

    Good times.


    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    I'm not sure I understand what the difference is between these.
    A passion is linked to a certain person. Ok, easy enough.
    An oath is, well, an oath.
    So drives are... a residual category for things that don't fit in any other category?
    A drive is defined as "a worthy cause that they would die for and (probably) kill for because they believe it to be extremely important".
    How is that different from any other spiritual attribute?
    Passion: Love. Hatred. Loyalty. Friendship. Your bond to a person. Or group (e.g. hatred for slavers).
    Oath: A promise you have to fulfill.
    Conscience: Morals and ethics. Choosing the right over the easy.
    Drive: A goal. A cause. Something you wish to achieve.
    Faith: Faith.

    Destiny is a separate beast. That's the "end state".

    The difference is, that by Passion you bind yourself to the world, while Drive states what you - the player - wish to achieve for the character. I think there were some minor differences between their uses (e.g. you use Passion when defending those you love/fighting those you hate while you use Conscience when you are doing the right thing as opposed the easy thing), but otherwise you are correct - Drive as such is mostly "character/player goal", which may be almost anything.

    So you could have following SAs:
    Passion: Love for Lady X
    Passion: Hatred for Lady X's other suitor, Lord Y
    Oath: I shall marry Lady X!
    Drive: I want to destroy Lord Y!
    Destiny: I am destined to marry Lady X and lead Lord Y to ruin!

    ...if your GM allows it. If you were to duel Lord Y to death, you could actually get somewhere up to +30 CP if you play your cards right...

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    The swords used by soldiers in AoT setting are heavy and meant to cut through titan skin at high speed, as they use the 3DMG, a special equipment with harpoons and wires linked to their body to go around swinging like Spider-Man.
    A video is probably more explicative: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfPrwJiZViQ
    Notice that no one is wearing 3DMG at the moment.
    I imagine the swords have a balance center quite far from the hilt, which make them not the best for dueling.
    If we go for one handed weapons I think any cut oriented blade could do it, as long as the ATN is not too good. Schiavona, backsword or even saber are the best fit.
    Soldiers in the setting don't wear armor, because well... anime logic. (to be fair they should wear not armor, but something akin motorcycle vests, to protect themselves from bad falls.)
    If the balance is closer to the point, it makes it easier to swing, but worse to defend with (e.g. axes and other mass weapons). Then even Falchions could serve as a good model, although their ATN for cutting is pretty good.

    Motorcycle vests could be AV 2 or AV 1. I'd check the table in Flower of Battle for combining armor stats and combine leather & padding.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Oscar knows being defensive won't do him any good in this situation.
    He assumes aggressive stance, points his sword at the captain and makes a step forward.
    I take Red dice for initiative.
    White die.
    You have initiative.
    First round, first exchange. Your CP refreshes.
    (normally you would have to check for wounds, fatigue, etc., but I assume we are both fresh and ready)
    Please, state your maneuver & allocate CP.

    Question: do you wish for me to do a complete breakdown of combat in spoilers? With your opponents' stats & etc.? Or do you wish to have the "blind" experience of actual fight?
    Call me Laco or Ladislav (if you need to be formal). Avatar comes from the talented linklele.
    Formerly GMing: Riddle of Steel: Soldiers of Fortune

    Quote Originally Posted by Kol Korran View Post
    Instead of having an adventure, from which a cool unexpected story may rise, you had a story, with an adventure built and designed to enable the story, but also ensure (or close to ensure) it happens.

  24. - Top - End - #24
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    BlueKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2015

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    There was a ruling somewhere (I do not remember the exact location, but will try to find it for you), that if the difference between rolls is 1 or 2, the attack still manages to hit.

    On the other hand, if you fight carefully (i.e. try to save your skin) and defensively, it's not uncommon for both to receive few smaller wounds before someone strikes true... and then, if you fail to get medical attention...

    If you wished to actually model reality a bit more closely, you could also define which wounds are internal and require surgery (or lead to death) and which can be simply closed with enough bandages and skill in First Aid.

    Meaning: if you get a stab wound in your belly, the First Aid skill may only halve the bleeding, not completely close it, as opposed to a deep cut on arm.
    That's good advice. Puncture wounds were way harder to treat than cuts, given that they reched deep in the body.
    If you can't completely close a wound you can end up winning the fight and then dying during the night for an hemorrhage.

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    You must let me know how it works for you. And I would suggest you first try the ruleset as it is, maybe for a one-shot. When I first wanted to play RoS, my group said "Why don't we stick to DnD and Shadowrun?"... well, we quickly generated few characters and I sent them to an abandoned house in the middle of winter storm (lockdown, so that I don't have to think of additional stuff), which served as hideout to few bandits... who were actually returning next day. And had numbers advantage.

