|
Post by Wolfgar on Jul 29, 2009 9:54:19 GMT -5
A bunch of questions regarding defending. See PHB p 104-105. I couldn't find anything in the DMG regarding defending or parrying.
1) Is it correct that all of your bonuses to hit are counted against the opponent's to hit roll? Strength? Magic weapon? Specialization? Prayer? Poetics? PHB only mentions strength but I think all of these should count. Note I think that prayer should count twice; once for you defending better and once for the opponent fighting worse.
2) The book says "subtracted from the opponent's 'to hit' dice roll(s)." I assume that these adjustments should be made to your AC as mentioned in the DMG p 70. Or is defending special?
3) The PHB mentions that you can fall back while parrying, i.e. retreat from combat while defending. I think we ruled that this doesn't apply under ADDICT. Correct?
4) Does defending work against all attacks by an opponent in a round? In particular with a fighter that attacks twice in a round we currently have the first attack happening before the opponent can do anything. Would that mean the opponent can't start defending yet? I could see this going either way.
5) If a fighter's attack sequence is 3/2 can he use the 1 attack round for defending? For example, 2 attacks, defend, 2 attacks, 1 attack, 2 attacks, defend, 2 attacks, etc.
6) If you are attacking with two weapons is there any advantage to defending with both of them?
7) If you are attacking with two weapons can you defend with the offhand?
8) If a fighter's attack sequence is twice a round can he use one of those attacks to defend. For example, a 7th level specialized fighter is fighting a cleric. Can he block the attack sequence of the cleric with his first attack and then use his second attack to strike the cleric? I like the idea of a high level fighter being able to parry a less adept opponent's attacks and still being able to get off an attack. But this may already be rolled into the additional hit points and better THAC0.
9) Does defending apply against touch attacks?
10) How many opponents/attacks can you defend against? Does defending work against all opponents/attacks on the front and front flank? Or just a single opponent? Or one opponent for each of your attacks? Or just the number of attacks you are able to make? For example, when defending against a carrion crawler are you able defend against all 8 attacks?
11) Can you defend someone else? Example: Kazan and Kimball are standing side by side in a 10' corridor. Kimball is using a bow and Kazan a spear. Can Kazan keep opponents off of Kimball? If viable, how would this affect each of their ACs?
12) Can a hasted person use half of a round to defend? If not, is there any additional benefit from defending while hasted or defending against a slowed opponent? Since you get +4 when attacking a slowed opponent, do you get this when defending as well?
Here is a scenario I want to try in our current situation. Kazan is facing a mass of Black Watch. Both have attack sequences of 3/2. What I would like to do is have Kazan defend when the Black Watch have their 2 attack round and Kazan has his 1 attack round. Then have Kazan attack on his 2 attack round when the Black Watch have their 1 attack round. This way he maximizes damage done while minimizing damage taken. In fact with his -3 AC and +9 to hit he would be unhittable by anything with less that 6 hit dice while defending. I realize the Black Watch won't all be attacking in unison, but is the general idea reasonable?
|
|
|
Post by Ginger on Jul 29, 2009 11:25:24 GMT -5
I definitely don't think you can defend with one hand and attack with the other. I also think that you defend for a round, and not for an attack routine.
|
|
|
Post by Dead Greyhawk on Jul 29, 2009 20:32:45 GMT -5
A bunch of questions regarding defending. See PHB p 104-105. I couldn't find anything in the DMG regarding defending or parrying.
1) Is it correct that all of your bonuses to hit are counted against the opponent's to hit roll? Strength? Magic weapon? Specialization? Prayer? Poetics? PHB only mentions strength but I think all of these should count. Note I think that prayer should count twice; once for you defending better and once for the opponent fighting worse.
All of your bonuses to hit are counted against the opponent's to hit roll, including magic, specialization, and strength. Prayer would count twice, as you noted.
2) The book says "subtracted from the opponent's 'to hit' dice roll(s)." I assume that these adjustments should be made to your AC as mentioned in the DMG p 70. Or is defending special?
I believe this mechanism is used so that your AC can't be shifted to the point where the opponent needs a natural 20 and bonuses to hit you. Instead, you calculate the AC your opponent hits and then move downwards from there. This also addresses the multiple natural 20 issue in the charts.
