MV and Berserk Attack...

[reaperwolf]

I'm working on a 3-fold landscape HOW Judge's Screen and while reviewing combat actions, I found something that really needs Brandon's clarification.

Berserk Attack (p. 44)
Doesn't mention movement of any kind but I'm guessing it's a Stand Still or Move 5 ft. (1 space) type of option. I'm also guessing it doesn't allow any sort of Reaction in the round.

One thing that really needs addressing in a small paragraph or two is multiple attacks gained from high skill levels. If you make all of your attacks, I'm guessing some if not most of your MV is eaten up probably as if a Stand Still or 5 ft. move is permissable.

[Deleted]

Dec 21, 2014 15:25:03 GMT -5 reaperwolf said:

I'm working on a 3-fold landscape HOW Judge's Screen and while reviewing combat actions, I found something that really needs Brandon's clarification.

Berserk Attack (p. 44)
Doesn't mention movement of any kind but I'm guessing it's a Stand Still or Move 5 ft. (1 space) type of option. I'm also guessing it doesn't allow any sort of Reaction in the round.

One thing that really needs addressing in a small paragraph or two is multiple attacks gained from high skill levels. If you make all of your attacks, I'm guessing some if not most of your MV is eaten up probably as if a Stand Still or 5 ft. move is permissable.

i'm guessing none of your guesses were intended.
play it as you see fit but none of your assumptions make sense to me.

[buzzclaw]

Sorry, ewookiereturns, but I agree with reaperwolf's hunch about no reactions.

Consider All-Out Defense (HOW 46) which is the reaction equivalent to Berserk Attack. You can only use if you don't attack and move no more than 1 space.

It seems logical that most of the same is true for Berserk Attack, namely that you can't move more than 1 space and you can't use reactions until your next turn.

[Deleted]

Dec 31, 2014 2:30:00 GMT -5 buzzclaw said:

Sorry, ewookiereturns, but I agree with reaperwolf's hunch about no reactions.

Consider All-Out Defense (HOW 46) which is the reaction equivalent to Berserk Attack. You can only use if you don't attack and move no more than 1 space.

It seems logical that most of the same is true for Berserk Attack, namely that you can't move more than 1 space and you can't use reactions until your next turn.

you can't attack or move if you perform full defense because EVERY attack against you that round are +1 die. the idea is that you are too focused on defense to move or make an attack.

berserk attack is an action (not a reaction like full defense). your armor and shields provide no protection for that round. penalty enough. however, the logic about no reactions after a berserk kinda makes sense but it wasn't hinted at anywhere. multiple attacks from high skill level don't give up reactions. so why would one assume from RAW that berserk was intended to sacrifice reaction?

all the other guessing about movement makes no sense either. berserkers were guys that charged without caution into battle and fought with wild fury. a berserk attack involves attacking adjacent foes, so you are most likely going to be engaged afterward, which already hinders your movement. again, no where is it suggested or even hinted that movement before the berserk attack is restricted, so why would one assume it was intended?

multiple attacks from high skill level
the idea here is that you become so skilled that your attacks are faster. so much faster that you can squeeze more into the same amount of time. there is no hint anywhere that it was intended to eat up movement. why would one assume that it was intended?

[Deleted]

i would like to point out that listing All Out Defense under Defense Options (Reactions) creates a logical inconsistency at play time relating to sequence of events. sure, grammatically? it makes sense to list All Out Defense under Defense Options but it doesn't jive with the other reactions or the description of Defense Options (Reations):

When attacked, a Hero or creature may choose to react to only ONE attack per turn.

a player should really declare during their turn if they are going to perform Full Defense as their movement/action. maybe the reason it was listed under reactions was to give the player a little more wiggle room. on his turn, the player, being unsure what he should do, could just move one space and decide when he is first hit whether he wants to All Out Defense, Dodge, Block, etc.

the ancestor of All Out Defense was Defend in TFT. TFT had no reactions. there were only actions. dodge and defend were the only defensive actions i can think of. both had the same effect in TFT (attacks add 1 die to hit). however, dodge was used when 'unengaged' and defend was used when 'engaged'. both had to be declared on the players turn.