    They managed to put the puzzle pieces together, so when the bandits came, PCs were prepared and crushed them. And then ate horsemeat porridge. Do not ask.
    Thinking about this, I wonder how good fights against nameless bandits are. For a training fight it should be ok, but considering the whole "choose your fight" mentality and the importance of spiritual attributes... well, it would be pretty lame to die against a mook.
    So, should the master tone down on the opponents, offering wide chance to the PC to avoid useless fights? Or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    Passion: Love. Hatred. Loyalty. Friendship. Your bond to a person. Or group (e.g. hatred for slavers).
    Oath: A promise you have to fulfill.
    Conscience: Morals and ethics. Choosing the right over the easy.
    Drive: A goal. A cause. Something you wish to achieve.
    Faith: Faith.

    Destiny is a separate beast. That's the "end state".

    The difference is, that by Passion you bind yourself to the world, while Drive states what you - the player - wish to achieve for the character. I think there were some minor differences between their uses (e.g. you use Passion when defending those you love/fighting those you hate while you use Conscience when you are doing the right thing as opposed the easy thing), but otherwise you are correct - Drive as such is mostly "character/player goal", which may be almost anything.
    So if my character is motivated by revenge and wants to kill a certain person/group... is that a passion? Or an oath? Or a drive?
    Ok, I get that it could be all of these, but then why make the distinction?

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    White die.
    You have initiative.
    First round, first exchange. Your CP refreshes.
    (normally you would have to check for wounds, fatigue, etc., but I assume we are both fresh and ready)
    Please, state your maneuver & allocate CP.

    Question: do you wish for me to do a complete breakdown of combat in spoilers? With your opponents' stats & etc.? Or do you wish to have the "blind" experience of actual fight?
    I will go for a "blind fight". Let's see things from the PC point of view.

    Oscar swings his swords towards the captain's blade: it's a Beat with 7 dices, +2 for aggressive stance, +4 for his drive, for a total of 13 if I'm not mistaken.

  25. - Top - End - #25
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    DruidGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    While the system is complex and deep, it works well in practice. And I am always surprised when DnD players (especially those who play 3.5) think the system is clunky/too complex: I find DnD's system quite distracting and while I love it in theory, I find it hard to run smoothly in practice.
    I much preferred 2e over 3.x myself, but that is a whole other matter. The complexity I was referring to was the actual combat side of things, which is a step up from d&d melee combat. But I do get the clunkiness side of things. Grappling for starters. And trying to wok out which of the dozen or more different modifiers apply...



    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    In this case: go with Blade of the Iron Throne. There are some changes to the combat system, but overall it looks a bit streamlined. On the other hand - it has a working magic system, which works pretty well with the Dark Sun setting from what I have heard.

    Magic is of the dark variety, with Taint mechanic providing a reverse mana mechanic (the more Taint you accrue, the less dice you have for casting spells), there are no real utility spells (like cleaning clothes), but it allows you to rain fire and lightning on people, hypnotize them to believe their swords are snakes (and it could happen they get bitten and die), causing pain - it is of the eldritch variety, so it should work well.
    Dark Sun has three different forms of 'magic.' The first is of the arcane type, which nobody likes, because it sucks the life out of living things around it, leaving the land dead. Defilers are happy to do so, as long as they don't get caught, but Preservers try to avoid it and instead only pull out enough life to cast their spells without killing the land. Most people can't tell the difference though. Preservers would probably work with a reduced dice pool, or some other mechanism.

    Then there are the priests of the elements - earth, air, fire and water, plus various combinations of them. One who tended to a geyser would have access to water and fire spells, and one who oversaw a region of magma would be fire and earth. A lot more respected than arcane users as they don't destroy the land, and the druids actually try (in vain mostly) to heal it.

    Lastly there is psionics. Every single person (and most monsters) have some minor psionic ability, a wild talent, which can range from minor and not very useful to a very powerful ability, like disintegrate. Some people are a lot more skilled at it as well.

    Plus you'd have to work on the races. Ones like muls, thri-kreen and half giants are a lot more power than others.

  26. - Top - End - #26
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Lacco's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Slovakia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    That's good advice. Puncture wounds were way harder to treat than cuts, given that they reched deep in the body.
    If you can't completely close a wound you can end up winning the fight and then dying during the night for an hemorrhage.
    This is actually one thing that I implemented during our games: puncture wounds required additional successes to be treated. First Aid - which usually serves to stop bleeding - needed additional 1/2/3 successes to actually treat level 1-2/3-4/5 wound. This made the party healer really important role.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Thinking about this, I wonder how good fights against nameless bandits are. For a training fight it should be ok, but considering the whole "choose your fight" mentality and the importance of spiritual attributes... well, it would be pretty lame to die against a mook.
    So, should the master tone down on the opponents, offering wide chance to the PC to avoid useless fights? Or not?
    Well, RoS made me step up my game and actually discard nameless bandits. All bandits had names. All bandits had a reason. Those who did not ran away after first wounds or after the party killed their leaders.

