The Forge Reference Project

Topic: Why script Block?
Started by: rafial
Started on: 6/18/2003
Board: Burning Wheel

Here's my latest head scratcher. Why would you ever want to script Block, as opposed to Counterstrike? Counterstrike works against all the things that Block works against, and a lot more. Plus it's more flexible.

I'm also confused by the sentence:

The "block" half of Counterstrike is only called thus for demonstrative purposes and does not count as a Block in any other way.

I've read through the descriptions of both maneuvers several times, and I don't see where Block does anything extra above and beyond "roll dice to knock successes off an incoming strike." If it walks like a block and quacks like a block...

What am I missing here?

Have you experienced the Feint yet? Feint beats Counterstrike every time. My character has laid low several major NPCs as they tried to Counter my attack, only to be exposed by a well-timed Feint. One such match - a challenge between two martial art masters - was over in two actions.

That little phrase you mention is used to refrain players (or GMs!) from saying, "Your Feint doesn't work against the Block portion of my Counterstrike!" It's a very niggling rule and obvious to most players, but we all know people who would try to take advantage of such a loophole if it existed.

There's good reasons to Block. Sometimes you really need every die possible when being slammed by a baddie. When you employ the Counterstrike, you have to split your dice. Characters with low skills often don't have the luxury of dice to split their skill up.

taepoong wrote: Have you experienced the Feint yet? Feint beats Counterstrike every time.

Yes. And also Block. Same difference.

That little phrase you mention is used to refrain players (or GMs!) from saying, "Your Feint doesn't work against the Block portion of my Counterstrike!"

I suppose, except that the rules already explicitly say that Feint beats Block.

When you employ the Counterstrike, you have to split your dice. Characters with low skills often don't have the luxury of dice to split their skill up.

This was the only thing I could think of. Thing is, Counterstrike says you can split your dice any way you want, which doesn't rule out 0D offense/ fullD defense. Here is where clarification is needed, if anywhere.

I may owe you an apology, rafial... I've played BW through several versions and one of them was that Feint only worked against Counterstrike and not Block. I don't have the books in front of me either. So, again, I am sorry if I overlooked the fact that Feint works against Block.

Anyway, to split is to divide. Imagine a pile of dice in the center of a table. Moving it all to one side couldn't very well be called "dividing" the pile. You would have to leave at least one in the center in order claim you have divided the pile. The same Truth holds with the Counterstrike rule. At least one die has to remain behind.

Ah! One more thing re: the need for a block.

Some Martial Skills - like Brawling - may not use the Counterstrike. So, they need something to defend themselves with! A Block is all they gots!

Counterstrike is a single maneuver, unlike the shield training's Block-and- Strike. Even though the mechanics are the same (knocking off dice) the maneuver is considered differently for countermoves. Namely, Block-and-Strike and Block cannot counter a Great Strike maneuver. While a Counterstrike or Avoid can be used against the terrible Great Strike.

Lastly, counterstrikes are very versatile, but once you are in a desperate melee you will see exactly why you need every single die available to Block incoming strikes. Even the one die given over to the riposte can be too much.

oh yeah and splitting 8 dice as 0/8 is NOT splitting.

-abzu

taepoong wrote: Some Martial Skills - like Brawling - may not use the Counterstrike. So, they need something to defend themselves with! A Block is all they gots!

Aha! This is the sort of stuff I was looking for. I haven't tracked down all the combat skills yet, so I missed this.

abzu wrote: oh yeah and splitting 8 dice as 0/8 is NOT splitting.

I'm a software developer. We start counting from zero as a matter of habit :) Disallowing 0 dice in a pool does however provide the justification for block. Thanks for the ruling.

I was imagining the amusing results if we applied the 0/8 split theory in other ways...

Player 1: "I split the orc's head with my axe!"
GM: "Ok, you split the orcs head. He blinks and stares in amazement, realizing his head is still intact. Then he snarls and bites you."

GM: "Okay, you have won the battle and the treasure is yours. A large pile of gold and gems sits before you."
Player 1: "I say we split it up, ok?"
Player 2: "Fine with me!"
Player 1 takes all the gold and leaves Player 2 with nothing.
Player 2: "Heyyy..."

:o) I hope you take this in the good humor it was meant! You've taught me a valuable lesson! Never game with a programmer! ;o)

On 6/19/2003 at 12:44am, rafial wrote:
Say what you mean, mean what you say

Clarity of speech is everything...

Player 1: "I split the orc's head in half with my axe!"

And course, scenario 2 is a classic example of what happens when you let one guy split the treasure, the orc, or the pie, and choose which piece he wants :)

-wilhelm
"The empty set and the set containing the null element walk into bar..."

. . .the set containing the null element. . .

You may have meant "the set containing only the null element" .

And for the record: Only we in the C and Perl communities count from 0 up. FORTRAN programmers (NASA's full of them) still count from 1 up.

Here's another question about Counterstrike:

With a Slow weapon, is "Strike, Counterstrike, Strike" valid? I was under the impression that Counterstrike was considered like a Strike for weapon speed purposes.

In which case Block is still very important for the off-actions.

I believe the Strike/Counterstrike/Strike option is ok for slow weapons. However, the strike half of the counterstrike should be made with the butt of the weapon to be fair. In fact, Strike/Butt strike/Strike is a fine script with slow weapons, too. And when I write Butt, I mean the butt of the weapon, though I guess your tush is fine too... maybe it counts as a push? ;o)

nebulous menace wrote: With a Slow weapon, is "Strike, Counterstrike, Strike" valid?

And this has led me to wonder about unwieldy weapons! Is Counterstrike even possible with an unwieldly weapon, and if so, must it be proceeded by a Set?

I was also wondering about unwieldy weapons and Great Strike. Is it necessary to script two Sets in a row to Great Strike with an unwieldy weapon?

We ruled that a double set is required on an unwieldy weapon if one wants to Great Strike with it. The original set only counts to strike normally. I don't know if this is explicitly stated in the rules, though.