Passive block with shield

[bearer]

Yes the new kind in town has lot questions!

ok here goes....
1 on 1 fight, attaker swings with 5 dice to upper torso
now defender has his shield covering that area, does he have to spend CP dice to block or can he just ignore the attack and let it hit the shield, he knows that the blow will have to be really lucky one to get trought shields hefty armor points...
So question is how to handle passive shield blocks in combat?

Ofcourse attaker could just attack place where the shield is not, forcing defender to move his shield, but thats not the point in this now =)

Fighters could be weist deep in water on small tunnel, and the defender could cover himself pretty good with the shield, leaving possibly only head (and mayby sword arm, or with really little space he would have to move the shield bit to side and trusts and then back to def position behind that big shield)

I hope i was not too confusing! (or too much spelling errors)

Thanks again, for fast reply and warm wellcome !

[Brian Leybourne]

Gidday Bearer,

To answer both of your questions at the same time, as the rules currently stand:

To get the full benefit of a shield, you use it to block (DTN 5, usually). If an attack gets through, you get the passive AV of the shield only if it happens to be covering the area hit (which the attacker can usually avoid). This means that Bucklers only give their passive AV to the forearm, small (round) shields to the arm and shoulder, and so on.

TFOB (the upcoming suppliment) will have updated rules for this, as well as a way of positioning shields and parrying weapons to get extra benefit from them, but that's not in the rules yet.

Brian.

[Lance D. Allen]

It would not be unreasonable or unrealistic to assume that any attack to a region normally covered by the shield (shieldside arm, shoulder and torso, for a moderately sized shield) is passively defended without a block. If anyone intentionally attacks the shield with anything other than a beat or a bind or some other similar maneuver designed to get it out of the way, they deserve to get nailed full force by the defender, who deserves the full AV of his shield and any available armor.

[Brian Leybourne]

It would not be unreasonable or unrealistic to assume that any attack to a region normally covered by the shield (shieldside arm, shoulder and torso, for a moderately sized shield) is passively defended without a block.

Sorry, I guess I wasn't very clear - this is exactly what I meant.

Brian.

[Overdrive]

Morjens, fellow countryman :)

1 on 1 fight, attaker swings with 5 dice to upper torso
now defender has his shield covering that area, does he have to spend CP dice to block or can he just ignore the attack and let it hit the shield, he knows that the blow will have to be really lucky one to get trought shields hefty armor points...
So question is how to handle passive shield blocks in combat?

Ofcourse attaker could just attack place where the shield is not, forcing defender to move his shield, but thats not the point in this now =)

But what if the attacker is sneaky, and exploits the defender's shield. He attacks a location passively covered by the shield. Now if the defender relies in the passive protection and decides not to defend (maybe declares 'ha!' and attacks instead), the attacker can feint and impale the poor guy. I love the many ways one can achieve victory in this game!

[Muggins]

I was about to say, if you block passively, a feint looms oh so large!

In actual fighting, a shield fighter who does not correct his position to minimise exposure will also get feinted around.

James

[Lance D. Allen]

Very true, Overdrive.. such are the tactical considerations... But so is the fact that the shieldsfighter, suddenly having been feinted, decides to buy initiative for his attack instead.

It's all about the risks you're willing to take. Lowest risk idea is to go ahead and block anyway, and hopefully win the initiative for the next round. Higher risk scenarios are often what decide battles though, one way or another.

[Overdrive]

Wolfen, I am beginning to wonder if there exist some 'best' action/reaction/reaction combinations, like in chess. Intensive research and playing has produced a lot of opening sequences, that can go on predetermined (if you know how to play) for like 10+ turns. At points there are branches, so a 'queen's gambit' can become 'Italian' or 'Vienna' variations (or whatever :).

Just a thought. But I think I demonstrated how a sword&shield fighter can be screwed so easily if not careful. Me I'd probably leave about 6 dice left should I try such a trick, just for the opportunity to take the initiative back (on first exchange). The opponent would know this, and *probably* not try buying it, which makes my move even more efficient, but also risky. What happens if the opponent sim block/strikes with all dice? Now that's my take on the best action in the case.

[Lance D. Allen]

The chess analogy isn't out of order, but there is one prime thing which makes this different than chess, and that's the element of chance. In chess a "stupid" move is generally always painful if your opponent capitalizes. In TRoS a "stupid" move can be devastating if the dice are with you, and the "best possible" move can mean nothing if you roll badly. So you've got the same uncertainty of whether your move will go as planned, but you've the additional uncertainty of whether or not chance favors you.

Mind, the old saying is correct.. Chance favors the prepared mind.

Then the other old saying: There are old warriors, and bold warriors, but no old bold warriors.