Members | Sign In
All Forums > Rules and Mechanics
avatar

New SE: Riposte or Counterattack

posted Apr 05, 2013 05:24:21 by jasonwpacker
Sorry if I'm covering old ground here, but I'd like some opinions on the possibility of a new Special Effect, Defender only, akin to Accidental Injury but not caused by a fumbled attack and instead by a successful, perhaps critically so, defense.

It would cause an injury as well, but based on the defender's weapon or shield, and represent the exploitation of an opening more immediately than one gets from Overextend.

Is it sufficient that it be on a critical defense, or is that overkill, and it should be allowed on any defensive special effect result, but require a hard difficulty attack roll to land?
page   1
7 replies
avatar
RangerDan said Apr 05, 2013 08:32:32
Some things that came to mind:

1) Does the counterattack require a succesful attack roll?
I assume it does because otherwise it would be stronger than Accidental Injury, which seems wrong. But if so, does the counterattack generate its own SEs (and potentially counter-Riposte)?

2) Does the counterattack require an additional CA from the defender?
If the counterattack is part of a defense (ie no additional CA), it is potentially one of the strongest defensive SEs available. It is arguably stronger than Trip, which can be resisted without expenditure of CAs (presumably the Riposte can be parried in turn?). If you make it Crit-only, it competes with Blind Opponent, which seems a closer match. Personally, if you play it this way I would make it crit-only

The alternative is to make it some kind of defensive 'Flurry' SE, allowing an immediate out-of-sequence counterattack that uses it's own CA.

3) Can you stack the SE?
If you crit defend vs. failed attack, can you Riposte twice?

4) What about Reach?
Presumably I cannot Riposte with my Kite Shield against the Halberdier that just struck me?


avatar
BruceMason said Apr 05, 2013 08:46:48
This did use to exist but isn't as good as it looks at first glance. After all, in a 1-1 duel say someone misses an attack then instead of spending 1 AP to get a Parry SE so that you can spend 1 AP to attack you could just not parry and save the AP for your next attack instead. It has some narrow uses but only if you have 3 APs but your SR is lower than your opponent.

However, I misread your post at first in a way which was more interesting.

You could do the following:
Counter-attack (Parry, critical only). You can treat your parry roll as if it were an attack roll. Your opponent can spend 1 AP (if available) to defend against this attack as normal.
Example. Boris attacks Albert and hits. Albert rolls his parry and scores a critical with a roll of 04. He gets a SE and chooses counterattack. Boris must now defend against a critically successful attack roll of 04.

This would be very powerful because not only does it drain the victim of 1 AP but it also probably causes damage and scores a SE in its own right. Consequently I might be tempted to save it for swash-buckling style settings and maybe restrict it to light, fast 1-handed weapons or certain combat styles.

E.g. combat style trait: counterattack. Allows access to the counterattack SE. Can only use weapons such as rapier, main gauche, buckler and only if unarmoured.

All that said, the counterattack mechanic is inherent already in RQ6 so it doesn't actually need a new SE. In several ways:
Not parrying a failed attack. You get an AP advantage so even if he manages to parry your attack he's on the back foot and risks being cut open Or
It consists of using 2 weapons. First weapon pins the attacker's weapon on the parry and the second smashes him in the face while he can't parry with his normal weapon.

Oh and semi-ninjaed by Dan. There are some mechanical questions about reach (you need to be able to reach with the counterattack)and the SE would need to be non-stackable.
Bruce
[Last edited Apr 05, 2013 08:48:40]
avatar
Dreameister said Apr 05, 2013 09:38:59
I agree with Bruce in that I'd make it into a trait.

I remember from my Kendo days that most parrying techniques were done on the upswing as part of the attacking movement. This was a style thing, what you can see from Kendo and Iaido katas, actual Kenjutsu techniques had more variety in parrying.

I do think that the reach is crucial here.

I'd reserve the style for settings/cultures where combat styles use same weapons (katana vs katana, rapier vs rapier, etc) or else require the use of close range in combination with it.

Cheers,
Marko
[Last edited Apr 05, 2013 09:42:33]
avatar
DanTrue said Apr 05, 2013 09:48:34
All that said, the counterattack mechanic is inherent already in RQ6 so it doesn't actually need a new SE. In several ways:
Not parrying a failed attack. You get an AP advantage so even if he manages to parry your attack he's on the back foot and risks being cut open Or
It consists of using 2 weapons. First weapon pins the attacker's weapon on the parry and the second smashes him in the face while he can't parry with his normal weapon.


This.
This is also why the Counterattack CA was removed from MRQII/Legend -> RQ6. It was only necessary because of the need to declare the parry beforehand, back in the day.

- Dan
avatar
RangerDan said Apr 05, 2013 10:23:21
Actually MRQII/Legend allowed you to 'undeclare' your parry if the attacker missed.
You just couldn't decide to not parry after you had seen the succesful attack roll (a Bleed with a succesful attack roll of 90 is scarier than with a succesful attack roll of 10).
I guess they cut the 'declare parry' thing for RQ6 because it was additional complication for relatively little gain.

But back to counter-attack, I agree that its uses are situational if it requires an additional CA.
If it does not however, it's quite powerful, which is what I think the OP was going for and why I asked above.

Bruce's idea of keeping the parry roll as the attack roll is very interesting. Why limit it to crits though?
avatar
BruceMason said Apr 05, 2013 10:49:38
RangerDan
Why limit it to crits though?

If using a version which doesn't need an AP then I would say it probably needs to be either a critical or only accessible through quite a restrictive combat style trait. Otherwise it risks becoming too much a no-brainer. E.g. trip leads someone being prone while counter-attack forces the spending of an AP and with potential damage and a potential extra SE that the counter-attack might generate. To me that puts it at the top end of non-crit SEs and the lower end of crit SEs.
avatar
jasonwpacker said Apr 05, 2013 18:39:17
Thanks, guys. Lots of food for thought there.

I'd assumed it would require an attack roll, but didn't allow for the action economy going to hell with counterparries and the like.
Login below to reply: