Topic: Melee vs Missile initiative

[Faustized]

Hi all !
i have some questions around a situation that happens a lot of times: trying to melee a ranged opponent ( with missile or spells).

Example:

A warrior with a sword is at 20 feet from the opponent with a bow and declares a react and melee and  to attack in snap, the bower declares to attack in snap too.They roll the initiative and the the swordsman win by few points so attacks the bowers first and he probably will take a bad hit . Is this realistic ?or the bower ,that can see the opponent coming from distance , has some initiavie bonus or simply get initiative?

Assuming that  during a charge  the initiative is of the longest weapon(SoHK), without quickness modifiers, hasn't a bow a longest range than a sword?

What does happen if the ranged opponent declares an opportunity action :" I attack the first who come into 10 feet from me"In wich way the initiative must be handled ? Theorically he strike first before the other melee him without any initiative roll.

Thanks tell me what do you think : )

[Kristen Mork]

Hi all !
i have some questions around a situation that happens a lot of times: trying to melee a ranged opponent ( with missile or spells).

Example:

A warrior with a sword is at 20 feet from the opponent with a bow and declares a react and melee and  to attack in snap, the bower declares to attack in snap too.They roll the initiative and the the swordsman win by few points so attacks the bowers first and he probably will take a bad hit . Is this realistic ?or the bower ,that can see the opponent coming from distance , has some initiavie bonus or simply get initiative?

The archer still needs time to pull back the bow, draw a bead, and release.  He's rushing (hence the snap penalty), but the swordsman is faster yet.  His sword is already in his hand and he closes the distance while the archer is still pulling back.  The archer is in trouble!  However, I would allow the archer to attack if he is not stunned, albeit with the penalty for shooting while in melee.  Now that the swordsman and archer are in melee, I wouldn't let the archer get off another shot (basically, I let the archer get off a shot provided he was not in melee when the missile attack was declared).

Assuming that  during a charge  the initiative is of the longest weapon(SoHK), without quickness modifiers, hasn't a bow a longest range than a sword?

The longest weapon rule was intended for two melee weapons.  It's a question of reach, not range.  You can't just hold out your arm and have your opponent impale himself on a bow.  I suppose you could use the bow as a club, and then the bow might get the benefit of reach.

What does happen if the ranged opponent declares an opportunity action :" I attack the first who come into 10 feet from me"In wich way the initiative must be handled ? Theorically he strike first before the other melee him without any initiative roll.

Thanks tell me what do you think : )

In your example, the archer would need to establish the opportunity action in a prior round.  Then, regardless of initiative, his action is resolved when the trigger is satisfied.  Although, I would sap exhaustion points (at the same rate as melee) for holding the bow taut the entire time.

[providence13]

Also keep in mind that if the warrior runs up to the archer, 20ft, that will reduce his OB by whatever 20ft is of his BMR. Reducing his OB will also reduce the overall amount he can split for DB. This is an explanation of why the archer will get a good attack on his foe.

I agree with the shooting while in melee penalty.

[Kristen Mork]

Also keep in mind that if the warrior runs up to the archer, 20ft, that will reduce his OB by whatever 20ft is of his BMR. Reducing his OB will also reduce the overall amount he can split for DB. This is an explanation of why the archer will get a good attack on his foe.

I agree with the shooting while in melee penalty.

Yup!  If we assume a BMR of 50' (average human) and a Run pace (I don't allow any faster w/o a Sprinting maneuver), moving 20 feet is 20% activity.  So, the sword attack is at -50 (-10 react attack, -20 movement, -20 snap).  That's a fairly substantial penalty.

[pastaav]

Example:
A warrior with a sword is at 20 feet from the opponent with a bow and declares a react and melee and  to attack in snap, the bower declares to attack in snap too.They roll the initiative and the the swordsman win by few points so attacks the bowers first and he probably will take a bad hit . Is this realistic ?or the bower ,that can see the opponent coming from distance , has some initiavie bonus or simply get initiative?

I would say that since striking distance of melee weapons are 10' the melee user that is standing 20' away will need to as a snap action use movement to close the distance. In many situations you can ignore distances like 20' since two characters who want to melee will both close the distance and will suffer the same penalty (approximately at least). The same is not true for a bow user that very much would like to keep his distance as much as possible.

Also keep in mind the penalty of -1 to initiative per declared 10% movement that mean the melee fighter will have a lower initiative during the round he must close the distance.

  Assuming that  during a charge  the initiative is of the longest weapon(SoHK), without quickness modifiers, hasn't a bow a longest range than a sword?

Longest weapon does only apply to melee weapons.

What does happen if the ranged opponent declares an opportunity action :" I attack the first who come into 10 feet from me"In wich way the initiative must be handled ? Theorically he strike first before the other melee him without any initiative roll.

His opportunity action will come in affect in the phase he does the action at his initiative. Opportunity actions can only delay attacks, never make them happen more early so it is not an issue. Unless the character hold the opportunity action since the previous round...then the bow user would indeed ignore initiative.   