    Of course that there will be some fights where you go in without SAs and there will be those guys in taverns that just want to draw blade without any forethought about getting killed.

    But most of the time those guys will go for fists and when someone flashes a blade, they step back. Nobody wants to die just for nothing.

    For example: the situation you described with captain and Oscar - Oscar has a good reason to go fighting. And had it happened in front of all the soldiers, captain would have a good reason not to step back. But here, alone? She would definitely hear his cause - and I assumed she has an SA regarding the book.

    Otherwise she would not fight.

    You could provoke her - using Ridicule or through failed Intimidation roll - to fight, but usually that would mean she goes Red (you can actually manipulate opponents using those two skills to either go all in/overinvest or go defensive).

    It's a strange game.

    My advice is: do not tone it down. Think about the NPCs - do they have a good reason to fight? If yes, they may fight even to the death, but not usually. Give them a chance to back down - both NPCs and PCs - from a fight they do not want.

    Of course, players will jump on the opportunity to fight at first. Fights are fun, energetic, exciting. But you will soon see they actually start to let enemies go more often. When you draw your blade, all bets are off - and someone will most probably die or get seriously wounded - so take it as your last resort.

    But once blades are drawn, hold nothing back. It's kill or be killed. Even rats will fight to the death if cornered - and if PCs are going to kill them, the least an NPC can do is hurt them bad before they get a chance.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    So if my character is motivated by revenge and wants to kill a certain person/group... is that a passion? Or an oath? Or a drive?
    Ok, I get that it could be all of these, but then why make the distinction?
    It could be any of these: an oath to take revenge, hatred against the entity or drive to see them dead.

    For me, the distinction is mainly for roleplaying and to ensure SAs are not all focused on one thing. It's a subtle thing, but you'll most probably notice differences.

    Passions are irrational. When my players had a hatred, they suddenly really went for the neck of the enemy. I've had two players who started with "Hatred: Slavers" - both for backstory reasons - and any time slavers entered picture, they did everything they could to destroy them. No holds barred.
    Drives are decisions and are more rational - the same two players, completely different approach. "Should I do this dangerous thing that will follow up on my drive?" vs. "CRUSH THE SLAVERS!"
    Oaths are usually a source of conflict. An oath is "the easiest to break", but players seldom do so. It's the "paladin" stuff - you want to show off that you can pull the oath off even in face of insurmountable obstacles.

    Again, it's interesting to watch how they motivate and form your players' choices in play.


    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    I will go for a "blind fight". Let's see things from the PC point of view.
    Good choice. Feel free to add commentary on how it feels

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Oscar swings his swords towards the captain's blade: it's a Beat with 7 dices, +2 for aggressive stance, +4 for his drive, for a total of 13 if I'm not mistaken.
    You are not mistaken, but FYI: Drive adds to your CP, so you can consider it part of CP (you get it once per round). Stance bonus is separate, so you did that correctly.

    Captain responds with a lightning fast counter for 14 dice (2 dice activation cost in addition).

    Feints? Feel free to roll for us both. I will then go over results.




    Quote Originally Posted by Corvus View Post
    I much preferred 2e over 3.x myself, but that is a whole other matter. The complexity I was referring to was the actual combat side of things, which is a step up from d&d melee combat. But I do get the clunkiness side of things. Grappling for starters. And trying to wok out which of the dozen or more different modifiers apply...
    Interestingly, for RoS there are two grappling systems. The basic one, in RoS Core Rules and the "detailed" in Flower of Battle.

    While the detailed one is a bit on the complicated side, we have done some grappling matches and it worked well. Just do not let them build a dagger/grapple guy as first character: the learning curve there is too steep and you both will get in trouble.

    It's best to go with swords, axes, shields and spears for first characters. Even pregens, so they can learn the basics and then build their own chars.

    Quote Originally Posted by Corvus View Post
    Dark Sun has three different forms of 'magic.' The first is of the arcane type, which nobody likes, because it sucks the life out of living things around it, leaving the land dead. Defilers are happy to do so, as long as they don't get caught, but Preservers try to avoid it and instead only pull out enough life to cast their spells without killing the land. Most people can't tell the difference though. Preservers would probably work with a reduced dice pool, or some other mechanism.
    Good news: the system handles this easily.
    BoIT handles its magic via Sorcery Pool, which consists of your magic attribute and your proficiency. Let’s say you have 10 dice to cast a spell (e.g. to attack with magic you use Witchfire proficiency; you can shoot lightning out of your eyes, fire out of your hands, or just collapse a part of a building or shoot mana daggers – the actual damage type is for you to specify).
    You then split the pool into two parts – a spellcasting check and containment check. If you get spellcasting successes, the spell works. If your containment check beats your spellcasting check, you acquire no Taint.
    If not, you get Taint equal to not contained spellcasting successes. Meaning Preservers will put most of their pool into Containment, but Defilers will happily shoot away with most of their dice pool.
    Also: by the virtue of not amassing Taint, Preservers are able to cast more spells (on average) than Defilers this way (Taint slowly blocks dice from your dice pool). You could also implement a Corruption mechanic I was working on, giving some advantage to Defilers, but at cost of increased Taint, working on death spiral once they reach certain threshold.

    Quote Originally Posted by Corvus View Post
    Then there are the priests of the elements - earth, air, fire and water, plus various combinations of them. One who tended to a geyser would have access to water and fire spells, and one who oversaw a region of magma would be fire and earth. A lot more respected than arcane users as they don't destroy the land, and the druids actually try (in vain mostly) to heal it.
    Divine magic in RoS: some characters can buy a gift to use divine magic. It works through spending of Faith attribute. You decide what you pray for and you invest Faith – rolling invested Faith dice against TN set by the GM. If you succeed, it works – and you may do miracles this way.

    Quote Originally Posted by Corvus View Post
    Lastly there is psionics. Every single person (and most monsters) have some minor psionic ability, a wild talent, which can range from minor and not very useful to a very powerful ability, like disintegrate. Some people are a lot more skilled at it as well.
    Well, no idea what to do there. You’d have to give me more information on how it works.
    Quote Originally Posted by Corvus View Post
    Plus you'd have to work on the races. Ones like muls, thri-kreen and half giants are a lot more power than others.
    No problem.
    RoS and BoIT both use priority build, which means that races do not have to be „balanced“, but they have to be tiered.
    If half-giants are more powerful than average humans, you put them higher on the list – so if you have a race that has clear advantage, you put it to priority A. Once a player chooses priority A race, they can not choose the same priority for attributes, proficiencies, skills or social standing/wealth.
    So it’s not really problem to build something like that.
    Call me Laco or Ladislav (if you need to be formal). Avatar comes from the talented linklele.
    Formerly GMing: Riddle of Steel: Soldiers of Fortune

    Quote Originally Posted by Kol Korran View Post
    Instead of having an adventure, from which a cool unexpected story may rise, you had a story, with an adventure built and designed to enable the story, but also ensure (or close to ensure) it happens.

  27. - Top - End - #27
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    BlueKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2015

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    Well, RoS made me step up my game and actually discard nameless bandits. All bandits had names. All bandits had a reason. Those who did not ran away after first wounds or after the party killed their leaders.

    Of course that there will be some fights where you go in without SAs and there will be those guys in taverns that just want to draw blade without any forethought about getting killed.

    But most of the time those guys will go for fists and when someone flashes a blade, they step back. Nobody wants to die just for nothing.
    I approve of this. No more random fights.

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    For example: the situation you described with captain and Oscar - Oscar has a good reason to go fighting. And had it happened in front of all the soldiers, captain would have a good reason not to step back. But here, alone? She would definitely hear his cause - and I assumed she has an SA regarding the book.

    Otherwise she would not fight.
    Yeah, in this case I assumed Oscar tried to get the book with diplomacy first, but failed and thus resorted to arms.
    The book is actually an handbook to build advanced weapons that would be useful against the titans.
    Oscar wants to bring it to his father, so that only his family can produce such weapons and then sell them to the military. The captain, probably, won't accept to limit the access to a tool that could help all of humanity.
    It doesn't help that Oscar is in a precarious mental state for seveal reasons, so he doesn't have the patience to hear the captain's argument. He wants the book and he wants it now.

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    It could be any of these: an oath to take revenge, hatred against the entity or drive to see them dead.

    For me, the distinction is mainly for roleplaying and to ensure SAs are not all focused on one thing. It's a subtle thing, but you'll most probably notice differences.

    Passions are irrational. When my players had a hatred, they suddenly really went for the neck of the enemy. I've had two players who started with "Hatred: Slavers" - both for backstory reasons - and any time slavers entered picture, they did everything they could to destroy them. No holds barred.
    Drives are decisions and are more rational - the same two players, completely different approach. "Should I do this dangerous thing that will follow up on my drive?" vs. "CRUSH THE SLAVERS!"
    Oaths are usually a source of conflict. An oath is "the easiest to break", but players seldom do so. It's the "paladin" stuff - you want to show off that you can pull the oath off even in face of insurmountable obstacles.

