Topic: Can Elemental Bolts be parried?

[Marc R]

That would make deflections and "Aim unture" rather more diesel than in the past.

[vroomfogle]

That would make deflections and "Aim unture" rather more diesel than in the past.

And far more effective then the Spell Bending spells, whose purpose are to deflect EAR spells like Deflections but they require an RR.

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

So since elemental bolts are essentially being treated as missile weapons and parried, can they be deflected per spell?

Not unless the spell specifically mentions elemental bolts.

Elemental bolts do a physical attack.
Shields can protect against elemental bolts (granted, not as efficiently as arrows or melee attacks).
Therefore, the same rules that allow for "parrying" an arrow also apply to other similar physical attacks.
Bolt spells are considered a similar physical attack.
This does not grant new abilities to other spells.

Regarding HARP -- as I said at the top of this thread, I have never played where you could parry missiles (mainly because the rules for doing so were so vague as to be useless, and then I even forgot they existed) or bolt spells. So, the core HARP rules do not allow for such.

A recent conversation caused me to look several things up, including the EAR section of RMC Spell Law and Parrying Missile Fire section of RMC Arms Law. Upon reading those two sections, back to back, I realized that the rules allow for parrying elemental bolts.

I took it to Heike, explained my reasoning and she agreed that yes the rules do allow for it. She doesn't like that the rules allow for it, but allow for parrying elemental bolts with a shield they do.

[Marc R]

I find it odd that they added a skill to parry elemental bolts in the arms companion if it was already included in the basic rules on missle parry. . .the rules are often unclear I'll admit. . .I think you were mistaken in your take on missile parry. . .but now that you've made it official, it's official, so you can indeed, officially parry a lightningbolt with a metal target shield. . I dunno if I'll use it that way though, it seems to smurf mages a bit too hard.

[Michael Petrea]

Even with the official ruling I think one of the important things for the GM to keep in mind is something that Cormac mentioned:

However, the basis behind this was the assumption that the character understood the threat that the mage posed ... someone who had never experienced a bolt attack before, and had no reason to expert one would not be able to dodge ... even if they knew their opponent was a mage, they assumed that they were about to be "cursed" ... after the first attack, they knew to put the shield between themselves and their attacker.

How exactly does the fighter (or any other defender) know that they are going to bolted?

My position is that to be aware of the attack the defender has to be aware before the bolt/missile is in the air.  If an archer is aiming a bow at you then you can figure that he will fire an arrow soon after.  But, if a caster is gesticulating and speaking in tongues, what does that mean? 

Certainly, the defender can decide to play it safe and hide behind his shield.  If the caster does not cast a bolt then he wasted his OB.  Therefore, as I see it, for the defender to be aware of the bolt attack he must make some sort of casting roll/lore to identify the spell be cast.  If he determines that it is a bolt then he may parry.  Otherwise, he can't.  And anytime, the defender may cower behind his shield and wait for the attack and see what comes but cover rules can handle that.

The awareness defines ability to parry.  It is the anticipation and preparation of a reaction.  If an archer was hiding in some trees and took a shot at someone the defender would be surprised and would not be aware.  Or, at the least an awareness roll of some sort would be required.

In fact, it could be fun as a GM to mix a few bolt in with other spells so that defenders start anticipating the bolt, but the caster keeps changing to other spells so that the defender's OB is lowered.  And, of course, have the mage cackle everytime he fools the fighter.

[mocking bird]

Not unless the spell specifically mentions elemental bolts.

Elemental bolts do a physical attack.
Shields can protect against elemental bolts (granted, not as efficiently as arrows or melee attacks).
Therefore, the same rules that allow for "parrying" an arrow also apply to other similar physical attacks.
Bolt spells are considered a similar physical attack.
This does not grant new abilities to other spells.

However you are granting new abilities to existing abilities by reinterpreting (or clarifying if you wish) them. 

To simplify - you are saying elemental bolts are considered as missile weapons except where they are not explicitly mentioned in spell descriptions.  The converse would then also be true.

Now for some snooping in RMSS to see what is there as well as in Spell Law to check for continuity.

However regarding generic shield BD vs. elements, some differentiation should be made - wood vs. metal against electricity or even perhaps laen vs. cold for example.

[vroomfogle]

How exactly does the fighter (or any other defender) know that they are going to bolted?

Excellent point Super Crime-fighting Ace.  There's certainly no easy way to know that you are to be bolted  in advance, especially not without any spell knowledge.

[Marc R]

Or the ever popular "Bolt originating from a point other than the caster" ala "Lightning Call"

"Cleric's doing the mambo, I prep to parry"

Blam, lightningbolt vertical strike from the clouds.

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

To simplify - you are saying elemental bolts are considered as missile weapons except where they are not explicitly mentioned in spell descriptions.  The converse would then also be true.

