Topic: Passive DB and multiple attackers, and splitting passive DB

[Zelekendel]

Hello,

our GM is making us split our passive DB, like quickness DB bonus, shield etc. between multiple attackers, is this correct according to the rules? The RM2 arms law questions page says that the shield applies to all enemies in a certain rough frontage, for example.

I suspect only parry needs to be split (in fact, according to the rules, you can't even do that without using an optional rule and a penalty to the total DB, but he believed it was harsh enough being outnumbered without extra penalties to parry, which I'm inclined to agree.) and quickness especially is just innately being a "hard target" without conscious effort at selecting who you're dodging (that's parry).

Thanks!

[arakish]

The way I have handled this is that all attacks the defender is "aware" of also have full Quickness applied.  ALWAYS.

The DB I made players split was the amount of their weapon's OB which is used to parry attacks.  If you have an OB of +75 against two attackers, then you could divide this OB as a +40 and +35 DB to parry the attacks.  If you had a QU bonus of +20, then that +20 would add to both parries giving a final result of +60 DB vs one attack and a +55 vs the other attack.

And although all OB was used to parry, you are still allowed a +0 attack with the weapon.  At least that was always my ruling.

However, it is still ultimately up to the GM.  If he says you need to split the QU bonus, then you have to split it.

However, no matter what, I say that the full DB given by a shield is applied to both attacks provided they are within a certain arc, my judgment has always been 100 degrees.  Any beyond this, then the shield can only apply to one attack.

rmfr

[Ecthelion]

Zelekendel, you are right in that, according to the RM rules, the quickness DB applies to all attacks in full. For shield DB I am not so sure, but we have the shield usually applied only vs. one opponent. And it is also correct that any OB portion that gets parried normally only applies to one opponent and cannot be split between multiple opponents unless special spells or skills like Two-Weapon Combat get used.

But of course your GM is allowed to modify the rules as he sees fit. Such modifications as requiring DB to be split between opponents should IMHO only be made by a very experienced RM GM. Hope you have such one and not a newbie that did not read the rules correctly...

[Zelekendel]

Thank you, could I please have a page reference or ruling to support this as otherwise I can just tell him that two people on a forum said so, which might not be enough (even though I trust you guys, not sure if that is enough of a proof for him).

He has run RM for at least 15 years though, but I can tell you from experience that some interpretations stick with you.

[Ecthelion]

Hi,

I don't have the books at hand, but some of the information can be found on the Rolemaster Rulings page, an official collection of errata and rules clarifications:
- Regarding parrying this page says "You can only parry the person you are attacking"
- Regarding shields the page says "A shield applies to only one opponent per round"
- Regarding the DB split there is no direct answer, so probably this is stated explicitly in the rules already (sorry, but you should take a look yourselves). But the rulings page says "Many GMs allow you to split your DB between multiple attackers. This is not an official rule, but it allows more cinematic combat." This to me says that splitting DB is not an official rule, even though the word "allows" is IMO a bit misleading, since it sounds like a possible improvement over the rules, which this definitely is not (at least not from the PC POV).

Hope this helps.

[markc]

Zelekendel,  Ecthelion, has the right official quotes. But as you have said playing for 15 years you (GM, groups) can adopt a variety of house rules.   


 My house rule is the following (Note I use it for RMSS but it should be the same for RM2), DB is reduced by 20 for every attack after the first (makes multiple attackers very deadly), Shield DB can apply for every attack from a given facing (on a hex map) and that facing can be moved from the side to the front. So I have players have a duel DB rating of shield / DB w/o shield for easy reference.
 Note 1: In RM2 the DB's can be higher so not forcing someone to split their DB vs my system above is going to give an advantage to the defender in most cases. 
 Note 2: In the past I have ruled that specific DB items or DB from items does not apply to specific attacks based on the items description. So a specific type of shield spell (I have a couple different types in my game) may only protect the front 3 hex facings and would not apply to a back attack.


 I hope that provides some clarity and an option for you and your GM to think about. Also since it is his game and game world he may be using his own house rules and just forgot to let everyone know what they are.


And Welcom to the ICE Forums if some one has not already welcomed you. Jump right in ask questions, provide feed back, Join the Beta for Rolemaster Unified (RMU) and have fun.
MDC 

[Cory Magel]

If you have to split DB does the GM also still give positional modifiers?  IMO the reason for positional modifiers is to simulate what I'm guessing your GM's reasoning for making you split passive DB's is.

It would interesting to see what your GM thought when the group comes upon a powerful creature with a lot of passive DB and you all attack it at once, thereby nullifying one of it's biggest advantages.

I suspect if this happened with our group we'd all attack the same foe and just work our way through enemies if, for no other reason, to point out the absurdity of it to the GM.

[Zelekendel]

Of course, armor quality bonus (including "thick hide" for monsters) and magic item bonuses are still static in his game, so of course we don't have to split those, so neither would this powerful monster you gave as an example, unless it happened to be of the dodgy type.

Thank you for the welcome.

[Spectre771]

I thought I had a good answer, but after reading the "exact quotes" I have to go back through my books to find something more accurate for you.

- Passive DB is always on.  No matter what.  +5 armour is +5 armour no matter how many people hit it.  It's not +5 for the 1st attacker than +0 for all following attacks.  You can't turn off passive bonuses and you can't split it by telling your armour to only protect you for 3 points on this hit, then protect you for 2 points on the next hit.

- Parry is split between attackers and you have to declare that you will be parrying 1,2, 3, etc and the single OB gets divvied between the number of attacks, then add the passive (+5) bonus to each.

100 OB wearing +5 Magical armour , no shield
Parry 30 + 40 + 30
DB = 35 , 45 , 35.

- I always took shield to be part of passive defense, unless you block the 1st attacker, then throw your shield on the ground for all the other attacks... That shield is still on your person providing some sort of defense even if you are not "actively blocking a strike.... the opponent still has to work around that shield just being in the way.

- Stunned unable to parry, you only get the passive DB since, again, it can't be turned off. +5 armour still protects at +5.

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

- Parry is split between attackers and you have to declare that you will be parrying 1,2, 3, etc and the single OB gets divvied between the number of attacks, then add the passive (+5) bonus to each.

100 OB wearing +5 Magical armour, no shield
Parry 30 + 40 + 30
DB = 35 , 45 , 35.

Technically, according to AL&CL section 4.3 Parrying, if one "elects to parry with a weapon with (one's) entire OB, (one) receives the "shield" bonus for (one's) weapon". Let's notice that that bonus is +5 for all kinds of weapons. So, in your example, if the combatant uses 100% of his OB (the whole 100 OB), he actually has 105 points to put into his DB.

100 OB wearing +5 Magical armour, no shield
Parry 35 + 40 + 30
DB = 40, 45, 35.