    Again, it's interesting to watch how they motivate and form your players' choices in play.
    Let's see: Oscar main goal is to be forgiven by his father for certain things happened in backstory.
    This could be a passion or a drive. Given that he's willing to go against his comrades and superiors to accomplish it, I will consider it a passion, although at the beginning of the campaign I didn't think he would have gone so far.
    His second goal is to become a great soldier and fight against the titans. This is a promise he made to a friend who died years before.
    I'm not really sure about this last one. It could be an oath, but also a drive. Considering the promise is his main motivation for accomplishing this, I think oath is the best fit.

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    You are not mistaken, but FYI: Drive adds to your CP, so you can consider it part of CP (you get it once per round). Stance bonus is separate, so you did that correctly.

    Captain responds with a lightning fast counter for 14 dice (2 dice activation cost in addition).

    Feints? Feel free to roll for us both. I will then go over results.
    When Oscar sees the captain's move he panics and training kicks in: he steps sideways and swings towards the head, striking to kill with all he has got.
    It's a feint and cut in zone 5 with 8 dices, so 4 dices gets added to the previous 13, for a total of 17.
    Results are: 1, 3, 3, 10, 6, 7, 1, 1, 9, 5, 6, 9, 10, 7, 3, 3, 9.
    With an ATN of 6 there are 9 successes.

    I don't know what weapon have you setted on for captain Valzer, so you should roll for her.

    Comment: when I saw the 14 dices counter I was like "OMG, I'm ****ed. Use feint! Use all dices you have!"
    This tanslated nicely in Oscar starting the fight with the idea he could disarm or lightly wound the captain without much issue, then losing his coolness when the captain showed her skill, thus forcing him to rely on what he had learned to save his life.


    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    Good news: the system handles this easily.
    BoIT handles its magic via Sorcery Pool, which consists of your magic attribute and your proficiency. Let’s say you have 10 dice to cast a spell (e.g. to attack with magic you use Witchfire proficiency; you can shoot lightning out of your eyes, fire out of your hands, or just collapse a part of a building or shoot mana daggers – the actual damage type is for you to specify).
    You then split the pool into two parts – a spellcasting check and containment check. If you get spellcasting successes, the spell works. If your containment check beats your spellcasting check, you acquire no Taint.
    If not, you get Taint equal to not contained spellcasting successes. Meaning Preservers will put most of their pool into Containment, but Defilers will happily shoot away with most of their dice pool.
    Also: by the virtue of not amassing Taint, Preservers are able to cast more spells (on average) than Defilers this way (Taint slowly blocks dice from your dice pool). You could also implement a Corruption mechanic I was working on, giving some advantage to Defilers, but at cost of increased Taint, working on death spiral once they reach certain threshold.
    Actually in Dark Sun Defilers are more powerful than Preservers, because they exploit the environment.
    This can be easily modeled by allowing to move Taint to the environment, causing the destruction of vegetation and fertile ground.
    This way a Defiler can cast without worrying about containment, while a Preserver needs to balance spellcasting and containment.
    But it also allows a preserver to match the power of a defiler, at the price of getting tainted...

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    Well, no idea what to do there. You’d have to give me more information on how it works.
    Every character in Dark Sun has a psionic talent. This could be modeled with gifts, but it would require to create those gifts. Each psionic gift could give access to a power (a spell) that doesn't cause taint.
    A psionic pool would also be needed, maybe from (WP + MA)/2. I divide by 2 because otherwise psionic powers would be too powerful, given the lack of taint.

  28. - Top - End - #28
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Lacco's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Slovakia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    I approve of this. No more random fights.
    It's actually a bit like going OSR: you did not want to fight the random encounters, because they had little value.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Yeah, in this case I assumed Oscar tried to get the book with diplomacy first, but failed and thus resorted to arms.
    The book is actually an handbook to build advanced weapons that would be useful against the titans.
    Oscar wants to bring it to his father, so that only his family can produce such weapons and then sell them to the military. The captain, probably, won't accept to limit the access to a tool that could help all of humanity.
    It doesn't help that Oscar is in a precarious mental state for seveal reasons, so he doesn't have the patience to hear the captain's argument. He wants the book and he wants it now.
    Hope Oscar did not mention the reason he's trying to get the book. Otherwise captain's Conscience could fire up

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Let's see: Oscar main goal is to be forgiven by his father for certain things happened in backstory.
    This could be a passion or a drive. Given that he's willing to go against his comrades and superiors to accomplish it, I will consider it a passion, although at the beginning of the campaign I didn't think he would have gone so far.
    His second goal is to become a great soldier and fight against the titans. This is a promise he made to a friend who died years before.
    I'm not really sure about this last one. It could be an oath, but also a drive. Considering the promise is his main motivation for accomplishing this, I think oath is the best fit.
    A promise "I shall become a great soldier!" would be an oath.
    Oscar's main goal = Drive
    Passions are irrational - meaning they are feelings. Love for his father, his country, friendships or family ties can be Passions, but if they are specific goals, they go into Drive.

