I just finished a duel between my character Tiberius, and Rattlehead's character Julianos. I lost due to a bad gamble.. The combatants and battle is posted below. After that are a few questions brought up by the battle.

Julianos Vainsteel..... think Iningo Montoya if he was well dressed and handsome....... oh.. and he wears foppish clothes of high freeman quality. A large hat with a massive feather protruding from it.... lots of purples and scarlets... with billowing white sleeves on his "shirt"... of average build.. muscular perhaps... slightly shorter than average, but not overly so..

ST: 4 AG: 7 TO: 6 EN: 4 HT: 3
WP: 3 WT: 3 MA: 4 SO: 5 PE: 4
RE: 5 AM: 5 KD: 5 KO: 7 MV: 7
Proficiency: Case of Rapiers 8
CP: 13

Armor: Sleeveless Leather Jack: AV: 2 for areas III, IV, X, XII and XI

Weapons: 2 rapiers, and a poniard in his boot
Rapier: 1 handed, Medium length -- ATNs: Cut: 6 Thrust: 5 -- DTN 8 (5 vs light weaps) -- DMG: Cut: ST-3 Thrust: ST+3

Tiberius is a man of large stature. He stands at 6'7", and looks to weigh well in excess of 200 lbs. He looks about middle age, with salt-and-pepper black hair, and unflinching steel grey eyes. His features are typical of the Stahlnish.

ST: 5 AG: 6 TO: 5 EN: 4 HT: 4
WP: 4 WT: 4 MA: 4 SO: 2 PE: 5
RE: 5 AM: 5 KD: 5 KO: 7 MV: 7
Proficiency: Cut and Thrust 8
CP: 13

Armor: Chain shirt with leather sleeves, iron bracers, and an arming glove.
AV: 4 to areas iii, iv, x, xi, xii;
AV: 2 to areas vii, xiv
AV: 3 to forearms(areas vii, xiv)
AV: 4 to left hand ( areas vii, xiv)

Weapons: A short sword, a stiletto in his belt, and the aforementioned arming glove.
Short sword: 1-hand, Short length, --ATNs: Cut 6, Thrust: 5 -- DTN: 7 -- Dmg: Cut: ST, Thrust ST

I think he's pretty much covered all the questions we ran into during this "test run", but I would like to explain our initiative system. Since we were using Instant Messages, we couldn't very well throw dice on the table. What we did was one of us would send a message to the effect of "begin count" and we would count off roughly 5 seconds (while typing an R or W for the die color) and then send the result. That way we more or less simultaneously "threw our initiative dice".

We also had a lot of fun with this duel as well! :-)

Brandon

In the DOS program they have on-site, initiative defaults to the other party when one party runs out of dice.

-Jeff

Yeah, we used the combat program as an example sometimes. For example, to decide if we were to let the leather jack cover the groin area too. But what we're looking for is for someone (hopefully Jake, if he has a moment) to look it over and say "Yes, you interpreted the rules correctly" or "No, it's actually done THIS way". I guess we're just being "rules-paranoid", but I don't really want to answer rules questions based on what it seems the combat program is doing.

Thanks,

Brandon

Wolfen wrote:
Question#1: In the second round, Tiberius successfully defended and struck. Would he gain initiative? And if so, what would be the result of him having no more dice? The round ends, or initiative defaulting to Julianos, who still had dice?

Question#2: Does a leather jack cover zone X? I made the call, for that battle, that it covered the lower abdomen, but not the groin or hip. Does this sound alright?

Question#3: I believe there was more to it, but could find nothing. If, on a double attack, the reflex contest is a tie, what determines the order of strikes?

Question#4: Was my use of the arming glove to parry by grabbing the blade correct?

Question#5: Is 5 the correct DTN for a Rapier -vs- a short sword? We assumed so, because Tiberius was using a Cut and Thrust style, and it is a lighter weapon.

1. Sorry, forgot to mention that my parry was an exact tie, where it says that initiative goes to the attacker. But it's a moot point, because you said that he gets to attack because he had dice, and I didn't. Thanks.

2. Thank you.

3. Thank you, we did it correctly, then.

4. So what if he were attacking with something else? The arming glove is designed to grab blades, so I should be able to grab any thrust, shouldn't I? Also, can an arming glove be used to parry a cut? I could see it being possible in reality, though difficult. What would your call be?

5. Thank you.

Thanks so much for the answers. It was, personally, a very enjoyable duel, and I will try to a couple more whilst waiting for my opportunity to actually play.

