Topic: RMC combat resolution

[Garet Jax]

Apologies for being a bit dense, but I'm having a hard time understanding the tactical combat sequence. I think I'm close but I believe the "resolve short and long actions" step is holding me back from true enlightenment.

I would appreciate it if anyone can give me a combat example where these two steps are used. The combat example in AL is good but didn't include anything in the "resolve short actions" step. I understand that this step resolves activities <50%. In the example, the two lesser orcs each advance 30% and attack Gauth the fighter. Everyone else seems to be taking actions requiring at least 50% activity so must wait for the next "resolve long action" phase. What I don't understand is why the 30% advance by the orcs aren't resolved in the short action phase but are lumped into the subsequent long action phase. Let's say the orcs instead declare that they draw their weapons (20%) and advance to attack the fighter but cancel that attack because they realize the magician is a greater threat and target him instead. Would this enable them to resolve their <50% activity in the short action phase?

Another bit of confusion in that combat example is with the greater orc's attack. I don't understand why cancelling his attack would cause him to lose initiative. I understand that action cancellation will cost you 10% activity in the round but wouldn't this just leave you with less remaining activity rather than loss of initiative?

Also, when parrying, does this apply to all attacks against you in that round against all opponents, or just the one you're fighting? Is there a total defense maneuver in RMC?

Thanks in advance.

[Marc R]

The issue of the orcs move-and-attack is due to the fact that the GM chose to combine the move and the attack into one complex action.

To give an example with more variety.

Khabal is wearing a ring of "Aim Untrue" (1x day, instant spell)

Brandin has a loaded short bow ready.

Khabal and Brandin are each standing 20' apart.

Declarations:

Khabal "Activate the ring (10% action, then 65% recovery time), run 20' to brandin (25% action)"

Brandin "Shoot Khabal (50% action), reload (60%, or More than a round activity).

Initiative:

Brandin wins.

Short actions:

Only khabal has one, he activates the ring of "Aim Untrue" for 10% activity. (Rolls BSC and makes it)

Long actions

Brandin won initiative, shoots khabal 50% action. . .rolls well, but the aim untrue makes the arrow miss.
Khabal spends 65% activity "recovering" from using the ring.
Brandin begins to reload 50%
Khabal runs up to Branding 25%

Upkeep:

none needed other than exhaustion spent.

Round 2

Declarations

Khabal, "I pound on Brandin 100% with Martial Arts strikes Tier 1, he's got 120 OB, he declares 90/30 attack/parry.
Brandin "Crap, he's right on top of me, I drop the bow, draw my shortsword, and 100% parry with my 110 OB"

Note, GM chooses to combine Drop Bow (10%) and Draw Shortsword (20%) into one complex action of "Drop bow and draw sword" (30%)

Initiative

Khabal wins.

Short actions

Only brandin has one, drops bow, draws sword. (kindly GM chooses not to make him roll) 30%. Drawing places brandin into a martial stance, so his parry DB will work even if he looses initiative. (110 OB - 30 for action already taken is 80 OB, 100% parry is +80 DB)

Long actions

Khabal pounds on Brandin for 90 OB / 30 DB, attack on the MA Strikes attack table, tier 1.

If he's still standing, brandin can make his 0 OB short sword attack roll since he went full parry.

parry is normally just one opponant, but Parry on multiple opponents is covered in the section, give it a re-read and if it's still confusing, ask again.

[Garet Jax]

Ah, it's clearer now. So even if you win initiative in the round your action can still go off later if it's in the long action phase. Thank you for the clarification, I get it now.

And it looks like you really can't parry multiple opponents since you'll need more than 100% activity to do so, ie you must be engaged (minimum 50% activity), and this would be impossible to do more than once a round with the 10% cost. Am I right?

Also, in the combat example on pg35, can you explain why the greater orc lost initiative to Athlon when it cancelled its attack on him?

Thanks again.

[Marc R]

Hmm, technically the Orc's "Cancel action" is an action, thus taking that spot in the rotation, meaning the greater orc would actually go after everyone else when his initiative came up again. The GM in this instance chose to interpret the cancel as a "Change target" since Athlon and Aurin are standing next to each other, combining the cancel and the switch target into one action, but penalizing the greater orc the initiative.

As to multi parry. . .if you have a 100 OB, and full parry for 50% activity, you get 100 0B - 50 (50% less than 100% activity) = 50 DB vs one attacker.

