Topic: Declaring OB/DB stance

[providence13]

I consider drawing or putting away a weapon to be an action, and take activity, but I consider a drop to be a free action taking 0%. I think that's actually in the rules, but it's possible it's just a long standing house rule.

I also handle drop as 0%Act.
If you drop, then 'Quickdraw, I always played it as 0%Act.

[TerryTee]

This probably becomes even more complicated if we include non-weapon attacks. Then you have no need to draw, for example at sword attack early in the round, and a ,martial arts attack at the end.

• Without looking thought the rules, I think I would handle it this way:
• Let the player declare OB/DB split before it is needed, which means before performing an attack or before being attacked whichever comes first.
  If the character is allowed a second attack, then I’d allow a new OB/DB split for that attack.
• The first OB/DB split is valid until the character has a new weapon in hand (or has changed to a ‘unarmed combat stance’).

My main problem would be to pinpoint the time when one OB/DB split ends and the next takes over, and if there is a window of no defense in there.
However, this problem is present even if you only allow one OB/DB split for the whole round in declaration. Example: The character starts the round with an OB/DB split of 50/50, weapon in hands and attacks at first opportunity (OB of 70, so effective OB 35). Then the character drops the weapon in order to use a new weapon in the next round (to make this simpler). Late in that same first round the character is attacked but now has a new weapon in hand with an OB of 90. How much DB does he get? DB 45 since the OB/DB split was 50/50? Possibly DB 45 with some penalty due to activity%? At what point in time during the round did the characters DB change from 35 to 45?
-Terry

[markc]

From what I remember of 2 Wep Attacks you have to have the same % applied to each equally.
MDC

[Cory Magel]

From what I remember of 2 Wep Attacks you have to have the same % applied to each equally.
MDC

Yep, that's how it works. Otherwise someone using a 2 weapon combo could full attack with one and full parry with the other, essentially giving the equivalent of a tremendous shield bonus to DB.

[markc]

From what I remember of 2 Wep Attacks you have to have the same % applied to each equally.
MDC

Yep, that's how it works. Otherwise someone using a 2 weapon combo could full attack with one and full parry with the other, essentially giving the equivalent of a tremendous shield bonus to DB.

  This can also be a problem in roundless combat systems and can take some work arounds to get right, IMHO.
MDC

[Marc R]

How could I have missed the martial arts strike angle? Totally allows you to skip the "Drop weapon" bit.

So, if someone is allowed 2 attacks for whatever reason, the DB to parry remains constant across the round like the TWC rule, with a declare change only allowed in the next round, just before initiative?

Thus you can't make two attacks under haste, at two different splits, no matter with the same weapon or two different ones?

[providence13]

Isn't this in the same vein as "DB applies to every attack from the opponent for the entire round".
So a Hasted, eight-armed Durga demon (Kali's mom) is attacking a farm hand with a rake (60DB total), each and every attack from the demoness is at -60.

Same thing, right?

Now, if you somehow.. stated the OB/DB split, attacked and then had another weapon to use in another attack (same round) wouldn't it make sense to use the same OB/DB split for the entire round? Your skill with that weapon may be different, but the %, parts, ratio.. of OB to DB should be the same. IMHO 

[Marc R]

I think that seems the most plausible rule so far. . .now, on to the next deviltry twist of this issue:

Godfry is Hasted, he has +100 in Broadsword, and +50 in Martial Arts Strikes.

He declares 80/20 DB/OB with the broadsword for 2 full 100% attacks (if RMSS, attacking in snap and normal)

He gets the first attack off, but either as the result of a disarm, or a crit result, the sword is knocked from his hands. . .

Blatantly cannot proceed with his broadsword attack, switches to Martial Arts. . .but doesn't have 100 to make the split, not even 80 to account for the DB side in parry. . .

[providence13]

Is this a drinking game?

GM's call.. maybe a +50 Martial Arts Parry; if that is all he has left.
Or would it be a +40/10 OB/DB?

Tricky. You mean that this hasn't come up before? In ~30 yrs!

[rdanhenry]

The official ruling on record is that you *can* change OB/DB split if you get a second attack (or do three attacks, since you only need 60% activity to melee and 3x60% = 180%, so 200% activity from Haste/Speed is enough to attack in each phase), with parry depending on the phase in which you are attacked.

