Topic: Do you resolve the full parry attack rolls when "Stunned" or "Must Parry"?

[yammahoper]

The odds of you lucky hitting your foe exceed the odds of fumbling.

I keep reading this opinion, but it seems it overlooks the base DB of the target rolled against with that 0 OB.  Figure that in, and fumble is far more likely.  If foes have a 0 DB, then yes, open ended roll is probably more likely, unless using a morning star, war maul, flail, etc.

[Marc R]

We did the morning star table look here:

http://www.ironcrown.com/ICEforums/index.php?topic=11116.msg140840#msg140840

With the proviso that AT vs Weapon matters a lot. Per the example done, even with the worst possible weapon morning star, vs AT 5 and 9 you needed at least 22 DB to make a fumble more likely than a crit, which exceeds the base DB of most people, unless 100+ Qu are common, or you're facing loads of elves and halflings with 90+ Qu.

Vs AT 20 you needed at least 72 DB to make a fumble more likely than hits damage done. . .72 is way more passive DB than you see outside a high epic game most of the time.

Of course, someone might be in one of the least likely AT combos, but over the average, lucky hits are more likely than fumbles. . . .the average fumble range in AL is 4.5333, which means open ended high results are more likely than fumbles, on average. . .and 96+ results at least hit in the majority of instances.

[rdanhenry]

With the proviso that AT vs Weapon matters a lot. Per the example done, even with the worst possible weapon morning star, vs AT 5 and 9 you needed at least 22 DB to make a fumble more likely than a crit, which exceeds the base DB of most people, unless 100+ Qu are common, or you're facing loads of elves and halflings with 90+ Qu.

Or they're using shields.

[Marc R]

Still gotta declare the shield on you. . .if you can't attack at +0, they can attack you, and declare the shield on someone else. . . that threat-risk mindset being my point. Without the risk, they can full OB you, and take the shield bonus on the next nearest person so they can kill you safely without being interrupted.

[markc]

Maybe with Stun you double or triple the base fumble for the weapon to make a +0 attack.
MDC

[yammahoper]

22 exceeds the base DB of most people?  I guess in your game.  +5 Qu and 20/25 for sheild, most of my weak level 1-3 villians have a base DB of 25-30.  As the levels increase, so does DB.

Level 5 orc will have +5 superior rigid leather (AT 9) with +5 weapon and shield.  Base DB is 45.

Typical villians parry with 1/3 OB (orcs with 1/4).  Defensive is half parry.  Against stunned foes, I am in the habit of 20 point parry as the +20 bonus for attacking a stun foe off sets (and I of course use allow parry to be applied against all frontal attacks as stated in other threads)

Also, the hit described is 1 hit point.  Meaningless for the most part.  A crit roll requires a roll much higher, enough so that unless the roll breaks 80, I'm guessing most GM's don't waste their time looking the "attack" up.  Rarely do I see foes dropped on hit points. 

There is a house rule I use/made for LA and SL foes: A troll typically has a St defense of 6.  What this means is unless you have a St mod of six or higher, it takes no concussion hits from melee attack.  A dragon typically starts around 17 for its St defense.  Critical damage is delivered normally.  If I was playing RM2 still, that would be a +60 St mod for the dragon, or a plus 10 for the troll.  A War Troll OTPH has a St defense of 11 (30 in RM2).  This allows the dragon or the troll to survive a missile barrage.

[Marc R]

Again, why bother directing the shield at them, unless they can attack back. . .forcing someone to declare their shield on you is as good as forcing someone to parry you for 20-25.

If they can't attack, go full OB, no parry, and declare the shield on someone else. . .

The roll referenced is to Crit AT 5 or 9 with a morning star (open the book and take a look), you need to roll over a 69 to AK those to ATs, a 30% chance. . .vs the 8% chance of fumbling the most fumbleable weapon in AL. You need 22 DB just to bring the two to parity odds.

That being my whole point. . . .

And you can keep circling around, but average fumble is less than 5, so the odds of open ending exceed average fumble odds. . .and 96+ results are usually quite juicy. (Average open ended up result is a 145). .That in and of itself is fully enough math to justify my point, without any of the rest. . .feel free to not roll, save some time. . .

But those of us who do roll are not merely showing our slavish devotion to the RAW, it's actually more of a dangerous attack than you choose to recognize.

[yammahoper]

Again, why bother directing the shield at them, unless they can attack back. . .forcing someone to declare their shield on you is as good as forcing someone to parry you for 20-25.

If they can't attack, go full OB, no parry, and declare the shield on someone else. . .

The roll referenced is to Crit AT 5 or 9 with a morning star (open the book and take a look), you need to roll over a 69 to AK those to ATs, a 30% chance. . .vs the 8% chance of fumbling the most fumbleable weapon in AL. You need 22 DB just to bring the two to parity odds.

That being my whole point. . . .

And you can keep circling around, but average fumble is less than 5, so the odds of open ending exceed average fumble odds. . .and 96+ results are usually quite juicy. (Average open ended up result is a 145). .That in and of itself is fully enough math to justify my point, without any of the rest. . .feel free to not roll, save some time. . .

But those of us who do roll are not merely showing our slavish devotion to the RAW, it's actually more of a dangerous attack than you choose to recognize.

No  wonder ince the foe is so foolish as to lower his shield/defenses rather than taking his foe seriously.

Toemato/tomato.

[MariusH]

The point must be that you can only use your shield against ONE target. If they use their shield against you, they cannot use it against another opponent, which can be a valuable contribution to the outcome of the battle. That said, against a high AT, you're most likely only causing a few hits, which is usually far less dangerous than a fumble.

In a one-on-one battle (which in our scenarios are rare), it's a different issue - the shield will ALWAYS be facing you, and your opponent gains nothing on doing otherwise.

However, MOST weapons DO have fumbles below 5, so there is little doubt that the chance of causing damage is greater than the chance of fumbling - unless your opponent has so high OB that he can parry a lot and still be guaranteed a max result unless he fumbles.