Incorrect. I am saying the elemental attack is a physical ranged attack that can be affected by a shield (i.e. you get a shield bonus against it). Therefore, since the shield may be used to "parry" other types of physical attacks (arrows and crossbow bolts and sling stones), it is only proper that it can be used to "parry this type of physical attack.

To a shield, the only difference it sees between a pointy stick flying through air and dollop of fire shooting at him is "how well it stops the attack". It does not affect them both equally, and this ruling does not change that.

And Parrying with a shield does NOT affect the DB modifier granted by the shield. The "Parrying" is you acting more defensively to avoid being hit, and in this case, using a shield to do so.

Also, Shield do have 3 different DB modifiers, one versus melee, one vs missile, and one vs elemental attacks.. 2 of them are listed in Arms Law, and the third is listed in Spell Law.

How exactly does the fighter (or any other defender) know that they are going to bolted?

Excellent point Super Crime-fighting Ace.  There's certainly no easy way to know that you are to be bolted  in advance, especially not without any spell knowledge.

Which is why you must be aware of the attack. But the bolt spells are the least of your worries....

Just wait until you are boxed in by elemental walls, and have a stun cloud dropped on your head.

[Setorn]

Yet, what of elemental attack type and the kind of sheild.  I would think that a metal shield would be nearly useless agaist shock or lighting bolt?
Would that be right? 

Wood vs fire?

Others?

While this rule is now official, what about optional rules in the future?

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

Yet, what of elemental attack type and the kind of sheild.  I would think that a metal shield would be nearly useless agaist shock or lighting bolt?
Would that be right? 
Wood vs fire?
Others?

1) Very very few shields would be made solely of a single material except maybe wood, and even then it is likely to be covered in leather and possibly have metal rivets in it. The same applies to metal and other shields

2) Rolemaster does not take into account the composition of the shield in regards to what it can and cannot protect against. I don't think the core rules ever have. That is just too great a level of detail to be worried about. Remember, this just a game, not a "real life simulator".

While this rule is now official, what about optional rules in the future?

What about them? Future optional rules (and questions about them) will be dealt with they arise.

[Balhirath]

Hmmm Since the official ruling have been made I will not go into the debate, but just conclude that it is one official rule that I will not use.
I grant people bonus for shield and thats it.
Otherwise every semi spelluser who knows directed spells and thus can recognize them, will be able to parry any and all elemental bolt attack spell.   

[yammahoper]

Well, it DOES make sense that a physical barrier could stop a physical attack, bolt, sword or arrow.

What is needed in future rules may be a new shield stat.  It would look something like this;

Small Shield (buckler), +15 DB, wooden, 11 hits.
     Bucklers may be worn on armor and gain DB bonus only against foe attacked in a round.

Medium Shield (round), +20 DB, wooden, 17 hits.

Large Shield (knight), +25 DB, wooden, 24 hits.

Huge Shield (wall), +30 DB, wooden, 30 hits.

Weight and the like should be added, but the hits rating would indicate how many hits a missile or bolt spell must deliver to blow a hole through the shield, eliminating any parry bonus gained (figure attack without parry, if hits are to low, add in parry DB, refigure attack).  Additional rules for metal, or specific rules per bolt type, could also be designed.  All as purely optional material in the future editions of Battle Law or whatever, for those who want the extra detail.

lynn

[thrud]

I like the simplicity and the ruling will make it easy and playable.
I will have no problem using it.
A mage being charged by a seasoned fighter should be scared if his only weapons are a cuple of bolt spells.

[Ecthelion]

Some questions concerning the actual mechanics of the parrying:
a) If a character gets a "Must Parry" result, e.g. from a previous directed spell attack, would his parry also apply the next elemental bolt fired at him? I am not sure as Missile Parry might be a completely different action and perhaps not allowed in this state. [I guess yes.]
b) What if the defender is "Stunned", would he be allowed to parry? Would the OB be halved as for melee attacks? [I'd say yes to both.]
c) What if the "Must Parry" or "Stunned" result was from a previous melee attack, e.g. by a comrade of the mage, and the defender does not yet know of the mages directed spells, would he still parry the attack when he is actually facing the mage and being forced to parry? [I guess not unless the defender somehow perceives that a bolt is being fired at him.]

Most of the questions above also apply to parrying "normal" missiles, but the Missile Parry action is not explained in much detail in the rules, so I am not 100% sure.

[Ecthelion]

Another question: Should this ruling also apply to RMSS/RMFRP? I took a look at the Defensive Capabilities Table in the RMSS core book and it relatively clearly distinguishes between "Missile" and "Directed Spell Attacks", with the former being allowed to be parried and the latter not being mentioned as being allowed to. So the ruling seems to conflict with this.

P.S.: Someone should also update the Rolemaster Rulings page as it currently says "You may not parry directed spell attacks without the aid of specific spells. [R, 6/7/00]"

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

"Parrying Missile Fire" as explained on page 15 of RMC Arms Law is a distinct and separate action that needs to be declared (the description allows the cancellation of another action and the the"Missile Parry" so long as you have enough activity remaining).