[reaperwolf]

Dec 30, 2014 15:46:55 GMT -5 @ewookiereturns said:

Dec 21, 2014 15:25:03 GMT -5 reaperwolf said:

I'm working on a 3-fold landscape HOW Judge's Screen and while reviewing combat actions, I found something that really needs Brandon's clarification.

Berserk Attack (p. 44)
Doesn't mention movement of any kind but I'm guessing it's a Stand Still or Move 5 ft. (1 space) type of option. I'm also guessing it doesn't allow any sort of Reaction in the round.

One thing that really needs addressing in a small paragraph or two is multiple attacks gained from high skill levels. If you make all of your attacks, I'm guessing some if not most of your MV is eaten up probably as if a Stand Still or 5 ft. move is permissable.

i'm guessing none of your guesses were intended.
play it as you see fit but none of your assumptions make sense to me.

Just noticed Dagger skill says you get extra attacks for high skill but no mention of bonus parry reactions. I'm hoping this is an oversight.

Ok so how would you rule the following? A character DX 12 with +6 Dagger skill wants to make a berserk attack and is standing 6 squares away from an opponent. How much movement is the character allowed to move on their turn? Would you allow the character to move 6 spaces then execute their full range of attacks? When they do execute their berserk attack how many attacks do they get? 3 or 2? 4? 6? According to the table on p.43 you only get to move up to 1, 2, 3 up to 1/2 your MV and still attack an opponent but exactly how many attacks constitute an attack is not mentioned. In fact only on the skill list do you see any mention of multiple attacks. This definitely needs clarification in the HOW rulebook or in some errata because the staged nature of turns and action counts is critical to how combat plays out. It's not something you should just hand-wave away.

The reason I'm asking for clarification is RAW, the character is entitled to 3 attacks and/or parries per turn and yet the berserk attack grants two but at the sacrifice of all armor and shield AV which is IMO a steep penalty but that's a post for another day.

But RAW, none of this is stated and the language is murky leading to varied interpretations. Maybe a regular feature in Crucible like The Dragon Sage Advice would be the ideal venue for addressing these questions in an official capacity.

When executing a berserk attack your options should be limited to attack only that's why it's listed as an attack option. The berserker should gain +1 attack against his/her opponent on top of any other attacks skill level provides so RAW a Dagger +6 character could make 4 attacks per turn. As to how much movement you should be allowed, the table on p. 43 says attack with an in-hand weapon, whether or not this means with all attacks from high skill level and/or berserk is sadly unclear.

This of course assumes the dagger skill description should include a reference to bonus parry reactions for high skill level.

[Deleted]

Dec 31, 2014 18:43:18 GMT -5 reaperwolf said:

Just noticed Dagger skill says you get extra attacks for high skill but no mention of bonus parry reactions. I'm hoping this is an oversight.

i don't think it was an over-sight. i think it was purposely left unspecified. many would argue that a dagger is ill-suited for parrying, unless it was designed for such (a parry-dagger or main-gauche). how does a dagger deflect a blow from a large, heavy weapon like a war hammer? you obviously think it is ridiculous to not allow daggers to parry but others would think it is equally ridiculous to allow them to parry. i don't see it as an over-sight but purposefully left open for you to rule it as you see fit. personally, i would allow a dagger wielder to parry but his bonus on the parry would be halved...and if he failed, he drops his dagger. (and i think that is generous. in reality, he would most likely get his hand cut off. again, original post: rule as you see fit.)

Ok so how would you rule the following? A character DX 12 with +6 Dagger skill wants to make a berserk attack and is standing 6 squares away from an opponent. How much movement is the character allowed to move on their turn? Would you allow the character to move 6 spaces then execute their full range of attacks?

i pause here because you are about to answer your own question..

