Questions about FEINTING here.

[Tywin Lannister]

I have only one question, but if you have others you could ask them in this thread. Or not. Anyway, here is mine:

Player A announces a thrust attack with a rapier against the head of Player B. Using the modifiers on page 234, he gets -1 CP. The thrust is aimed at location XIII. Player B declares dice for defense. Player A then calls a feint (feinting from a thrust is allowed with rapiers).

Since player A did not strike the head, does he get back the 1 CP removed due to the modifier? I think this is the most logical solution.

Cheers

[Jake Norwood]

Hmmm...

I don't know. I'd say that it's actually lost, because the feint has to look convincing, meaning that it's on target. But I could see it working both ways. What does everyone else think?

Jake

[Lance D. Allen]

It would make sense. The modifiers are added to simulate how difficult a given target is to hit, due to size, mobility, etc. If you're not actually aiming for that location, then the modifier would not apply.

[Tywin Lannister]

The character (player A) *knows* he is going to feint, and he (the player) had some other very convincing arguments for getting that 1 CP back but I just don't remember it now :-)

[Brian Leybourne]

Yeah, that seems reasonable to me. It's never come up in one of my games, but I guess I would give the player the single die back.

Brian.

[Durgil]

I think I agree with Brian and Lance here, I would give the die back, but don't forget about the activation cost for the feint.

[Valamir]

I would disagree with the majority here, and NOT give the die back.

The reason the head has a penelty is because it is a small and highly moveable target area (like a limb).  In order for a feint to work I actually have to legitimately aim at that location just as accurately as if I were really attacking there.  If I'm sloppy about it (i.e. not paying the 1 die cost) then the target isn't going to buy it.

Of course, feints to the head are not the most effective tactic in TROS anyway.  For a feint to work you want your opponent to underdefend the initial attack so you can nail him with the extra dice.  Starting with the head defeats the purpose because, being the most vulnerable location (even at lesser wound levels) a defender is MORE likely to throw an extra couple of defense dice into the defense just to be on the safe side.

[Salamander]

I have read this and I have to admit, it is a tough one, but I am going to side with Valamir on this. If you are going to Feint and cut or feint and thrust, both have to be convincing for the other person to buy it and defend against that attack. If that means you are feinting to the head and cutting/thrusting to elsewhere you are still aiming at that point and you need to spend that point. A feint is a method of convincing them you are about to attack that location. If you want to convince him you gotta be accurate.

[Brian Leybourne]

Got to disagree :-)

All I have to do is swing or thrust my sword in the general direction of your head and you're going to want to protect it "just in case". If I was faking you out, you were (possibly) taken in simply because the head is so important to protect. That doesn't sound much like "you have to be convincing and thus spend a CP" to me.

Of course, that raises a "side" question not covered by the rules where someone is so expert compared to their opponent that they can see a feint coming. Maybe something based on the difference between ther proficiency scores of the two combatants is in order...?

Brian.

[Jason Kottler]

Still new to the full rules, so sorry if this is idiotic, but don't the Body Language rules cover this?

...When defending, by spending 2 CP dice at any time before the attacker throws his dice, you may roll PER / Body Language...This skill is both potent and risky...and should be used when you guess a tricky maneuver is coming (or has come such as a declared feint).

(emphasis mine)

TRoS p.33

[Irmo]

Got to disagree :-)

All I have to do is swing or thrust my sword in the general direction of your head and you're going to want to protect it "just in case". If I was faking you out, you were (possibly) taken in simply because the head is so important to protect. That doesn't sound much like "you have to be convincing and thus spend a CP" to me.

I agree with Brian here. We frequently try to instinctively protect our head/face if something as much as might hit there (e.g. someone throwing something at us at eye-height). It requires some training and conditioning not to instinctively raise a defense to protect the head. Which is why disagree with Valamir and think that feints at the head, especially against relatively little trained opponents, are a pretty good idea, since they're more likely to fall for it than a feint at some other positions.

[Salamander]

I am still new to the longsword, but something my teacher said struck me as interesting. He said that the person you are fighting has to believe you are going to strike and the trick to the feint is getting them to react to it. I admit that right now as a noob in the longsword I am going to flinch at just about anything, but as I become more experienced I will react later and later into the cut/thrust/throw/grapple/whatever, in essence as I increase in speed and skill I will be harder and harder to fool as I will be choosing to react later and later and moving faster and faster.

I am thusly of the opinion that the one CP for the head shot in this case would most likely be "spent" by a genuine fighter. Fencing is all about speed, skill & deception. Hence the reason for my belief that the die should be spent.

In the world of Renaissance fencing, everything is massively important to you, because if you get hit there, it's gone and in those days, medicine was not able to save quite a few who lost a hand or foot. Besides if you lived after sustaining such an injury the other guy wasn't doing his job.

As for a person percieving the feint, how about using a Perception test with the TN being either your opponent's Agility or Wit?