3) The PHB mentions that you can fall back while parrying, i.e. retreat from combat while defending. I think we ruled that this doesn't apply under ADDICT. Correct?
You could move less than 10' from your opponents. I think this is effectively your attack, and we've decided you can shift within the 10' combat radius while attacking. I think if your movement broke contact with a second attacker, they would not suffer the negatives from your parrying and would attack as if you had retreated.
4) Does defending work against all attacks by an opponent in a round? In particular with a fighter that attacks twice in a round we currently have the first attack happening before the opponent can do anything. Would that mean the opponent can't start defending yet? I could see this going either way.
Formally, I think you should start defending on your attack's segment and finish defending on your next attack's segment. This is complicated to adjudicate, but would provide a bonus to specialists who are defending on their two attack round, as they would defend against almost all attacks. In a combat with multiple attack routines on both sides, I might find it hard to keep track of.
5) If a fighter's attack sequence is 3/2 can he use the 1 attack round for defending? For example, 2 attacks, defend, 2 attacks, 1 attack, 2 attacks, defend, 2 attacks, etc.
Yes. I think that this is illustrating the point of why, for balance, you would want the defense to start on the PC's attack segment, allowing for an opportunity to attack before the defense started. But, in principle, this seems exactly like 2 attacks killing opponent, move within combat distance, 2 attacks.
6) If you are attacking with two weapons is there any advantage to defending with both of them?
Good question. I think practically, so few folks should have 18 DEX that defending with both weapons would incur a penalty. I think this gives a huge bonus to the current PCs, simply on the basis high strength. I also think that this devalues a shield significantly for high DEX fighters, since they gain both offensive and defensive benefit from having a magical hand axe or dagger equipped. Finally, if we decide you can defend with the off hand, I think it has to be on your attack segment, so that shields, which protect you regardless of the segment, retain value.
7) If you are attacking with two weapons can you defend with the offhand?
See above.
8) If a fighter's attack sequence is twice a round can he use one of those attacks to defend. For example, a 7th level specialized fighter is fighting a cleric. Can he block the attack sequence of the cleric with his first attack and then use his second attack to strike the cleric? I like the idea of a high level fighter being able to parry a less adept opponent's attacks and still being able to get off an attack. But this may already be rolled into the additional hit points and better THAC0.
I agree with Zinc. Parrying is an attack routine and replaces all attacks by that weapon.
9) Does defending apply against touch attacks?
Yes.
10) How many opponents/attacks can you defend against? Does defending work against all opponents/attacks on the front and front flank? Or just a single opponent? Or one opponent for each of your attacks? Or just the number of attacks you are able to make? For example, when defending against a carrion crawler are you able defend against all 8 attacks?
Your defending is equivalent to a shield, so it is direction specific but not limited in attack number.
11) Can you defend someone else? Example: Kazan and Kimball are standing side by side in a 10' corridor. Kimball is using a bow and Kazan a spear. Can Kazan keep opponents off of Kimball? If viable, how would this affect each of their ACs?
Yes. Kimball gains the benefit of Kazan's defending on attacks targeting Kimball. Kazan gains no benefit himself from defending, as he's not defending himself. Kazan probably also suffers flank attacks from anyone able to attack him from the side away from Kimball, since he must turn somewhat sideways to parry in front of Kimball.
12) Can a hasted person use half of a round to defend? If not, is there any additional benefit from defending while hasted or defending against a slowed opponent? Since you get +4 when attacking a slowed opponent, do you get this when defending as well?
A hasted person can not use half a round to defend, as the hasted person must wait for the opponent's attack, which might come at any point in the round. I would think that defending is a bad idea from the hasted person's point of view. Similar logic applies regarding defending against a slowed person. A hasted versus slowed person is too complicated for my little brain at the moment.
The +4 to hit bonus against a slowed person is a situational bonus, like prone or flank, and is not applicable to the defense.
Here is a scenario I want to try in our current situation. Kazan is facing a mass of Black Watch. Both have attack sequences of 3/2. What I would like to do is have Kazan defend when the Black Watch have their 2 attack round and Kazan has his 1 attack round. Then have Kazan attack on his 2 attack round when the Black Watch have their 1 attack round. This way he maximizes damage done while minimizing damage taken. In fact with his -3 AC and +9 to hit he would be unhittable by anything with less that 6 hit dice while defending. I realize the Black Watch won't all be attacking in unison, but is the general idea reasonable?
