Topic: Can a Warg Parry?

[markc]

IIRC, the passage you quote was also in either a Spanish and or German RMSS copy of the book as well as in some RM2 versions of the book. I will check some of my older copies (If I can find them easy) to see if it is them.
MDC

[Cory Magel]

I don't recall where it was.  Might be older material than RMSS.  Of course, it may be that the lack of information lead a GM to disallow it.  RMSS 5500 actually specifically mentioned being able to parry using a martial arts style.  RMFRP 5800 removed that comment for some reason so there doesn't appear to be a ruling either way in it.

[markc]

I did check and both of my copies of RMSS AL are the same printing with the same wording and both of my copies of RM2 AL have the quote that Tommi, presented above.


Now I just thought of looking at my PDF copy which is 1999 reformatting of 1994 (pg 111) and it does have the text as Tommi describes above.


But it does not matter as sometime in the 2000's it was decided By Old ICE that animal can parry with their OB as well as use the mods in the chart. You as a Gm can decided to do what you want though.


This also shows a flaw that I think the new system will fix, one in which a central N-ICE supported DB of rules "official rulings" and "official changes" is kept somewhere on the ICE website.
MDC

[Tommi]

My both  AL  #1100's have this wording (second US edition 1989 and second US edition second printing 1990)  p.12  4.3 Parrying. Parrying melee attacks
My RMSS AL is actually #5520P   (scan of Third U.S. Edition, September 1994. Second printing September 1995.)

Wording is absolutely same in all including punctuation marks.

Those official changes newer ended in any books and sometimes even changed. It is basically hearsay. There was no official ruling list...

[Cory Magel]

Direct quotation: 5.4.3 p.115
"He must also have a shield, suitable terrain, or a Melee weapon.
Some weapons may only be used to parry with a certain
percentage of the wielder’s OB."

This is the 5500 RMSS Main Rule Book passage.

• He may also have a shield, suitable terrain, or a Melee
weapon. Some weapons may only be used to parry with
a certain percentage of the wielder’s OB (see the Defensive
Capabilities Table T-3.6). Note that he may also
parry attacks if making a martial arts-type attack (though
he has no weapon except his body).

I always just have to shake my head when more recent versions of a game get less clear.

[markc]

Official Ruling:
 As per Rasyr at O-ICE, Animal can parry with their OB.


 Rasyr, was the guy in charge of making RM rulings. If do not want to use the ruling that is fine, if you do not like the way Rasyr ruled on various things fine; but to say his ruling is "hear say" is "beyond the pale".


MDC   

[Ecthelion]

The Rolemaster Rulings contain, in the section about parrying, a rule saying "Animals may parry". Simple as that.

[Witchking20k]

Works for me.  I had never considered an animal not being able to parry- someone should you tube some animal footage and just see if there is any evidence of parrying or defensive actions in one of those National Geographic lion vs. lion videos...LOL

[Tommi]

Now that there is link (to  creditable site - still not ICE's own) It is not hearsay. That ruling makes huge difference!

I'll continue to use my house rule.

[Ecthelion]

We also have a House Rule that reduces parrying to 50% of the OB if the combatant does not wield a weapon or shield. This also applies to martial arts if no Weapon Kata is used. But it's only our House Rule. The official rules, at least according to the RM Rulings page, don't seem to limit parrying for unarmed combat or animals.

[Tommi]

MArts I do understand (in fantasy game) as those guys/gals are supposed to regularly combat with armed and intelligent opponents and MArtists often have bracers or whatever. For intelligent monsters without weapons MA reasoning is valid (e.g. 5th pale demon without weapon).  For animals it doesn't make as much sense as they don't have enough intellect and armed opponent is likely the first one they combat against.     

Tim's ruling is for RMSS/RMFRP  (even in that ruling collection he mentions that RM2 should have own rulings). I run most of my campaigns with RM2 - there RMC's offer the rulings and options.  This thread is in  RMSS subforum thus Tim's ruling is law.

How did Tim get to make those rulings? He was not credited in RMFRP (my issue is 1999 second reformatted edition - no printing year but I bought the book june 2003) and  in that book the wording on parrying is still the same. RM, RM2, RMSS and RMFRP had clear wording that didn't allow animal parrying - to me it looks like conscious choice.  Ruling date is 28th April 2000. Had the RMSS/RMFRP team  given up at that point? I can't remember ICE company history... 

[rdanhenry]

Animals certainly do change their level of aggressiveness. Watch wolves taking down a large herbivore. The herbivore when unable to escape goes full parry most of the time, but will take moments to attack in hopes of breaking out. The wolves to the front of their prey go more defensive, while those behind are more aggressive.

Lions regularly set up and drive prey into ambushes. Predators are tactical; human hunters probably first learned tactics by observing the beasts. Animals also understand the danger of weapons. There are plenty of places you can tell the day that deer-hunting season starts by the suddenly lack of deer sightings.

One also needs to be very careful when looking at rules in Arms Law. It came out before any of the other RM books as an add-on for other RPGs (read "D&D"). The rules were written for that usage. My version of RM2 Arms Law includes a specific statement that Character Law overrides Arms Law where there are differences. In the RMSS version of Arms Law, there is a chapter on "Using Arms Law without Rolemaster" or something along those lines. The rules there do not seem to have been updated at all, and they explicitly are not part of the RMSS rules.

[Cory Magel]

For animals it doesn't make as much sense as they don't have enough intellect and armed opponent is likely the first one they combat against.

I agree and don't provide limited intellect animals the ability to parry.  IMO their DB is the result of their defensive behavior.  A dog cannot parry, it can only dodge... which is not a parry (again, just my opinion).

How did Tim get to make those rulings? He was not credited in RMFRP (my issue is 1999 second reformatted edition - no printing year but I bought the book june 2003) and  in that book the wording on parrying is still the same. RM, RM2, RMSS and RMFRP had clear wording that didn't allow animal parrying - to me it looks like conscious choice.  Ruling date is 28th April 2000. Had the RMSS/RMFRP team  given up at that point? I can't remember ICE company history...

I believe he was an official ICE employee at the time and RM was part of his arena.  An official ruling was probably asked for and he was likely the most appropriate provider at the time.  RMFRP was almost surely written before he came on as an employee and, in the past, RM core rules would only have been written by formal employees.  Still, keep in mind (and not to discount his expertise at all), his ruling is no more valid than any other GM who understand the system well aside from the fact that he was an ICE employee.  He would most likely say the same.