[Kristen Mork]

Example:
A warrior with a sword is at 20 feet from the opponent with a bow and declares a react and melee and  to attack in snap, the bower declares to attack in snap too.They roll the initiative and the the swordsman win by few points so attacks the bowers first and he probably will take a bad hit . Is this realistic ?or the bower ,that can see the opponent coming from distance , has some initiavie bonus or simply get initiative?

I would say that since striking distance of melee weapons are 10' the melee user that is standing 20' away will need to as a snap action use movement to close the distance. In many situations you can ignore distances like 20' since two characters who want to melee will both close the distance and will suffer the same penalty (approximately at least). The same is not true for a bow user that very much would like to keep his distance as much as possible.

If the swordsman declared a move action, followed by an attack, I would agree.  However, the React & Melee option allows the swordsman to move and attack in the same phase.  The maneuver allows for 50 feet of movement, which seems too large.  For balance reasons, it may make sense to require separate move and melee actions, but this a) may be hard to explain in prose and b) lead to problems wherein the archer just keeps backing up preventing the melee attack completely (although perhaps that's okay).

[providence13]

Also keep in mind the penalty of -1 to initiative per declared 10% movement that mean the melee fighter will have a lower initiative during the round he must close the distance.

pastaav, where is this wonderful rule?

[Kristen Mork]

RMSR, page 74:
Declared Movement = -1 per 10% of maximum movement activity (based on declared phase)

I suppose the "based on declared" phase means that if you move 20% in the snap phase, you take a penalty of -2 in that phase (but not in any other phase).  That's an ugly modifier because you end up with a conditional initiative total.

I'm also not sure how it interacts with "react & melee."  With this option, you don't declare any movement.  When it's your turn you simply choose to move within range of your target.

In fact, you don't even need to declare in which phase you will be attacking (if I'm reading the option correctly).  And, you can move up to 50'.  Wow, that's a lot of flexibility for only -10 to the attack.

It sounds like the swordsman could declare "React & melee."  If he wins initiative, he can move up to 20% and attack.  If he loses initiative, he can delay until the deliberate phase to get an extra +10 to the attack.

(In my game you have to declare a phase for the "React & melee" maneuver, and you have to learn combat options, so we haven't seen much abuse of the maneuver.)

[MariusH]

Perhaps it should read "based on DECLARATION phase"? That would make sense. If you declared a total of 20% movement in one of your phases, you get -2 to initiative. Not sure why movement should be penalized such compared to other activity, though. And it seems weird to use it for "react and melee". I don't think we've ever used this at all.

We use "react and melee" quite a lot. It IS quite flexible (no target declaration needed, and equally important, no OB/DB split declaration needed until you attack or are attacked), and in my opinion the -10 is often a price worth paying. Note, however, that a "full melee" is +10, so the difference between the two is actually 20, which is far from unimportant. The "press and melee" is +0, and also quite useful, in my opinion. I think the "standard" situation is to use react and melee until one is engaged in melee, and then press and melee. Full melee is for when you're simply defending, and it's OK if your opponent disengages and moves away. Or if you REALLY need those +10, perhaps if you have to affect an opponent in snap. Or when your target is not expecting you, of course. Or if you don't have 80%+ left for melee (full melee is the only form allowable with as low as 60% activity; the other two require at least 80% activity, which, among other things, means that they cannot be used in the same round as you disengage, since that requires 25% activity)

[MariusH]

Actually, it reads "based on declared PACE", not phase!  . However, it still feels strange that using 20% movement gives you less initiative than using 20% for something else.

[providence13]

Although I can't say that I've ever seen that rule, I like it! Ok, the rule is listed one time on pg 40 in RMFRP.

It also makes a lot of sense, IMHO. If you have a 12 for init and have to run up to your semi stationary opponent, it is reasonable that the time it takes you to advance will make you act at a later time interval than you had initially. You start moving on that original init, however you might be at a 10 init (for resolving melee on this opponent) by the time you get there (and also take an OB penalty because you used less than 100%Act on a melee attack). It helps and is slightly more complicated if you have a spear..

[Kristen Mork]

It's still a weird rule.  Movement and melee are normally separate actions.  So, if you want to move, then attack, the necessary delay is built into the action sequence: move snap, melee normal.  This paradigm doesn't work for charges (hence the overriding rule in SoHK that the longer weapon attacks first).  The only place where it makes some sense is when you have react & melee: the react starts at X and finishes at X-K where X is the initiative total and K is the movement penalty.  But, then why doesn't a bow have the same issue: the attack starts at X and finishes at X-K where X is the initiative total and K is the time required to pull back the bow and aim?  Carried much farther and you have second-by-second combat (which is a great mechanism, but a) it's a whole lot more complicated than taking turns and b) probably shouldn't be fused with a round system).

I think there may need to be limits on react & melee, but if the swordsman wins initiative, he shouldn't have any trouble attacking an archer a mere 20 feet away.