I generally agree.
|
|
|
Post by Wolfgar on Aug 1, 2009 12:07:39 GMT -5
I could see a problem if we do segment based defending. You could have a case where someone doesn't get to defend against any attacks depending on the dice rolls.
Suppose you have two opponents who can each attack only once a round. In the first round, Joe announces he is defending and Fred announces he is attacking. Joe rolls a 1 and Fred rolls a 6. Joe doesn't get his defense up in time because it starts in segment 6. Next round both Joe and Fred announce they are attacking. Joe rolls a 6 and Fred rolls a 1. Joe's defending ends at segment 1 before Fred attacks. So Joe wasted a round defending.
I think rather we should consider the initiative roll as indicating when your opponents attack comes in the round. Throughout the round you are both parrying the opponent's feints and probing with your attack and only on the initiative roll is there a chance for the opponent to get through your defense. However when you take a purely defensive stance you are attempting to block all attacks throughout the round. The initiative roll just indicates the timing of the best chance the opponent has during the round.
There would still be the question of when you switch to a purely defensive stance. Does that always occur on segment 1 (modified by dexterity?)? Or does it only happen on your initiative? For the sake of argument could you announce that you are going to attack for the first 3 segments and then start defending? So if your initiative is low you may get an attack off and if the opponents is high you may have defend against it. This seems overly complex.
I think there is still a question as to how to handle the 3/2 fighter. The 2 attack, defend, 2 attack sequence seems abusive. Maybe the defense doesn't count towards the 3/2 rate of attack. So you can do 2 attacks, defend, 1 attack, defend, defend, 2 attacks, etc.
|
|
|
Post by venger on Aug 5, 2009 9:19:15 GMT -5
This came up on a Dragonsfoot thread about the "Fighting Withdrawl"
Players Handbook pg 104-105
"Falling back is a retrograde move facing the opponent(s) and can be used in conjunction with a parry"
That would be pretty cool if you could parry and make a fighting withdrawl at the same time.
Not sure how effective it would be, considering if you lose initiative they still attack you before you have a chance to parry/withdraw and if you win initiative you have withdrawn before they strike and your parry isn't really all that useful.**
**Unless another opponent is charging you during your fighting withdrawl and you get the parry benefit.
|
|
|
Post by Ginger on Aug 5, 2009 9:27:45 GMT -5
I think there is still a question as to how to handle the 3/2 fighter. The 2 attack, defend, 2 attack sequence seems abusive. Maybe the defense doesn't count towards the 3/2 rate of attack. So you can do 2 attacks, defend, 1 attack, defend, defend, 2 attacks, etc. We've already ruled that you can attack twice, cast a spell, attack twice, drink a potion, and attack twice. I think defending is just fine. Also, I don't think that it's all that bad if on rare occasions you get screwed and you waste a round because your defense comes after your opponent's attack. On the flip side, the reverse could happen and you could defend for two rounds if you lost initiative while defending the previous round.
|
|
|
Post by Dead Greyhawk on Aug 7, 2009 9:25:26 GMT -5
I think rather we should consider the initiative roll as indicating when your opponents attack comes in the round. Throughout the round you are both parrying the opponent's feints and probing with your attack and only on the initiative roll is there a chance for the opponent to get through your defense. However when you take a purely defensive stance you are attempting to block all attacks throughout the round. The initiative roll just indicates the timing of the best chance the opponent has during the round. There would still be the question of when you switch to a purely defensive stance. Does that always occur on segment 1 (modified by dexterity?)? Or does it only happen on your initiative? For the sake of argument could you announce that you are going to attack for the first 3 segments and then start defending? So if your initiative is low you may get an attack off and if the opponents is high you may have defend against it. This seems overly complex. I agree this seems overly complex. We have used this principle for determining rear or flank attacks in battle by stating the PC has not yet pivoted because they haven't had their attack routine yet. Especially in the case where the target is being attacked by a specialized fighter. I'm also in Zinc's camp regarding the 3/2 fighter. It seems like it is equivalently abusive for the enemy's purpose.
|
|