Hi,
I've tried to look this up in the forum, but to no avail. I remember Jake once saying that he allowed "double actions" in his fights. Pretty much like the canon Block/Strike, except that just about any useful pair of actions could be coupled. If any of you could explain that again, please do.

Areas of special interest to me would be
- activation cost
- order of initiative

Thanks in advance.

Hey Richard,

As Seneschal, you would have to assign an activation cost on the fly, depending on what it was the character was trying to do. If he wanted to swing his sword and also kick for the groin for example, well that's just like a double attack, right? (Activation cost already in the book). If he wanted to do something more outrageous, you would have to wing it, although as a rule I wouldn't assign an activation cost of more than 2 for anything personally. (So, for me I would say really simple = 0, more complex but related actions (such as double attack) = 1, complex and unrelated actions = 2, YMMV of course).

Initiative? Well, again, that would depend on the situation and how time consuming the actions the character was trying to do were. Things like double attack don't affect initiative, but slow actions might.

We can't possibly cover every combination of actions in the book, some sometimes to comes down to Seneschal fiat. Having said that, we're presently working on the combat book (The FLower of Battle), so who knows what might end up in there... :-)

Brian.

Thanks.
I have no problem with judging about activation costs or something on the fly, lucky me. ;) You have to understand that I come from the WMA corner and because of that, I have all kinds of interesting ideas. Mostly along the lines of "I'd do this or that. How does it work in TROS?"

One important thing in the "German School" of longsword is "Versetzen und Verletzen" - setting aside (deflecting an attack) and hitting at the same time. Instead of deflecting the attack first and then coming up with one myself, I would ideally attack and leave my blade in his weapon's way as a "byproduct". I hope I make sense here. I've been trying to get that into the TROS system.

Imagine the following scenario. Guy A and Guy B face each other. Both armed with a Bastard Sword both in a variant of "Vom Tag" (a "stance", left foot forward, sword held above the right shoulder essentially like a baseball bat). Guy A attacks with a full-arm cut to Guy B's left shoulder with a passing step forward, leaving his right foot forward. Guy B counters with a step off-line to the right with his right foot and cuts to B's left shoulder. A's sword harmlessly lands on B's, as he "closed the line of attack". Unless A notices this *during* his own attack and redirects it towards B's blade instead of hitting his body. And that is where it gets interesting... *g*

Example of how it is usually done:
Guy A: Cut to Area IV, for x dice.
Guy B: I parry for x dice. [resolving] I cut to Area IV, x dice.
Guy A: I parry for x dice.

How I'd maybe do it:
Guy A: Cut to Area IV, for x dice.
Guy B: Double Action. Parry for x dice with cut to Area IV, x dice.
Guy A: Damn.

See? B essentially made a defense and an offense during his "defensive turn" thus robbing A of the ability to stage a parry. So there must be a way to let A squeeze in a parry without resorting to the canon way, since that seems to depict a "back and forth" kind of fight.

Another idea I had was to let players use the Counter maneuver and actually determine the area themselves if they can describe the counter. Might not be something for everyone out there, but in our group it might work - "As your blade misses him and continues downwards, he winds up to strike you from above - Area V, five dice." "From Wechsel, I pull my hilt up, connect with his blade. I push it down with my quillons and snap around. Short edge to the head! Counter, six dice, Area V. Hah."

I was going to suggest the Counter maneuver as well. Sounds exactly like what you have in mind. And if your group knows the sort of counters that would fit a situation, then it seems completely reasonable to allow them to pick instead of rolling. It would also be the simplest method to use.

BTW, Jake studies German longsword as well.

Seth Ben-Ezra
Great Wolf

I always wondered why the table for counters exists. How come you cannot choose where you hit if you successfully counter? As I understand it there are hundreds of counters in real swordfighting as so I figured it was just a way to reflect this fact despite the fact that the actual player might not know any counters....Hmmm have I answered my own questions?

The reason Jake gave is that while there are 100s of possible counters which one you would use depends entirely on what part your opponent left open. If my enemy does...this...and I do that...I can hit...there.

If the game modeled complete biometrics one could look up from a complicated table what the appropriate counter would be to each possible enemy attack. But since it abstracts alot of the actual body positions and such one can't know exactly what the opponent just did, so one can't know exactly what the appropriate available counters are. So instead one rolls and assumes that whichever location comes up, is the location that was open at the time.

Valamir wrote: The reason Jake gave is that while there are 100s of possible counters which one you would use depends entirely on what part your opponent left open. If my enemy does...this...and I do that...I can hit...there.

Richard_Strey wrote: How I'd maybe do it:
Guy A: Cut to Area IV, for x dice.
Guy B: Double Action. Parry for x dice with cut to Area IV, x dice.
Guy A: Damn.

Brian, that was exactly my initial problem. If it was possible, why not do it every time? Maybe I'll slap a +3 activation cost on it and allow the other side a parry at a +1/2 activation cost. Making the whole thing an option for superior enemies only. Which it would be IRL, as well.

Salamander, you'll see that real-life classes will give you a whole lot of fancy ideas for TROS. :) My example actually was the "Zirckel" Handarbeit (technique) from Joachim Meyer's Fencing Book. And what you describe sounds a lot like a "Zornhau-Zornort" combo from either Ringeck or von Danzig. Stopping an opponent's cut to Area IV with the same thing yourself and then going for a thrust to the face. Cool stuff. *g*

Richard_Strey wrote: Salamander, you'll see that real-life classes will give you a whole lot of fancy ideas for TROS. :) My example actually was the "Zirckel" Handarbeit (technique) from Joachim Meyer's Fencing Book. And what you describe sounds a lot like a "Zornhau-Zornort" combo from either Ringeck or von Danzig. Stopping an opponent's cut to Area IV with the same thing yourself and then going for a thrust to the face. Cool stuff. *g*

Richard_Strey wrote: Brian, that was exactly my initial problem. If it was possible, why not do it every time?

Hmm. Good answer. Made me think. *g* This is the stuff the "Fechtbücher" or Fencing-Books of old talk about. Fighting techniques by masters for masters, against masters. Beyond anything we can pull off today.
Such an action needs extreme judgement of timing, distance, line and such. Anyone except a master wouldn't be able to pull it off reliably. So in-game you might want to put the minimum proficiency requirement to at least 11. If you do it right, it's devastating. If you don't, you're most likely setting yourself up for defeat.

Edit: Made the requirement match with this.