    Also: Drive is internalized (I want...), while Oath is given to someone else (I promised...).

    Passions are feelings. They are not goals.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    When Oscar sees the captain's move he panics and training kicks in: he steps sideways and swings towards the head, striking to kill with all he has got.
    It's a feint and cut in zone 5 with 8 dices, so 4 dices gets added to the previous 13, for a total of 17.
    Results are: 1, 3, 3, 10, 6, 7, 1, 1, 9, 5, 6, 9, 10, 7, 3, 3, 9.
    With an ATN of 6 there are 9 successes.
    Captain's schiavona swings around as she tries to counter the attack - the blades hit each other, as she catches Oscar's attack, but Oscar's skill with blade proves to be superior. He manages to avoid her parry and transfer the cut to a quick slash from above, hitting captain right above her eyes, drawing first blood.

    She winces, giving him a precious moment of advantage.

    OOC:
    Roll: 10, 1, 9, 10, 8, 5, 9, 8, 1, 1, 9, 2, 2, 9
    DTN 6, 8 successes. Extremely lucky roll.
    Zone: V (overhead swing)
    Hit location: 3 (upper head)

    Damage: ST 5 + 0 (cut & thrust) + 1 net success = 6
    Resist damage: TO 5
    Damage level 1

    Blood Loss 3
    Shock 3
    Pain 4-WP

    Scalp cut. After 2 exchanges (roll of 1d6), blood seeps into eyes, CP reduced by 1/3 until wiped away (giving another full exchange).

    Captain has no dice left this exchange, will start at disadvantage next round.

    Second exchange: you have initiative. Choose your maneuver and allocate dice.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Comment: when I saw the 14 dices counter I was like "OMG, I'm ****ed. Use feint! Use all dices you have!"
    This tanslated nicely in Oscar starting the fight with the idea he could disarm or lightly wound the captain without much issue, then losing his coolness when the captain showed her skill, thus forcing him to rely on what he had learned to save his life.
    See? Going in blind is a different animal. And if you do this at table, live, remember my advice. Show, don't tell. Show them how you attack, swing/thrust. Stand up, gain energy.

    Players will react.

    Still: had you stayed with the original attack, she would have at best 10 dice to work with. Still a winnable thing, considering her ATN 7.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Actually in Dark Sun Defilers are more powerful than Preservers, because they exploit the environment.
    This can be easily modeled by allowing to move Taint to the environment, causing the destruction of vegetation and fertile ground.
    This way a Defiler can cast without worrying about containment, while a Preserver needs to balance spellcasting and containment.
    But it also allows a preserver to match the power of a defiler, at the price of getting tainted...
    What I meant by "Preservers can cast more spells on average" was that Preservers, if we use BoIT magic system, will most probably balance containment with spellcasting which will allow them to cast more spells, but less powerful (like 50% less powerful).

    For Defilers it would be possible to use the original mechanic for removing Taint using rituals - usually you have to use Faith + appropriate ritual, burn incense, sacrifice something... in line with this, Defilers could "unload" Taint to environment using a ritual. They will get clean, but the environment will get corrupted.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Every character in Dark Sun has a psionic talent. This could be modeled with gifts, but it would require to create those gifts. Each psionic gift could give access to a power (a spell) that doesn't cause taint.
    A psionic pool would also be needed, maybe from (WP + MA)/2. I divide by 2 because otherwise psionic powers would be too powerful, given the lack of taint.
    BoIT has a "Power" stat IIRC. You could use that one and model the psionic talents as proficiencies. I was playing with an idea for elven magic in the past and came up with something that could be adapted:

    You have a "Mana" pool (or psionic points), which you refill via meditation or resting. This consists of Power attribute and "Psionic Power" (I used "Kaa") proficiency. You then have psionic powers, which have their own proficiency each. You do not buy specific powers, but either roll randomly or improve the one you already have.

    You have to spend Mana to cast a spell (if you fail, you lose 1/2 the mana). You gain d10 per mana burned + your proficiency in the psionic discipline, roll against base TN.

    Example: you have the "Disintegrate" proficiency at 1 (wild talent). Your Power is 5, your "Kaa" is also 1. This means you have 6 mana points.

