System Mod: the 'Press'

[Harlequin]

Heyo...

I posted awhile back about a campaign I was planning, which would use TROS as the engine for a Seventh Sea setting.  It's been proceeding quite satisfactorily so far, and I may post some Actual Play stuff later.

We've tinkered.  The system as written is not perfect for a rapier-focused, mostly non-bloody duelling setting, and so far I'm reasonably happy with the tinkering results.

But one particular rules mod we've recently introduced has shown all the hallmarks of something that, beyond being of interest to our group, should be shared with Jake and Brian and the rest of the TROS enthusiasts around here.  As I said in my original post, rapier fencing is something I'm good enough at that I think my evaluation is accurate when I say that this change seems to make TROS duelling feel even more like real duelling than it did before, which is saying a lot because TROS didn't leave a lot to be desired in that department.  Which is why I wanted to share it.

Tentatively, we're calling this the Press, as in pressing the advantage or pressing the attack, though it also works just fine if done from the defensive, pressing into the attacker's space.  Mechanically, it's implemented a lot like a Feint.  In an exchange, after the attack is declared and the defense responds, either (or both!) combatants may elect to Press by spending a one-die activation cost, and then any number of additional dice.  Verbally, "...and I'll Press for three."

Each of those additional dice counts as an automatic success - for the purposes of determining who emerges with the initiative, only.  They are not rolled and do not affect anything else in the resolution.  [Exception: if you have dissimilar weapon ranges, I assume that even if a blow fails to land or a parry fails, Press dice do help you with moving to your preferred distance.  Not often a big deal in our game except when rapier-and-dagger moves to corps-a-corps range against rapier-and-anything-else.  Also, clarification: If you successfully Counter, but lose the initiative, you do not get to follow-through on the Counter.]

Thus, if Alphonse thrusts with two dice and Presses for two (total five dice spent), and Philippe parries with four dice, then although the parry will probably be successful, odds are that Alphonse will retain the initiative and redouble his attack on the next exchange.

Tactically, it somewhat overlaps with the idea of stealing initiative, but this is mechanically simpler and lacks the "desperation" feel of the stealing-initiative tactic.  And it has some really neat effects on the pacing of things and the dice tactics.  

First off, it adds a new uncertainty to the "probing attack" of one or two dice, which to this point is only meaningful as a possible lead-in to a Feint.  Second, it's relevant even during the second exchange of a round, because the initiative (unlike the dice-pool advantage of overcommitting your opponent to a parry by using a feint) carries over to the next round.  It thus cuts out some of the "you might as well attack/parry with everything left" factor during the second exchange in each round, which had always felt like a small flaw in the system.  Third, it adds a tactic of intimidation which I've seen work over and over again even in Olympic-style sabre, whereby the sustained offensive of one side leaves the other one no room to mount an attack comfortably, often flustering the defender and causing him to overreact, or else simply presenting him with a situation where any mistake can be "fatal".

Anyway.  I've been out of touch for a while, so there may be something like this already planned for TFOB or some such... but either way, I'm interested to hear any comments or questions on the modification.  I heartily commend it to you and give it freely to Jake and co. if they want it.

- Eric

[Caz]

"rapier-focused, mostly non-bloody duelling"

Hehehehe

Oxy moron?

[Harlequin]

Naaah.  It's not like swashbuckling is a realistic genre... when's the last time you saw a disembowelment in the Scarlet Pimpernel?

Grin.

[Mike Holmes]

I like it a lot. It reminds me a lot of how the game Zenobia handles things, basically making most of combat a battle to achive position. Followed by a quick finish. Very cinematic.

I like it.

Mike

[spunky]

I realy like this Maneuver.  Besides Rapier, Case of Rapiers, and Cut & Thrust, which Proficiencies would Press apply to?  Or rather, are there any it wouldn't apply to?

[Snikwas]

You could also have a defensive manuveur to counter the "Press". It would work in the same way. The defender chooses to committ dice from his/her CP that would only be used to cancel the "Press". It would be combined with another defensive manuveur, such as "Parry". The defender would have to select this manuveur without knowledge of whether his opponent is using "Press" or how many dice are committed to it. It would add another element of cat and mouse to the duel.

I have even thought of a name for it:

Depress

I couldn't resist the that.

[Harlequin]

You should always, always resist the 'that' when it comes upon you without warning. People have died for less. :)

But as a note, the defender counters a Press by Pressing back.  I'm still torn on whether he gets to do so in response, having seen the Press, or not; it'd need playtesting.

And as to the other question, I'm not sure that I can think of any Proficiencies this would not apply to, although perhaps the activation cost should be higher for some of the heavier proficiencies - it's harder to keep a greatsword repeatedly on the offensive, without giving pause for thought, than it is a rapier.  Not over two dice activation, though; the higher ATN still covers it somewhat.

Actually, in non-swashbucking settings, the biggest factor that would affect this maneuver would simply be armour.  This "counter-maneuver" is already available, but enhancing the relevance of Initiative with the Press would make it more popular.  In stout armour (and with a good Toughness), against a light weapon which is using small, Pressed, attacks to keep its distance, your best recourse is just to let him expensively buy the initiative, and then declare an attack anyway.

[kenjib]

How about making it like a game of chicken - each side can continue to add press dice (only pay activation the first time) in response to the other until someone gives in.  That way it can have some really nice bluff elements (especially if you hide the size of the dice pool like Jake does) in terms of trying to push someone to exhaust their combat pool prematurely.

[Harlequin]

Dunno - I think that would be bad for the game's pacing, which intentionally keeps the complexity of each exchange down as much as possible.  My inclination is just one chance each.

[Mike Holmes]

I dunno, I like Kenjib's idea. TROS is actually a little complicated. It's pacing is based on the fact that, though it sometimes takes a while to work things out, the result is always satisfying. Combat is short because it doesn't take a lot of rounds like other games, not because it's simple.

So I think that as long as the mechanic is interesting to play out it's OK. And there's nothing more dramatic than an auction. I think it would rock. And encourage players to add more dice, BTW, which further's your goal, if I'm not mistaken. You want a lot of dice in Press on both sides, right?

I like that idea a lot.

Mike

[Harlequin]

Mmm - it varies.  In play so far, Press has seen use about as often as Feint... only when you need it, and to tactical effect.  I like that because it helps distinguish fencing styles and so on; one school - probably an Eisen one - may teach, "Never give up the offensive," while another doesn't much care and in fact tends to cede the initiative to the opponent quite frequently.

So no, having this make everything be about initiative was not my intent, though it'd be a valid implementation.  Kenjib's idea would make sense if, say, you had two members of the first school I mentioned above, facing off... but since that's not intended to be the general case, and giving the option of an auction is one more decision point, I'll stick with only the one chance per exchange.  (If I had a PC member of the above school, it might be different - it would be a greater focus of the game.)