Parrying is the act of reducing one's overall offensive capabilities to increase their defensive capabilities.

Now to your specific questions...

Some questions concerning the actual mechanics of the parrying:
a) If a character gets a "Must Parry" result, e.g. from a previous directed spell attack, would his parry also apply the next elemental bolt fired at him? I am not sure as Missile Parry might be a completely different action and perhaps not allowed in this state. [I guess yes.]

If he receives a "Must Parry" result, then he must parry the following round. He must still declare a Missile Parry, and meet the conditions listed on page 15, and follow the conditions layed out in the "Must Parry" description in order to for him to parry another elemental bolt.

A "Must Parry" result does not automatically mean that his "parry" will automatically be a missile parry.

b) What if the defender is "Stunned", would he be allowed to parry? Would the OB be halved as for melee attacks? [I'd say yes to both.]

Yes, and again, he must still declare the missile parry and meet the conditions for doing so.

c) What if the "Must Parry" or "Stunned" result was from a previous melee attack, e.g. by a comrade of the mage, and the defender does not yet know of the mages directed spells, would he still parry the attack when he is actually facing the mage and being forced to parry? [I guess not unless the defender somehow perceives that a bolt is being fired at him.]

And again, he must meet the conditions of the missile parry in order to perform it. If he is in melee with another foe, and a mage decides to send a shock bolt at him, he must know that is under attack in able to declare the missile parry.

Thus, in this last example, he turns and sees the mage casting. However, he has no idea what (unless he has something like spell lore) and no idea at who the mage is casting at (though if he is by himself, he can likely guess, unless his name is Groo). So while he can take a wild guess and declare a missile parry, he isn't really sure and could be shorting himself.


And here is something else to think about. You can call it a quirk of the system.

As I pointed out, Missile Parry is a specific, declared action. it is an action that requires 50% activity. The leaves only 50% activity for other actions, including OB. And according to the tactical system rules, you need to subtract activity modifiers (and condition modifiers) before doing an OB/DB split. And according to the rules, you can have both a Missile Parry AND a Melee Parry in the same round.

This would make it appear  that you can never use full OB while doing a Missile Parry. That you must always subtract 50 from the OB before deciding how much you are apply to Missile Parry and how much you are applying to melee parrying.

It would also mean that you need at least a minimum OB of 51+ with your weapon before you can even attempt a missile parry. If you are under the effects of "Must Parry" or "Stunned", you would need a minimum 101 OB to perform a Missile Parry since you only get 1/2 your OB, and that is before the -50 is applied to your OB because of performing the Missile Parry.

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

Another question: Should this ruling also apply to RMSS/RMFRP? I took a look at the Defensive Capabilities Table in the RMSS core book and it relatively clearly distinguishes between "Missile" and "Directed Spell Attacks", with the former being allowed to be parried and the latter not being mentioned as being allowed to. So the ruling seems to conflict with this.

This ruling applies ONLY to Rolemaster Classic.

In doing a quick check of RMFRP, I would have to say that for RMFRP, you cannot use the Missile Parry Rules to parry directed spell attacks. There are several spots where the way it phrases things makes me think that he folks that came up with RMFRP might not have allowed it.

I also had a chat with Bruce last night, and he pretty much confirmed that RM2 did allow parrying of elemental bolt spells if you had a shield.

P.S.: Someone should also update the Rolemaster Rulings page as it currently says "You may not parry directed spell attacks without the aid of specific spells. [R, 6/7/00]"

You would most likely want to contact Brent Knorr for that.

[Ecthelion]

Hi Rasyr,

thanks for your answers.

As I pointed out, Missile Parry is a specific, declared action. it is an action that requires 50% activity. The leaves only 50% activity for other actions, including OB. And according to the tactical system rules, you need to subtract activity modifiers (and condition modifiers) before doing an OB/DB split. And according to the rules, you can have both a Missile Parry AND a Melee Parry in the same round.

This would make it appear  that you can never use full OB while doing a Missile Parry. That you must always subtract 50 from the OB before deciding how much you are apply to Missile Parry and how much you are applying to melee parrying.

That would rather be true if Missile Parry were a 100-150% activity action, with 150% being normally required and 100% allowed but at -50.

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

As I pointed out, Missile Parry is a specific, declared action. it is an action that requires 50% activity. The leaves only 50% activity for other actions, including OB. And according to the tactical system rules, you need to subtract activity modifiers (and condition modifiers) before doing an OB/DB split. And according to the rules, you can have both a Missile Parry AND a Melee Parry in the same round.

This would make it appear  that you can never use full OB while doing a Missile Parry. That you must always subtract 50 from the OB before deciding how much you are apply to Missile Parry and how much you are applying to melee parrying.

That would rather be true if Missile Parry were a 100-150% activity action, with 150% being normally required and 100% allowed but at -50.

You lost me there.

Missile Parry is a specific, declared action. While the bonus applied to DB comes from OB, it is not part of an attack action like a normal parry is.