Wolfen wrote: So what if he were attacking with something else? The arming glove is designed to grab blades, so I should be able to grab any thrust, shouldn't I? Also, can an arming glove be used to parry a cut? I could see it being possible in reality, though difficult. What would your call be?

Jake, thank you VERY much for your help. I would like some clarification on point five (rapier DTN) though, if you will. To make it quick and easy, you can just reply with a yes or no. :-)

Am I correct in this reading of the way this is handled: The rapier has a DTN of 5 against ALL thrust attacks, regardless of weapon size. Against big weapons, it's DTN is 8 for cut (swing) attacks and 5 against thrusts. Against small weapons it's DTN is 5 for all attacks (cut or thrust).

Is that right?

Thanks,
Brandon

PS: I normally wouldn't split hairs over little things, but I like rapiers and use them a lot with my characters.

That's how I handle it.

Thank you again, Jake! I'll leave you alone for a bit now... :-)

Brandon

Hey Jake, they used their opponent's ATN as a TN for the reflex roll. I thought it was to be done with one's own ATN as a TN. I know that this isn't the most important part, but it could do with some clarification.

Lyrax wrote: Hey Jake, they used their opponent's ATN as a TN for the reflex roll. I thought it was to be done with one's own ATN as a TN. I know that this isn't the most important part, but it could do with some clarification.

::frowns, re-reads the last two posts a couple times... runs to grab his RoS book, turns to the page, looks... then sighs:: Gah. Not that I doubted you Jake, but I had to see where I obviously mis-read. So did Brandon too, it seems, though I was generally the quicker finding things, so he may not have even found the page to read the rule. Yeah, it was an oversight, but I would likely have continued in that vein if Lyrax hadn't pointed it out.
Thanks.

BTW, it's going to get slightly confusing with 2 Lances in here, but I suppose I'll cope.

FWIW, I misread it the same way at first as well, but when I taught a friend it sounded wrong, so I looked it up and realized my error. Anyway, maybe a slight change in wording is in order.

-Jeff

Oh yeah, I meant to mention that to you, Lance, when we were chatting last night. I saw that we had done it wrong when I was running some combats on Saturday. During the actual duel, I had looked that up, but I missed it too... It seems to be worded clearly, so I don't know why it's so easy to screw up.... LOL

Brandon

Jake - How long do you want the finished product? And do you have any comments, one way or the other, about anything? I assume you at least liked the introductory part of it.

Those of you who are clueless - ignore me. I am of no consequence to you. Yet...

Like a girl's skirt...long enough to cover the subject, short enough to keep interest. We'll be using it for the website.

Jake

Ok... another question regarding the duel between Julianos and Tiberius:

Lance and I we're chatting and he brought this to my attention...

We dropped dice (red or white for initiative) after every round. It says in the book, on page 73 (top of right column) that you repeat step 2 every round. BUT, in the example on page 89, they start round 2 without dropping dice. Did we do it wrong then? It would appear so.

The way I get it, there are multiple ways to determine initiative: either die dropping or the result of combat exchanges. When step 2 is repeated, it's done the latter way, unless there's a pause.

In other words, I think we made another mistake in the duel there. What's the "official" call, Jake?

Thanks,
Brandon

The red/white die thing is only thrown at the beginning of a bout or after a pause. Where it says "determine initiave" in Step two, remember that that is usually done by just giving the initiative to the winner of the last exchange. That's quite clear throughout the examples and other rules in the chapter, but I can see how confusion could set in (especially when people use other RPG's as thier example). Thanks for the heads up.

Jake

Thanks again Jake! You never cease to amaze me. I can't think of any game developer who goes to such lengths to help his community! You sir, are one cool dude.

Brandon

Hey Brandon, check out any game on this website, and I bet you'll find the same or similar level of support. I'm getting the feeling that this level of support is a good part of what indie published games are about.

As for questions... I can only hope Jake isn't getting tired of the two of us, specifically... 'cause I got another one highlighted by last night's duel. First though, a short rave..

I love this game. I mean, you totally defeat an opponent in almost any other game, and you get to go describe it to your friends as "Yeah man, I took him down to 1 hit point in 3 good shots!" whereas in Riddle of Steel, it's more like.. "After some brief exchange, I eventually gave him a good gash in the head, dislocated his hip with a body slam, and shattered his knee." Additionally, when I decided that my character would try to take his opponent alive, I didn't have to go looking for any rules covering subdual damage or such.. I just directed my shots to non-lethal areas and non-lethal attacks, the same as you would in real life if you wanted to take someone down without killing them. It's intuitive like that..
Although it does take some time when both players are exploring new maneuvers, and are constantly having to stop to read rules, and verify the rules for each other. ::grins::

Okay, so here's my question.. Tiberius has Cut and Thrust as his highest proficiency, but he also has brawling pugilism. For the sake of not bogging down the battle, I just asked Brandon to make a judgement call if it was okay for me to use brawling maneuvers (specifically the offensive grapple) with my full CP from Cut and Thrust. He said it was okay with him, so I went ahead.. But I'm curious about that. I know it's pretty cut and dried if you try to use maneuvers from a proficiency you don't have (use the defaults) or if you switch to a different weapon style (say, if I'd dropped my sword and arming glove just to grapple) but what's the call if you want to use maneuvers from another proficiency you have, but at a lower level, in addition to the standard maneuvers from your primary proficiency?

Also, with grappling, it describes two types of grapple... The set-up and the straight grapple.. I assume then that you can toss someone in a straight grapple, but that you cannot pin unless you do a set-up grapple first. And is it possible to use a Defensive Grapple (from Cut and Thrust) to grab the opponent's weapon and attempt to disarm them? I thought I'd read something to that effect, but I couldn't find it when I went back to verify it.

That's all from me for now. Thanks in advance.

I wrote: Okay, so here's my question.. Tiberius has Cut and Thrust as his highest proficiency, but he also has brawling pugilism. For the sake of not bogging down the battle, I just asked Brandon to make a judgement call if it was okay for me to use brawling maneuvers (specifically the offensive grapple) with my full CP from Cut and Thrust. He said it was okay with him, so I went ahead.. But I'm curious about that. I know it's pretty cut and dried if you try to use maneuvers from a proficiency you don't have (use the defaults) or if you switch to a different weapon style (say, if I'd dropped my sword and arming glove just to grapple) but what's the call if you want to use maneuvers from another proficiency you have, but at a lower level, in addition to the standard maneuvers from your primary proficiency?

Wolfen,

I don't agree with your interpretation, mostly because it sounds too forgiving<g>. I'm probably being silly, but I'd pull dice from the combat pool equal to the difference between the two proficiencies.

For the situation where, say, a cut-n-thrust counter ends up in a grapple, I'd keep the cut-n-thrust pool as-is for the follow-up. I assume that the specific grapple being used is part of the cut-n-thrust proficiency. Later grapples, though, I'd deal with as above.

Standard disclaimer: I'm not Jake. :-)

Also, what places the activation cost at 4 (as described under pugilism, offensive grappling (2 or 4))?

Jaif wrote: I don't agree with your interpretation, mostly because it sounds too forgiving<g>. I'm probably being silly, but I'd pull dice from the combat pool equal to the difference between the two proficiencies.

For the situation where, say, a cut-n-thrust counter ends up in a grapple, I'd keep the cut-n-thrust pool as-is for the follow-up. I assume that the specific grapple being used is part of the cut-n-thrust proficiency. Later grapples, though, I'd deal with as above.

I assumed the 2-4 was the difference between a 2-round setup and a 1-round do-it-all-at-once. It's standard wrestling: you either work a position first, then the take-down is easy, or you risk all (spend many dice) and shoot for an immediate take-down.

Example: Default from pugilism to C&T is -4. If my Pugilism proficiency were 2, that would be a penalty of -6!

Jeff,

Big positive on that last sentence. Jake affirmed it to me just last evening.

Just to run it down with all steps in:
- Say Proficiency X permits Proficiency Y at -4.
- Buy Proficiency X for six dice, getting Y at X-value minus 4, equals 2.
- Spend (say) three more Proficiency points on Y, and its value is now 2+3 = 5.
- You have X at six and Y at five.

Best,
Ron

I think you've totally misunderstood me. My character is a beginning character (as I have not played other than a few duels, he has not advanced) and all proficiencies have been bought with beginning Proficiency points. I did not get my second proficiency through character advancement, so I don't get to start it off at default level... If I could as a beginning character, I'd have a MUCH higher pugilism, that's for certain!

My proficiencies are as follows:

Cut and Thrust: 8
Pugilism/Brawling: 4
Bow: 3

(Priority A for 14 points +1 point for being Stahlnish)

At this point, I *HAVE* pugilism. I am not defaulting to it when I use it in combat. I paid the points so I wouldn't have to default when I wanted to punch someone or grapple offensively.
if what you said in 2) were true for a beginning character, I could spend my 4 points to raise Pugilism from it's default of 4 to 8, which would effectively give me 19 points. Further, I could instead spend 1 point to raise pugilism to 5, spend another point to raise dagger to 5 (-4 default) another to make greatsword a 6 (-3 default) and dopplehander a 5 as well.

While the advancement rules do indeed state that you can buy a new proficiency as if it were it's default level, but this does not apply to new characters. If you did not realize my character was new when you made the assumptions you did, I then apologize for my lengthy examples.

So in the case as I described above, doing as you said in your previous post would be disadvantageous. Perhaps my suggestion is not the best either, but I can think of nothing better at this time.

While the advancement rules do indeed state that you can buy a new proficiency as if it were it's default level, but this does not apply to new characters.

::raises an eyebrow::

Ron Edwards wrote: Big positive on that last sentence. Jake affirmed it to me just last evening.

Just to run it down with all steps in:
- Say Proficiency X permits Proficiency Y at -4.
- Buy Proficiency X for six dice, getting Y at X-value minus 4, equals 2.
- Spend (say) three more Proficiency points on Y, and its value is now 2+3 = 5.
- You have X at six and Y at five.

Thats an interesting list of proficiencies, especially since you told me the character uses a short sword.

It sounds like your character would be at his best effective in tight spaces. Was this the intent behind making him, or did you just think (like me) that short swords are cool? ;)

as for building off defaults during chargen... you're right, it doesn't say that, and I'm not sure how I'd feel about that. I think it'd depend on the players. On one side it fits logically into things to let new characters build off the defaults. ("Why would I bother having a 2 in proficiency A when I start I can get a default value of 4 for free?")

On the other hand, some players who don't 'get' that TROS isn't just about combat would jump for joy at this for all the wrong reasons. (Wrong reason being "Sweet! I get to kills things in different ways! I ROOOL!")

While the advancement rules do indeed state that you can buy a new proficiency as if it were it's default level, but this does not apply to new characters.

Isn't this lively...math, math, math...

It was always my intention that you can train off of default with a new character. Thus with your character, Lance, you've got C&T at 8, so you default to Pugilism at 5 (8-2=6, but 5 is the ceiling for a default). You could then throw a few of your points into it and have a pugilism of, say, 7, and then put the other 2 points into something else.

As far as throwing offensive grapples in, that shouldn't be difficult at all, really...the main issue is going to be one of range, and of the fact that you've only got one hand. Grabbing your opponent (or his weapon--barehanded or otherwise) was EXTREMELY common in period fighting, although this is more often as part of a counter or as a response to an attack--thus Grapple's placement in the C&T repetoire of Defensive Manevuers. Simply rushing in and snatching the opponent's weapon is pretty hard to do, onthe other hand.

It also seems to me that a lot of your solutions are mathematically complex, when simplicity might be better (look who's talking...ha!). I would allow it for a price of half the difference between the two proficiencies (as if you were switching prof's mid-round, and kept the percent of dice you have left over, not the quantity). I might penalize that with one more die, because of the sudden shift in "modes," but that seems excessive to me given the range penalty that's bound to get involved. An even easier way to handle it is require that you use one proficency for a full round, so you could switch over to pugilism for one round, then back to C&T on another.

As a side note, grabbing your oponent's weapon is a manevuer we're saving for the Flower of Battle. We left it out of the core rulebook because people always say "you can't grab another guy's blade!" when we do it in real life practice, despite the fact that we can show them how to do it without getting hurt.

Ugh...

Hopefully John Clement's visit to Origins will stir up a little bit of "this is how it was really done."

Jake

I don't think it's a LOT more versatile. Look at your character: most proficiency possible, add in stahl as a culture, and you're simply really good w/cut-n-thrust and boxing. It's a nice combination for city streets and duels, but you're not an amazingly versatile fighter.

Personally, I think it fits well.

-Jeff

Hey,

I guess we're waiting on Jake to confirm/dissolve the "buy from defaults" at character creation. I can't claim to be 100% sure myself, especially after glancing at the rules. It sure sounded like a confirm during the conversation, but I could merely be confused.

As a side note, I must say that I think the short sword (or short-ish arming sword) is the most impugned, marginalized weapon in role-playing. Historically, the thing is totally deadly. In fights I have been in (fortunately not involving edged weapons), it would be a true killer.

I would very much like to practice TROS play with a character such as Lance describes, who I imagine would use grab/tugs, arm-locks, trips and sweeps, and shoulder-blocks in conjunction with close-in blade work. Very nasty.

My concern is whether getting in close could work consistently enough. As it stands, the guy with the shorter weapon actually has to get in a blow in order to close the distance, which I find troubling ... wouldn't a successful evasion also qualify? (In the real world, I am a shorter kind of a person and my personal fighting style sometimes relies on this technique - drawing strikes and then closing in over or around them.) Maybe I am missing some CP or maneuver combination that accounts for that.

Best,
Ron

This was something I was trying to figure out as well, and the best thing I could come up with in the book was Counter. A guy with a Long weapon attacks a guy with a Short weapon. Guy with Short weapon counters. The parry part of countering has no penalties for distance, and if the guy with the long weapon didn't save any cp for an emergency, he's wide open. (add body language and a short weapon with a lot ATN like a S.Sword, and, well... ow)

I'm not totally sure if the counter-attack gets the range penalty for short-against-long or not. The language suggests it would, but i'm not sure.

I imagine little gems like closing maneuvers for short weapons will be in Flower of Battle.

As a side note, I must say that I think the short sword (or short-ish arming sword) is the most impugned, marginalized weapon in role-playing. Historically, the thing is totally deadly.

My concern is whether getting in close could work consistently enough. As it stands, the guy with the shorter weapon actually has to get in a blow in order to close the distance, which I find troubling ...

Well, alright then. I suppose this is one of those times I'm wrong.. Cool, I can do with this. So my Pugilism gets to be higher. Neat.

Ron Edwards wrote: My concern is whether getting in close could work consistently enough. As it stands, the guy with the shorter weapon actually has to get in a blow in order to close the distance, which I find troubling ... wouldn't a successful evasion also qualify? (In the real world, I am a shorter kind of a person and my personal fighting style sometimes relies on this technique - drawing strikes and then closing in over or around them.) Maybe I am missing some CP or maneuver combination that accounts for that.

Jake Norwood wrote: It was always my intention that you can train off of default with a new character. Thus with your character, Lance, you've got C&T at 8, so you default to Pugilism at 5 (8-2=6, but 5 is the ceiling for a default). You could then throw a few of your points into it and have a pugilism of, say, 7, and then put the other 2 points into something else.

You're missing the crossbow proficiency I also had, Brandon, that's why your numbers don't match up. ::smiles::

This brings up another misunderstanding, perhaps.. I had assumed that the default for using pugilism based on cut and thrust was a -4, as described under Pugilism. Is it the other way around, and I get to use pugilism at a -2, as described under Cut and Thrust? (This is assuming that I didn't have pugilism already, and was trying to default off of Cut and Thrust to use it under normal circumstances)

I think the defaults listed under a specific proficiency are the penalties for defaulting to another skill. So, if I don't have cut-and-thrust, the defaults listed under c&T are the things that I could use and what the penalties are

As for what the ceiling is, I think its 5. Its a happy round number. :)

The book says the ceiling is 6, so it's six. I ain't the pope and sometimes I gotta consult the good book too (which is why I wrote it...). While I might change it to 5 for the next printing (I like it), I say go with 6, cause that's what the book says.

The defaults listed under each weapon are the defaults FROM that weapon. Apparently this is confusing, so I'll either re-arrange it or explain it better in the next printing, but I wanted to put all the defaults from C&T under C&T, so that you wouldn't have to go hunting.

Your other, more recent, assumptions on defaults are right, and how I envisioned them. SOme people might think that that's too easy, but in my head it works like this...

I'm a certified General Free Scholar in the Langenschwert (that's the longsword/greatsword proficiency). It's the first weapon that I seriously trained in. About a year ago I broke my left index finger and had to temporarily change weapons to the C&T, with no dagger, buckler, glove, or cloak. I found that the bulk of my training converted beautifully, though many maneuvers had to be modified and then re-trained in for the new weapon. By the time I regained use of my left hand I had become quite proficient with the C&T as a fighter--I was really really really hard to beat, and I'd go 20 or 30 matches in a row against various opponents before losing one due to fatigue or stupidity.

In other words, I defaulted the day I busted my finger, and put all my SA's into that proficiency for the next 2 or 3 months. Although I still know fewer maneuvers with the C&T, I still consider it my favorite weapon, and it's one that I'm quite good at.

The defaults are intentionally generous. If you can fight with a sword, you can fight (to some degree) with any sword. If you can fight with a longsword, you've learned techniques that apply to polarms, axes, staves, grappling, dagger, and shorter swords. You never study weapons in a vacuum (or rather, the period masters and their pupils never did). My point therefore being that generosity and leniency with proficiencies is intended. High proficiencies help make up for the mythical Attribute Point deficits in TROS--I know lots of quick, agile, and strong fighters. I'm 6'2" and about 205 lbs...my reflexes are crap compared to a lot of folks, so I gotta make up for it in skill...

Anyway, just a general rant, but it should help you all make decisions in the future.

Jake

Awesome. It'll mean some refiguring on my character, but considering I won't likely be playing him in anything other than duels, it's no thing. Now that you've explained it, it makes quite a bit of sense.

I will say one thing... A couple months training yourself with a padded bastard sword does NOT translate into proficiency with a shinai, especially when it's an interval of a few years. ::smirks:: Gotta keep up them skillz, don'cha know.

And here comes this thread, bouncing to the top once again.

One more judgement call for ya, Jake. It should be a relief that there are less questions everytime we duel, right?

One question this time: Counters and ties. When an attacker and defender tie, no damage is done, and the attacker keeps initiative.. But what happens when the defender was countering? The effectiveness of the counter depends on initiative the next round. We did a compromise (though it didn't feel right to me) wherein the attacker kept initiative, but the defender got his bonus dice. This doesn't really feel right to me, but it seemed the fairest way to do it, with no guidance.

So here's the question: WWJD? (What Would Jake Do?)

Bad joke, I know..

::flees::

Just want to chime in with some more details. Lance and I were dueling again (apparently Julianos and Tiberius just can't get along). I thrust to the head, he countered. We both got 7 successes. So is this tie handled the same as a parry - no damage, attacker keeps init, end of exchange? Or does the defender win this tie because it's a counter? If the defender wins, he would get bonus CP dice equal to the number of successes the attacker had, so in this case it would be 7. Does he get these dice, even if it's a tie? Does he still get the "attack" that the counter results in if it's a tie?

Sorry to keep this interrogation up. But at least others can see your answers and learn from them.

Thanks Jake!

Brandon

PS: I have a differing opinion of the counter from Lance's. I feel that the strength of the counter is that you get to defend and attack and take initiative all at the same time. But that's part of what forums are for - to share your opinions. :-)

PS: I have a differing opinion of the counter from Lance's. I feel that the strength of the counter is that you get to defend and attack and take initiative all at the same time. But that's part of what forums are for - to share your opinions. :-)

D'oh! Again, I was sleepy... I don't know what the heck I was talking about as far as attacking at the same time. What I should have said was:

The counter not only takes initiative but gives you dice for your next attack. Or something to that effect, anyway.
Hey, if you can't make an ass of yourself in public, where can you? ;-)

Brandon

As one just learning the systems of this game, I just wanted to say that this Q&A session with the example duel is most enlightnening and useful. Also, on the subject of Rapier parrying Shortsword, I would probably count a Roman-model Shortsword as of sufficient mass (at the point of contact) to force the Rapier to use the DTN of 8 vs. a slash. I guess this one's a judgement call, but I am thinking of the broad blade a Roman gladius/Shortsword has. Anyway, thanks for starting this highly informative post!

The purpose for keeping all of our questions in this one post is to, hopefully, create a thread where various information can be found within the one thread. I'm glad, for one person at least, that it succeeded in this. I was considering starting another thread, as this one seems to be dying... but we'll see if we get an answer to our latest questions.

I think I inadvertently deflected the path of this thread away from the latest question Lance asked (on behalf of both himself and me). So, I've quoted it below (with some snippage):

Wolfen wrote: One question this time: Counters and ties. When an attacker and defender tie, no damage is done, and the attacker keeps initiative.. But what happens when the defender was countering? The effectiveness of the counter depends on initiative the next round. We did a compromise (though it didn't feel right to me) wherein the attacker kept initiative, but the defender got his bonus dice. This doesn't really feel right to me, but it seemed the fairest way to do it, with no guidance.

One question this time: Counters and ties. When an attacker and defender tie, no damage is done, and the attacker keeps initiative.. But what happens when the defender was countering? The effectiveness of the counter depends on initiative the next round. We did a compromise (though it didn't feel right to me) wherein the attacker kept initiative, but the defender got his bonus dice. This doesn't really feel right to me, but it seemed the fairest way to do it, with no guidance.

Ok, sorry Jake.. I musta missed it... thanks!

Brandon