You still have 50% activity left to "Pay" for multiple parry to extend that 50 DB onto more opponants. Barring either 360 degree vision, or more than the usual number of limbs, it gets difficult to engage in melee and also be aware of more than 3 opponants, unless you're being mobbed, or attacked by spearmen in multiple ranks. (i.e. one opponant in each of your three visible forward hex facings.). If an opponant is behind you, you'll have a tough time parrying them unless you have some means of seeing behind you and a limb like a tail to do it with.)

[yammahoper]

Garet Jax...I always did like that character.  It was a shinning moment in Terry Brooks Wishsong book when he left the outcome of his final battle something of a mystery.  Sometimes it is best to not know everything.

I wonder if THIS Garet Jax is also a Gnome hater?

 

lynn

[Garet Jax]

Thanks again for clarifying. The idea of an initiative sequence being superimposed on the multiphasic round is somewhat difficult to grok for me as well. So in the example when you cancel an action, do you normally forfeit your initiative order and allow everyone else to take theirs before your "redeclared" action? Unless GM fiat allows you to combine the cancel and redeclared action into a complex action?

yammahopper: to tell you the truth, I don't remember much about the character Garet Jax other than the fact he was a badass swordsman and had a badass name. The name just stuck with me (and I read that book probably 20yrs ago), as did other names from the Shannara novels, like Panamon Creel, Garth, Menion Leah, etc. Oh, and I have nothing against gnomes...as long as they stay on the neighbors' lawn 

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

When you cancel an action, no you do not normally forfeit init as well.

The GM in the example, decided that since the Great Orc was not truly cancelling his action, only changing targets, that he needed to be assessed a penalty in addition to the normal 10% (plus the time of the new action). Therefore, he decided to say that the Great Orc's changing his target also affected his init score.

That whole bit was included to show you that you need not limit yourself to just activity percentage adjustments, that the GM does have some leeway in handling things.

As for wrapping your head around the system, it is relatively easy.

You have 100% activity, broken in a number of Sections (core rules say 2 sections, but there is an option to allow you to use however many sections you want, so long as they do not exceed 100%).

In each section, you cycle through the initiative order of the combatants, and any who has an action being completed within that section resolves that section. The GM cycles through the init order multiple times until nobody has any actions left that will resolve in that section.

He then moves to the next section and repeats the process.

For the default rules the sections are "below 50%" and "50% and above"

Remember, the tactical system is meant as a suggestion on how to handle things, not a hard & fast rule. You need to be able to allow for things that are not listed without worrying about whether or not it will break the system.

I hope that the above helps...

[Marc R]

"Cancel" is an action, so unless the GM combines it into another action, it takes a slot. . .it is a natural action for combining, since in almost all circumstances, it involves another action.

Movement tends to force you to think of activity as time (ala 10% = 1 second) but it's also attention. . . .if your character is 50% attacking, 20% perceiving and 30% advancing, those could technically be one combined "Attacking while advancing and looking around" 100% action. . .the fact that this is a game often forces the need for an order of resolution of actions, which results in defined sequences. . .but don't let your brain get stuck in the rut of "Attack for 5 seconds, look for 2 seconds, then advance for 3 seconds" as you are really doing them all at the same time most likely, and it's more a division of your attention, not time.

As Tim said, the mechanic requires the GMs attention, and the GM has a lot of ability to shift the flow and feel of combat.

Combining most actions will result in flowing activity in initiative order, while breaking down most actions will tend to give a very hard tactical feeling of simultanious activity. (Breaking all movement to 10% increments, or using the "smaller steps" option take that further.)

The GM may stylisicly choose one or the other, or both in different circumstances, depending on their needs.

That make sense?

[Garet Jax]

I think I finally got it. Will have to run a few combat examples myself to see all the nuances of a declare-roll init-resolve tactical system. I played red box MERP many moons ago but don't remember it being quite this complicated. I definitely see it being a bit more realistic and flexible though, but also more book keeping. Coming from d20, rolemaster is in some ways a breath of fresh air, in others it's relearning old ways of doing things although I do see a lot of subtle similarities in the two systems.

Thanks again for all the help. I know where to go for all my RMC questions now 

[Marc R]

It's been a while. . .how did it go?

[munchy]

Must be the day of reviving older threads - nice to see.
Anyway, would be interested in the test results also.