    You decide to explode someone's arm with sword. You burn all 6 mana points, get +1 for your proficiency. Roll 7d10 against TN of 7; if you overcome opponents' roll, their hand is history.
    Call me Laco or Ladislav (if you need to be formal). Avatar comes from the talented linklele.
    Formerly GMing: Riddle of Steel: Soldiers of Fortune

    Quote Originally Posted by Kol Korran View Post
    Instead of having an adventure, from which a cool unexpected story may rise, you had a story, with an adventure built and designed to enable the story, but also ensure (or close to ensure) it happens.

  29. - Top - End - #29
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    BlueKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2015

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    Hope Oscar did not mention the reason he's trying to get the book. Otherwise captain's Conscience could fire up
    He tried to point out he was the one that found the book, and started an argument that the captain took it only to get the merit of the finding.
    Not really a great argument, but well... we don't want things to be resolved peacefully here

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    A promise "I shall become a great soldier!" would be an oath.
    Oscar's main goal = Drive
    Passions are irrational - meaning they are feelings. Love for his father, his country, friendships or family ties can be Passions, but if they are specific goals, they go into Drive.

    Also: Drive is internalized (I want...), while Oath is given to someone else (I promised...).

    Passions are feelings. They are not goals.
    So Oscar should have: drive (to be forgiven by his father) and oath (to become a great soldier like he promised to his friend).
    Assuming that he accomplishes his goal the drive will disappear and he won't feel anything too strong towards his father, so a passion is not adequate.
    If instead he always wanted to get his father approvation, independently from the specific situation, it would be a passion.


    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    Captain's schiavona swings around as she tries to counter the attack - the blades hit each other, as she catches Oscar's attack, but Oscar's skill with blade proves to be superior. He manages to avoid her parry and transfer the cut to a quick slash from above, hitting captain right above her eyes, drawing first blood.

    She winces, giving him a precious moment of advantage.

    OOC:
    Roll: 10, 1, 9, 10, 8, 5, 9, 8, 1, 1, 9, 2, 2, 9
    DTN 6, 8 successes. Extremely lucky roll.
    Zone: V (overhead swing)
    Hit location: 3 (upper head)

    Damage: ST 5 + 0 (cut & thrust) + 1 net success = 6
    Resist damage: TO 5
    Damage level 1

    Blood Loss 3
    Shock 3
    Pain 4-WP

    Scalp cut. After 2 exchanges (roll of 1d6), blood seeps into eyes, CP reduced by 1/3 until wiped away (giving another full exchange).

    Captain has no dice left this exchange, will start at disadvantage next round.

    Second exchange: you have initiative. Choose your maneuver and allocate dice.
    Oscar is shocked by the sight of blood on the captain's face. He wishes to break out of range and try to talk again, but at the same time he's afraid of the captain's reaction. He swings at her arm, while stepping back.
    It's an Evasive Attack with 4 dices, plus 3 dices used to raise her TN. 2 of the dices used come from the aggressive stance, so Oscar spends only 5 dices. Hit location is zone 7, the arm.

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    See? Going in blind is a different animal. And if you do this at table, live, remember my advice. Show, don't tell. Show them how you attack, swing/thrust. Stand up, gain energy.

    Players will react.
    Yep, it's a very different sensation. My only grief is that I'm probably going to be the master of the campaign, so it won't be the same.

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    Still: had you stayed with the original attack, she would have at best 10 dice to work with. Still a winnable thing, considering her ATN 7.
    It was mostly an instinctive decision. "I can't lose, use everything I've got"


    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    What I meant by "Preservers can cast more spells on average" was that Preservers, if we use BoIT magic system, will most probably balance containment with spellcasting which will allow them to cast more spells, but less powerful (like 50% less powerful).

    For Defilers it would be possible to use the original mechanic for removing Taint using rituals - usually you have to use Faith + appropriate ritual, burn incense, sacrifice something... in line with this, Defilers could "unload" Taint to environment using a ritual. They will get clean, but the environment will get corrupted.
    The important thing is to leave defilers more powerful than preservers, as that is the whole point of defiling.
    Using the ritual to remove taint is a good start, but I think it should be made instantaneous for this case.
    Ritual magic and D&D are quite in antithesis.

    Quote Originally Posted by lacco36 View Post
    BoIT has a "Power" stat IIRC. You could use that one and model the psionic talents as proficiencies. I was playing with an idea for elven magic in the past and came up with something that could be adapted:

    You have a "Mana" pool (or psionic points), which you refill via meditation or resting. This consists of Power attribute and "Psionic Power" (I used "Kaa") proficiency. You then have psionic powers, which have their own proficiency each. You do not buy specific powers, but either roll randomly or improve the one you already have.

    You have to spend Mana to cast a spell (if you fail, you lose 1/2 the mana). You gain d10 per mana burned + your proficiency in the psionic discipline, roll against base TN.

    Example: you have the "Disintegrate" proficiency at 1 (wild talent). Your Power is 5, your "Kaa" is also 1. This means you have 6 mana points.