In the case of a broken or dropped sword, there's no reason to adjust the parry for this round, since your attack (failed as it may have been) is still of this round. Unless you *choose* to make another attack with your remaining activity, there's no replacement parry declaration. Let the abstract nature of the combat round cover things and start dealing with the issues of no weapon to parry with next round.

[Marc R]

Thus, a hasted person could perhaps go Full OB then full DB.

[Marc R]

In the case of a broken or dropped sword, there's no reason to adjust the parry for this round, since your attack (failed as it may have been) is still of this round. Unless you *choose* to make another attack with your remaining activity, there's no replacement parry declaration. Let the abstract nature of the combat round cover things and start dealing with the issues of no weapon to parry with next round.

I do get the abstraction of an attack over 10 seconds adding up to one roll, but. . .

I dunno, especially in RMSS with defined phases, if you are disarmed in snap, you can continue to get the parry in the following phases?

Like, if a Crit read "Shield Destroyed" I wouldn't apply that shield DB vs the next attack, even if the next attack came inside the same round.

[Ecthelion]

In the case where a combatant gets disarmed and later gets attacked, I would not allow him to simply use the weapon OB for parrying. But I'd be fine with unarmed OB being used for parrying.

[Ecthelion]

Yes, a hasted person could go full OB first and later in the same round go full DB, just as I already explained earlier in this thread. But it should be noticed that the parry assignments in such a case get applied per phase. E.g. Fighter A with 0 normal DB and 100 OB is hasted and decides to do an outright attack with no parry in the Normal Action Phase and later do a full parry in the Deliberate Action Phase. This means that he has 0 DB in the Snap Action Phase and Normal Action Phase and 100 DB in the Deliberate Action Phase. So if an opponent decides to attack him during the first two phases, then he will have very little DB...

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

The official ruling on record is that you *can* change OB/DB split if you get a second attack

The  problem with using the term "Parrying" is that most people take that to mean that it is ONLY deflecting an incoming attack with your weapon -- and that just isn't the case. "Parrying" should more accurately be called your "Combat Posture" as it reflects more how defensively you fight overall.

[oRule=Official Ruling: OB/DB Split & Multiple Attacks]
When a player declares the OB/DB split for the round, he is declaring his overall defensive posture. The amount of OB moved to DB reduces the character's effective OB for the entire round. If the character is able to make multiple attacks, ALL those attacks will utilize that "effective OB". The player does get to make multiple OB/DB split declarations for each attack.

It does not matter if the character gains multiple attacks from Two Weapon Combo/Combat (however you call it), or through having enough activity percentage available through Haste. This ruling applies to all of them equally.

Additional Note: Since "Parrying" is basically your combat posture for the round, being disarmed will NOT remove the modifier to DB gained from Parrying. The same applies to critical results that also disarm the character or that destroys their shield.

It is also important to remember that the "attack roll" isn't actually a single roll, but the cumulative effect of numerous lesser attacks all rolled up into one, in a single roll. The "initiative order" in which events happen is simply a device to determine when the GM and players resolve the actions, and is not actually indicative of when those actions actually occurred within the round. 
[/oRule]

[Ecthelion]

Rasyr, the intention is to overrule the older RM ruling "If you make multiple attacks in a turn, with different ammounts of parry, the parry you have declared for a particular phase applies to any incoming attacks during that phase"?

[markc]

IMHO what phases mean;
 Phases mean to me that when you see an opening how you react to that opening. It does not really mean to me that snap actions happen in the first 3s of combat. Also everyone has a different attack moment not matter what the % actioin is as you are not tracking it by seconds but by 10s chuncks.
 Does that make sense?
 
MDC

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

Rasyr, the intention is to overrule the older RM ruling "If you make multiple attacks in a turn, with different ammounts of parry, the parry you have declared for a particular phase applies to any incoming attacks during that phase"?

Yes, this new ruling overrides that ruling from 1999.

[rdanhenry]

I would point out that Two Weapon Combat does not permit multiple attacks. It allows multiple attack rolls in a single attack.

[Cory Magel]

rdanhenry is right...

Two Weapon Combo allows you to attack twice for each attack action you make.  In Rolemaster you are only allowed to make two attack actions per round.

So, you cast Speed or use Adrenal Speed and the two weapon user can effectively make four attacks contained within two attack actions during the round.  If this were not the case a single weapon user would have an advantage on the two weapon combo user in situations where they were both "Sped".