When they do execute their berserk attack how many attacks do they get? 3 or 2? 4? 6? According to the table on p.43 you only get to move up to 1, 2, 3 up to 1/2 your MV and still attack an opponent but exactly how many attacks constitute an attack is not mentioned. In fact only on the skill list do you see any mention of multiple attacks. This definitely needs clarification in the HOW rulebook or in some errata because the staged nature of turns and action counts is critical to how combat plays out. It's not something you should just hand-wave away.

there is no hand-waving. the answer is right there on the pages and the text you quoted. there is something preventing your mind or eyes from seeing it. i really understand where you are coming from. i have been there. will probly be there again. there were many things which seemed half-assed to me about the rules when i first got them...but i came to realize the fault was mine. i just needed to give it time to sink in and to read again. this is why i'm having these conversations with you. i am the old man from the Rime of the Ancient Mariner trying to do my penance and help you out. but i get the feeling you think i'm as crazy as i think you are! LOL

p.44
Berserk Attack (3/DX)
Attacker makes two attacks against the same opponent or one attack each against two adjacent opponents. Your armor and or shield provide no defense this turn.

when you berserk, you get your normal attack +1 one more. if your weapon skill grants you even more attacks, have at it. personally, i would not allow more than 3 attacks as a character's action...unless they had more than 2 arms or something. i have bolded that phrase because i would allow a character with +6 'parry-able' weapon skill to make 3 attacks on their turn (as their action) and still let them have their reaction when it is not their turn. again, play as you see fit (as i said in my first post).

But RAW, none of this is stated and the language is murky leading to varied interpretations. Maybe a regular feature in Crucible like The Dragon Sage Advice would be the ideal venue for addressing these questions in an official capacity.

extra clarification never hurts.

When executing a berserk attack your options should be limited to attack only that's why it's listed as an attack option.

it's listed as an attack option because it is a type of attack and you make attacks as an ACTION when it is your turn. by your reasoning, Melee Attack would prevent someone from Dodging, Blocking, Parrying, or Disbelieving as their REACTION.

The berserker should gain +1 attack against his/her opponent on top of any other attacks skill level provides so RAW a Dagger +6 character could make 4 attacks per turn.

RAW, if i'm not mistaken (i don't have every word of the rules committed to memory), this is correct. If you're OK with that, what's the problem?

As to how much movement you should be allowed, the table on p. 43 says attack with an in-hand weapon, whether or not this means with all attacks from high skill level and/or berserk is sadly unclear.

this is where you baffle me again. it is crystal freaking clear. is berserk an attack? YES! do you do it with an in-hand weapon? YES! what do you not understand?!

i feel like i just survived a berserk attack! lol

[Fenway5]

Gentlemen. First let me apologize as things that played out fine at the table did not translate clearly through my writing into the rules. Second some rules questions that come up were not brought up in play...so did not make the rules. That is a fault for which I do apologize--and an opportunity for the revised edition to clarify. In the meantime...

First let's take Berserk.
My intent is (like all out defense)for the character to have moved no more than 1 space prior to executing the berserk attack. Second, for the berserker, there are no defense reactions possible after executing a berserk attack.

Also note, Berserk attack was intended as an option for unskilled/low skilled characters and creatures to make multiple attacks--not for highly skilled experts to flail about madly. That seems like a logical contradiction as in the real world highly skilled batters, golfers, QB's, snipers, do not unleash a torrent of swings, throws or shots. The more skilled, the more patient and effective that skilled person. This is kind of the opposite of going berserk.

I understand the confusion and issues, RAW, as I did not specify, detail or make it more clear. That is my failing and it needs improvement, replacement or possibly have it struck all together as an option.

As to Dagger skill, it does need revision and my initial thoughts in playing, is to make it like the other skills at +3 skill =1 additional attack. As to a weapons skill level meaning extra parries? No I had no thought of weapon skills or shield skill translating into extra parries/blocks. I will play around with it and if you try it in your games, I'd be interested to hear your own experience.

[Deleted]

i look forward to the 2nd edition. your intentions regarding movement and reactions in relation to Berserk weren't even hinted at in the RAW. my personal preference is to drop Berserk. it seems like an out-of-place D&D-ism.

As to a weapons skill level meaning extra parries? No I had no thought of weapon skills or shield skill translating into extra parries/blocks. I will play around with it and if you try it in your games, I'd be interested to hear your own experience.

again, i look forward to a revision. this statement contradicts most of the weapon skill descriptions.

[Fenway5]

this statement contradicts most of the weapon skill descriptions.


Sorry, yes the issue of not being clear sadly continues. Some skills DO have it applying to parry (swords) and some do not (Ax).

[Deleted]

Statement in this thread...

As to Dagger skill, it does need revision and my initial thoughts in playing, is to make it like the other skills at +3 skill =1 additional attack.