    You decide to explode someone's arm with sword. You burn all 6 mana points, get +1 for your proficiency. Roll 7d10 against TN of 7; if you overcome opponents' roll, their hand is history.
    It's a good idea that makes psionic powers different from magic.
    Thinking about it, in AD&D there was a whole system dedicated to mental combat between psionicists.
    RoS combat could probably be edited to make a better combat system than the original one. It shouldn't be hard to convert the various original maneuvers to RoS.

  30. - Top - End - #30
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Lacco's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Slovakia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    He tried to point out he was the one that found the book, and started an argument that the captain took it only to get the merit of the finding.
    Not really a great argument, but well... we don't want things to be resolved peacefully here
    Correct, we are here for the blood.

    That said: most enemies they encounter will not have any SAs, but some may. And in case of important NPCs, one or two SAs are a good idea.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    So Oscar should have: drive (to be forgiven by his father) and oath (to become a great soldier like he promised to his friend).
    Assuming that he accomplishes his goal the drive will disappear and he won't feel anything too strong towards his father, so a passion is not adequate.
    If instead he always wanted to get his father approvation, independently from the specific situation, it would be a passion.
    That sounds about correct - especially the evaluation of accomplishing his goal.

    Had he felt a childe's love for his father, independently of their issues, it would be passion. He could have a Passion: love for his father (or loyalty to his father) and drive to be forgiven - that is quite possible. But in this case it sounds like he just wants his approval and does not care for his well-being or his love.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Oscar is shocked by the sight of blood on the captain's face. He wishes to break out of range and try to talk again, but at the same time he's afraid of the captain's reaction. He swings at her arm, while stepping back.
    It's an Evasive Attack with 4 dices, plus 3 dices used to raise her TN. 2 of the dices used come from the aggressive stance, so Oscar spends only 5 dices. Hit location is zone 7, the arm.
    Warning: Aggressive stance does not give any advantage anymore - stances work for first exchange; after that you are considered to move through stances. Next time we go for stances is when there is a break in combat.

    And since you've spent... 21 dice, I think we both are actually out of dice for second exchange!

    Sorry, that's why I usually work with two bowls and remove dice used; gives me actual overview.

    If I miscalculated, let me know, but if not: a bit of a change!

    Captain's schiavona swings around as she tries to counter the attack - the blades hit each other, as she catches Oscar's attack, but Oscar's skill with blade proves to be superior. He manages to avoid her parry and transfer the cut to a quick slash from above, hitting captain right above her eyes, drawing first blood. His improvised feint throws him a bit off balance, but he regains his footing quickly.

    He sees captain Valzer stepping back too - her wound may not be deep, but is definitely discomforting. He saw fear and surprise in her eyes.

    OOC:
    New round, new dice (refresh your dice pool).
    State your stance. Captain has a defensive stance.
    Since nobody has initiative, we'll be throwing anew. So, throw initiative!

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    Yep, it's a very different sensation. My only grief is that I'm probably going to be the master of the campaign, so it won't be the same.
    Do not worry, it will be. You'll get plenty of practice with NPCs and the most memorable ones will be those where you stop pulling your punches.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    It was mostly an instinctive decision. "I can't lose, use everything I've got"
    Well, now you understand what I meant that during the game the "optimal" stops being so interesting - it's a visceral experience.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    The important thing is to leave defilers more powerful than preservers, as that is the whole point of defiling.
    Using the ritual to remove taint is a good start, but I think it should be made instantaneous for this case.
    Ritual magic and D&D are quite in antithesis.
    Well, the difference could be in the duration of the ritual. To cleanse taint safely, you need to spend around 12 hours performing the ritual. Or you can do a sacrifice (which makes it almost instanteous). So Defilers could actually do the sacrifice through environment, but Preservers have do the safe way - using the long ritual.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlacKnight View Post
    It's a good idea that makes psionic powers different from magic.
    Thinking about it, in AD&D there was a whole system dedicated to mental combat between psionicists.
    RoS combat could probably be edited to make a better combat system than the original one. It shouldn't be hard to convert the various original maneuvers to RoS.
    BoIT has Duel of Wills, a sorcerous duel with separate maneuvers. Would have to read up on it to adapt it...but basically imagine Harry Potter's duel with Voldy on cementery meets Lovecraft. Adaptable for Psionics? Definitely
    Call me Laco or Ladislav (if you need to be formal). Avatar comes from the talented linklele.
    Formerly GMing: Riddle of Steel: Soldiers of Fortune

    Quote Originally Posted by Kol Korran View Post
    Instead of having an adventure, from which a cool unexpected story may rise, you had a story, with an adventure built and designed to enable the story, but also ensure (or close to ensure) it happens.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •