Topic: Stun, Stun no Parry and Must Parry

[Finwe]

Hello!
It seems to be that according to the rules Must Parry is not a form of "stun", but even in that case I think it should be reduced after the stun rounds, because how do you apply MP and stun or MP + SNP simultaneously?
I think these rules have never been completely clear in the different editions of Rolemaster ...

[Sable Wyvern]

Not sure on the strict reading of the rules, but I've always treated this as the weakest status on the "stun" scale, for the purposes of natural recovery. Having said that, I agree it's not actually a form of stun; it wouldn't lead to unconsciousness in the same way as excessive stun rounds, nor would I allow stun relief spells to apply.

Theoretically, you could tack "lost initiative" on the end of that scale as well, although I typically apply it simultaneously with any other effects.

[Hurin]

In some ways though 'must parry' thus becomes worse than stun: there is no 'must parry' maneuvering skill like the Stunned Maneuvering skill. Must parry shouldn't be worse than stun.

[Sable Wyvern]

In some ways though 'must parry' thus becomes worse than stun: there is no 'must parry' maneuvering skill like the Stunned Maneuvering skill. Must parry shouldn't be worse than stun.

I don't use stunned manoeuvring, so not an issue at my table.

If I did, there would certainly be an argument to allow it to apply to must parry results.

In any event, unless you're out numbered, must parry doesn't have anywhere near the down-side of a stun. There's no bonus to hit you, and your DB will be through the roof when you go to 100% parry. It costs you a round, but at least you're likely to survive it.

[Majyk]

I thought Must Parry results forced one to parry at a max of 50%, or used to, and was modified to be worse depending upon the crit(ie. “Must Parry at -20”)?

Might be the pain meds, again, though!
 

[Finwe]

Ok, but my initial question is: how do you apply MP + stun or MP + SNP simultaneously?

[jdale]

As Sable Wyvern, I would just treat MP as the lowest version of stun. So, first you use up all the rounds of Stunned No Parry, then you use up all the rounds of Stun, then all the rounds of Must Parry. You'd never apply them simultaneously.

[Finwe]

ok, but in the case that it is not counted as a form of stun, you also reduce it after the rounds of SNP and stun? Or ignore MP?

RM classic book says:

Effects of Must Parry: Being knocked off
balance or out of position, either physically,
or mentally, results in the target being
unable to execute an attack. They can parry
with half their OB, or perform a movement/
maneuver at -25.
Note: “Must Parry” results are not
stun rounds.

OPTION 14: “MUST PARRY” AS STUN
Some GMs may wish to treat “Must
Parry” results as stun rounds. If so, treat
them as a weaker form of stun than “Stun”
so that they take effect and wear off last.
(Be aware that using this option makes
creatures immune to stun more powerful.)

[jdale]

I can see the argument for handling them simultaneously, but A) it's not at all clear how you handle simultaneous "can't parry" and "must parry" (decrementing the "must parry" count when there's no effect of "must parry" seems... odd), and B) that's not how I implemented it in our combat tracker.

We handle it as per option 14 that you have listed. Or, rather, we did, but both our campaigns have switched to RMU which renders the issue moot.

[Sable Wyvern]

Clearly, I was wrong about allowing full parry with must parry. In my defence, I've just started running the game again after a long absence.

[Hurin]

Clearly, I was wrong about allowing full parry with must parry. In my defence, I've just started running the game again after a long absence.

I have made the same mistake in the past, man! Don't feel badly about it.

[Majyk]

Option 14, for sure.

Good citing, as I thought I remembered a max of 50% parry being allowed - lowered further for extreme MP results(with a nega-mod).

[PeterFdH]

Just ran a session where a monster was put on a Must Parry but as he was low on hits, I chose to have him disengage and run away.  Is that correct or does he have to stay in melee and parry.
Also is the -75 penalty to any maneuver an error?  Previous versions had this at only -25.

[jdale]

RMFRP pg 209: "...the target of the attack must parry for B rounds with a penalty of -A. The only allowable actions are movement and maneuvering (modified by at least -75)."

So, movement is fine, but if it's any type of movement that would require a maneuver roll, it's at -75.

RMSS also puts the maneuver penalty in this case at -75.

[Lorgalis]

I also allowed my stunned players to parry with Max OB, though I gave the attacker a bonus to hit a stunned foe.
Of course it's only 50% of OB! Thanks.

Now another question: why is there a 50 PERCENT "penalty" here and not a fixed penalty like let's  say -30?
Why is the penalty for having lost half your hit points not a percent penalty, but -20?
Abdul with OB 140 can only parry with 70. (-70)
Jacky with OB 20 can parry with 10. (-10)

Abdul with 140 hits and OB 140 can attack with OB 120 after taking 70 hit points.
Jacky with 80 hits and OB 20 can attack with nothing after taking 40 hits.
The rules works just fine with me, but I'd like someone to explain why there's a percentage in one case and not a percentage in another case.

[PeterFdH]

RMFRP pg 209: "...the target of the attack must parry for B rounds with a penalty of -A. The only allowable actions are movement and maneuvering (modified by at least -75)."

So, movement is fine, but if it's any type of movement that would require a maneuver roll, it's at -75.

RMSS also puts the maneuver penalty in this case at -75.

OK but in this instance the creature had a huge base move (130) and was unencumbered so no maneuver roll was needed - a simple x2 at 75% action (with 25% for the disengage).  My players were not happy!  They feel that it makes the Must Parry redundant.

[Grinnen Baeritt]

I've always considered:

A "Must Parry" result to indicate that they must use "at least" half their activity and OB parrying... but cannot attack. If the player wants to spend the entire round parrying they therefore can use 100%.

If another crit then simultaneously occurs that states "Cannot parry", that character is then simply limited to non-parry defensive manuvers.

If the initial crit states "Cannot Parry" but the character is otherwise unaffected by other results it means they can still attack, but not parry.

and Stun simply makes the character less effective for that period of time at whatever it attempts to do. I treat the Stun Manuever skill as a way of reducing the negative effects whilst stunned. It would have no effect on other crit results like must parry or no parry.

[Majyk]

_{OK but in this instance the creature had a huge base move (130) and was unencumbered so no maneuver roll was needed - a simple x2 at 75% action (with 25% for the disengage).  My players were not happy!  They feel that it makes the Must Parry redundant.}


I’d say a “Must Parry” would limit movement to 50% since that is the penalty to any parrying done.
A special case could be made where it is a smaller hit, since it isn’t technically a Stun result as confirmed above.

So with a disengage, I’d say the beastie would be locked down to a 25% movement distance after a Disengage, tops.
(I think we made Disengage a 10’ straight back action from a melee formerly fought in vs any BMR distances.)

That said, just remember whatever is judged as canon for the NPCs should be allowed by the PCs!  I always kept a house rule sheet handy to add any in-game decisions that would be easy to forget, for future reference - and to prevent hard feelings, too!

[PeterFdH]

Thanks Majyk.  I really like that 'house rule' and it makes sense.

[Felros]

I have always accumulated stuns and must parry rounds... The more dangerous go first, so SNP then stunned then must parry.


About the penalty, it´s not that. You can parry at 50% BO for me means that only half the BO you use is a bonus to your parry. The other ar plain negatives to your dice rolls.