Rules...

Dagger (3/DX) Bonus to attack when using daggers and knives. For every +2 in skill bonus, the Hero can make 1 additional attack per turn.

so, are you considering revising Dagger from 'every +2 in skill' to 'every +3 in skill'? are you also considering allowing the Dagger skill to enable extra parries? i'm still not clear. sorry

it might be beneficial to post potential revisions here in the forums, one for each rule item up for revision. it could help iron out any murkiness before going to print. i suppose G+ or the blog could work as well but discussions on either of those aren't as easily found or referenced, imo.

example:
Sub-board: Revisions and Errata(if possible, set it up so that only you can start a new topic but anyone can chime in)
Post subject: Berserk
<current rule>
<new rule>

Post subject: Dagger skill
<current rule>
<new rule>

not only would this improve the 2nd edition's clarity, it would honor us that bought the 1st edition by giving us one place to reference revised rules until they go to print.

[Fenway5]

Until I get some hard decisions and playtesting made I won't tie up a forum with changes--but rest assured I will post "revised rules" once I get something more concrete

So here is what I am considering as a general idea:

All weapons skills (Ax-Mace, Bow, Dagger, sword, sling, throw, etc) for every +3 in a skill you get one additional action at no penalty on your turn (could be an attack/could be a parry)

For Shield skill for every +3 you get 1 additional block action at no penalty.

Disarm opponent may become a new defense action

Berserk Attack option-goes away as attack option

All out defense option-goes away as defense option

[reaperwolf]

A suggestion: roll dagger into Sword and simply call it Blades. The reason being the same reason Axe-Mace skill exists, i.e. the similarity of the handling of the related weapons.

[reaperwolf]

Jan 6, 2015 21:09:31 GMT -5 Fenway5 said:

Until I get some hard decisions and playtesting made I won't tie up a forum with changes--but rest assured I will post "revised rules" once I get something more concrete

So here is what I am considering as a general idea:

All weapons skills (Ax-Mace, Bow, Dagger, sword, sling, throw, etc) for every +3 in a skill you get one additional action at no penalty on your turn (could be an attack/could be a parry)

For Shield skill for every +3 you get 1 additional block action at no penalty.

Disarm opponent may become a new defense action

Berserk Attack option-goes away as attack option

All out defense option-goes away as defense option

So long as Berserk Attack/Total Attack and All-Out-Defense still exist in some manner I'll be happy.

Maybe get rid of two-weapon attack skill and simply have it as a combat action.

[Deleted]

Jan 6, 2015 21:09:31 GMT -5 Fenway5 said:

All weapons skills (Ax-Mace, Bow, Dagger, sword, sling, throw, etc) for every +3 in a skill you get one additional action at no penalty on your turn (could be an attack/could be a parry)

To be honest, having the ability to make 3 attacks on one's turn has always seemed preposterous to me. Especially when at +6 skill level, all of one's attacks are virtually guaranteed to succeed. Especially if one follows these attacks up with a parry or counterattack. Giving an extra attack at +3 or +4 only seems more reasonable.

For Shield skill for every +3 you get 1 additional block action at no penalty.

Again, imagine at some point some character is going to have +6 weapon skill and +6 shield skill. That character will be able to make 3 attacks on his turn and follow it up with 3 shield blocks? Does that seem right? I would grant one additional block at +3 or +4 only.

And what does the 'at no penalty' phrase mean in either of these contexts? Does this mean that +3 sword guy can make one attack on his turn, then perform a parry as a reaction and still be free to move on his next turn? RAW, the only penalty for reactions is loss of movement on one's next turn (or you couldn't have moved on the previous turn?) Loss of movement really isn't much of a penalty, why waive it? Isn't the extra attack, parry, or shield block boon enough on it's own? Or does this 'at no penalty' phrase imply that we could have been making extra attacks at +1 weapon skill as long as we paid some penalty?

Disarm opponent may become a new defense action

This doesn't sound like a good idea to me, not as a standard action or reaction...at least not with a normal 3-die test. maybe a 4-die or an opposed test but which stat, ST or DX? Imagine trying to perform this action on a giant. Seems best to have it as an optional consequence of a critical hit...or some kind of 'character option' later on.