[mightypawn]

Alright guys, IMHO you all missed the bigger picture. 

20 feet is more than 20% of a 50 foot (100%) movement.  This cannot happen as a snap action at all.  It has to be at least a normal action.  And the OB penalty would then be 40, not 20.  And the Archer with his snap action gets his attack off long before the swordsman has finished his movement.

If the swordsman is trying to charge... IE, get there in the 20% activity, then he has STILL spent all of his activity for that phase!  He has ZERO ob to attack with, minus all the associated penalties....  A foolish move to say the least.

[Faustized]

First of all thank you for your interest and advices.

I saw that many have misunderstood (because of my poor English  ) that I posted about the length of the weapon, I am not referring to the "real" length of the bow and arrow, but as an arrow can be shot at distance.

Second, I thought the scene with the bow ready to shoot,so that the archer had to shoot the arrow only.

However,all of your answers were very helpful especially these:

in your example, the archer would need to establish the opportunity action in a prior round.  Then, regardless of initiative, his action is resolved when the trigger is satisfied.  Although, I would sap exhaustion points (at the same rate as melee) for holding the bow taut the entire time.

His opportunity action will come in affect in the phase he does the action at his initiative. Opportunity actions can only delay attacks, never make them happen more early so it is not an issue. Unless the character hold the opportunity action since the previous round...then the bow user would indeed ignore initiative.   

and this one (a rule that we forget to apply  )

RMSR, page 74:
Declared Movement = -1 for 10% of maximum movement activity (based on phase Declared)

Again thanks to all

[Kristen Mork]

Alright guys, IMHO you all missed the bigger picture. 

20 feet is more than 20% of a 50 foot (100%) movement.  This cannot happen as a snap action at all.  It has to be at least a normal action.  And the OB penalty would then be 40, not 20.  And the Archer with his snap action gets his attack off long before the swordsman has finished his movement.

If the swordsman is trying to charge... IE, get there in the 20% activity, then he has STILL spent all of his activity for that phase!  He has ZERO ob to attack with, minus all the associated penalties....  A foolish move to say the least.

I don't think we did.  The React & Melee attack allows a character to move up to 20% activity during the attack.  With a BMR of 50', the swordsman would have a run speed of 100', so he can close the distance with -20.  When he arrives, his modifiers are: -20 for movement, -10 for react & melee, -20 for snap.  So, if he wins initiative, he can attack first at -50.  Whether or not he also takes a -2 to his initiative is open to interpretation.

FWIW, under your interpretation (that the attacker has 0% activity left for an attack), a character could never attack during the snap phase, and any attack during the normal phase would be at a serious penalty.  I don't think that's the intention.  If you attack quickly (i.e., during the snap phase), the attack only takes a couple of seconds, but you need to spend the next several seconds "recovering" (i.e., the attack still takes close to 100% activity).  This may not be wholly realistic, but it's necessary for play balance.

In the absence of snap, normal and deliberate attacks, the round ends up looking like a modified RM2 round: Missile attacks go first (60%) activity, spells are next (75% activity) and melee attacks are last (at 100% activity).

[pastaav]

I would say that since striking distance of melee weapons are 10' the melee user that is standing 20' away will need to as a snap action use movement to close the distance. In many situations you can ignore distances like 20' since two characters who want to melee will both close the distance and will suffer the same penalty (approximately at least). The same is not true for a bow user that very much would like to keep his distance as much as possible.

If the swordsman declared a move action, followed by an attack, I would agree.  However, the React & Melee option allows the swordsman to move and attack in the same phase.  The maneuver allows for 50 feet of movement, which seems too large.  For balance reasons, it may make sense to require separate move and melee actions, but this a) may be hard to explain in prose and b) lead to problems wherein the archer just keeps backing up preventing the melee attack completely (although perhaps that's okay).

That the React & Melee action allow for movement does not mean you should ignore the rule that modifies init. The penalty of -1 per 10% movement modified by pace multiplier should IMHO apply to the React & Melee attack. The penalty does of course apply to all phases during the round. If you don't use this rule then there is pretty much no downsides of using React & Melee. 

[mightypawn]

A snap action is MAX 20% action...  Shouldn't that make an attack be at -80??

[yammahoper]

Without reading the thread...use a rule that states if target is farther than 10' missile user has auti init.  A player freindly version would read "if archer is more than 20% of your base rate away, he auto wins initiative."

[Kristen Mork]

A snap action is MAX 20% action...  Shouldn't that make an attack be at -80??

A snap action can be an attack.  When a snap action is used for movement, you are limited to 20%.  During the snap phase, you can load a bow (50-70% action) or throw a spear (60% action) or even swing a sword (100% action).  The 20% limitation is quite narrow.

[mightypawn]

Without reading the thread...use a rule that states if target is farther than 10' missile user has auti init.  A player freindly version would read "if archer is more than 20% of your base rate away, he auto wins initiative."

Now that is the first common sense I've seen in this thread!