OK first i will explain how i think it is:

Only the defender (white dice), can buy initiative (and only once). if won the "old attacker" can't buy it back again.
And the dices(pool) used to buy initiative, can only be taken from dices not already put into an attack. ie _not_ as the combat simulator does, where it can take from the pool/dices already commited to attack.

Q: can the attacker buy back the initiative if taken from him?
Q: is this not giving the defender just TOO much an advantage?


2nd problem i got is when mounted. in OBAM there are a rule where you can succed in a riding check and then the combat round is only ONE exchange. fine by me.
Problem is when the person on the horse is charging most opponents just do a FULL evade/block thing, and then its very hard to to hit people with a ride by, becouse most weapons have higher ATN then shields DTN and TN of full evade. so the person on horse need to use his entire CP to attack (why not the round is only 1 exchange).
Even worse it is when the person on the ground declares that he wanna attack as his defence

then the person on the ground, also chooses to buy initiative and put some extra dices into it so the person on horse got no chance of winning.
ie again it an advantage to be a defender...even when attacked by a horse man? where are the "trempling charge of cavalry"?

This may seem fine if the rider is heavy armoured, but it simpy don't work when thinking on light cavalry....


PLEASE HELP ME UNDERSTAND!

Hi. I'll try to answer as best I can:

I believe I read somewhere (Jake wrote it in another post? The Book?) that the participants of a fight may buy initiative back and forth as long as anyone has any dices left in their CPs.

And the dices(pool) used to buy initiative, can only be taken from dices not already put into an attack. ie _not_ as the combat simulator does, where it can take from the pool/dices already commited to attack.

then the person on the ground, also chooses to buy initiative and put some extra dices into it so the person on horse got no chance of winning.
ie again it an advantage to be a defender...even when attacked by a horse man? where are the "trempling charge of cavalry"?

Tough questions.

Q: can the attacker buy back the initiative if taken from him?
Q: is this not giving the defender just TOO much an advantage?

Starshadow wrote: Since buying initiative (usually) happens before any maneuvers are declared, you use dices from your remaining CP. Any already declared maneuvers are no longer valid, and any comitted dices are returned to the dice pool.

Remeber that a charging rider gets a +4 dice bonus (+2 for charging, and +2 for height advantage) Add another +2 if agressive stance. This adds to a total of +6 CP! If the defender threw a white dice, he gets a -2 CP if he chooses to attack, also another -2 CP if attacking from a defensive stance. That's a 10 dice advantage right there...

I also think charging already includes the +2 from aggressive stance.

stances don't apply for full evasions, so no additional cost there

If you can buy back initiative as many times as you want, then there are no problems! i will use that!.

But in my group we have always played and understand it that you have have to declare (in reflex order), what you are doing before buy initiative.

this means that if both persons throw red, then the person with the lowest reflex says what he will do and sayinging how many dices he wants, then the other person say what he will do, and say how many dices.
THEN they roll the REFLEX/weapon ATN, to see who comes first, and after that then they begin to buy initiative with the REMANING dice pool, ie. those dices not put into the attack.

if its red vs white then manuveres are declare and as the "red" players says what he will do first, then the "white" can say he will attack as his defence. ie. the "white" player need to buy back initiative, if his tactics should work.

we think the is ok, becouse it then just means that not all people then just won't put all the dices into the first attack, becouse they always then just can take dices away from the attack if needing to buy initiative. and if he did not need to buy initiative, then he waste no dices...
either way the attacking has nothing to loose by making full out attacks.

the way we play, full attacks are something the players should think before doing., ie then the system works as Jake wanted it to be.

and if combining it with that you always can buy back initiative, then it 100% good by me!

Summary as how i think it is:
1. Both players first declare manover and how many dices they want to use in the manuover.
2. Then you can buy back initiative if needed, but only with already un-used dices from your pool.

OR:

ATTACK ORDER, INITIATIVE AND BUY INITIATIVE ORDER.

1. ”Red” with lowest Reflex declares his maneuver and number of dices used in it.

2. “Red” with highest reflex or “white” declares his maneuver and number of dices used in it.
(remember that a “white” defender declaring to use an offensive maneuver/attack as his defense, still counts as having chosen “white”, and therefore need to buy back initiative if he hopes to attack first, move on to 4.)

3. If it’s a Red vs. Red, then the combatant make a Reflex/weapon ATN test, the winner has the initiative. If a Red vs. White-defender situation continue to 4.

4. The loser of the initiative contest or if on “white” can now choose to buy back initiative, using dices from his CP pool he not have used for anything yet. You can always buy the initiative, as long as you have dices for it. No matter how many times you have lost it.

5. Roll dices…..

Where it gets really nasty is in the second exchange, because the attacker has probably already dumped all of his dice into his attack.

First off, let us not forget that in fact the plural form of the word dice is in fact, DICE!!
...
Secondly, let us not forget that when buying initiative one must pay a cost of dice(no bloody S here) equal to the opponent's perception.
When doing that against a horse, that's usually quite a few dice.
Thirdly, let us not forget that each GM is going to govern their game differently.. so in fact the rider making a charge might get a +2 for that, +2 for height advantage, and +2 for an aggressive stance.(And I beleive it's pretty easy to tell that an opponent is going to attack you when they're coming after you on horseback whilst you are a footsoldier regardless of the rider's stance.. so that might not fly with other GM's..)
Fourthly, let us not forget that OBAM states that a destrier/war horse grants +3 dice instead of the normal +2.
...

I'd just treat trampling moves like rearing or other some-such rule. It's been done before in our group.. but I forget the specifics of the GM's ruling on that. And the rider doing it didn't have the riding skill.. so his default TN was 13..

But that is neither here nor there, and neither am I
because I am going to sleep now.
-Ingenious

Starshadow wrote: If the defender threw a white dice, he gets a -2 CP if he chooses to attack, also another -2 CP if attacking from a defensive stance. That's a 10 dice advantage right there...

Finally, let's have a little tact toward people who do not speak English as a first language.

Much agreed Re: second language people, Lance.

I think that Brian's take on red/red, above, is how I would do it. Looks good to me.

Jake