Yet another question.

Are stances only for when characters are facing off to each other in a dueling situation?

Or, for example, if my character Eric is walking down a corridor and sees a man standing in a door way. Could Eric go into a defensive stance while moving forward because he expects to be attacked by that man? given the situation of why he is walking down the corridor.

(I see the stance bonus as only applying to fighting the man in the doorway not to his mate behind me, but thats another issue...)

This is a slight variation of something that happened last night but I just wanted to use it as an example of non face off style combats and how stances apply to them.

I hope my question made sense ;-)
Thanks,
Dan.

Well, the combatants in a duel have to somehow get close enough to exchange blows, so yes. And IIRC charging in combat is "aggressive stance for the whole first round".

Yup. Stances last until combat actually starts and from that point on don't come into play uinless there's a break in the action (one character full evades away, or similar) at which point they could go into stances agains before re-engaging if they like.

As Overdrive said, a charge is pretty much the definition of an aggressive stance :-)

Brian.

Sorry to labour a point,

So is it ok to enter a defensive stance, creep along a corridor and then be considered to be in a defensive stance (for the +2 dice) if/when you are attacked further down the corridor?

Dan.

I've understood that the "stance" is mostly about how you hold your sword. When the actual fight begins, you move your weapon and the stance is lost. Of course footwork has something to do with it as well but I'd happily let someone creep/walk/run with some stance. Remember that neutral stance is a stance as well; there is a mention in the book about having no stance at all (when you're surprised).

Simple rule:

Any situation where, if this were D&D, the Fighter's player would say "I ready my sword", is definable as a stance in TROS.

Interesting question.

For example, in a battlefield melee I'd say that you might not have time to get into a stance between engaging opponents. That is, despite the fact that you might run the combat as a series of one-on-one conflicts, you continue to be engaged by more than one opponent (who, in theory, is attacking your ally to the left or behind you). So when you finish one guy, you may still have to deal with the next guy before being able to take time to get into a stance. GMs call, I'd guess. Basically not allowing a stance would give a sense of the immediacy of things.

As for holding a stance down a corridor, I'd allow it, sure. But that's a combat stance. Slightly tiring to maintain over time. I'd charge fatigue at, say, one third the rate of combat until they dropped the stance and just started walking again. This is why people don't go around slightly dangerous places in stances all the time. That, and people will make fun of you.

But, yes, if it's a legitimate threat that you're dealing with, I'd allow people to maintain stances as long as they could pay for the fatigue. Very important for anticipating ambushes, I'd think.

Mike

Stances are basically an abstract we use in the real world and in the game to describe our guard. In my training with the longsword I have been taught the five basic guards and the deriviatives thereof. (For those of you who are curious; Vom dach, Pflug, Alber, Nebbenhut & Ochs) of course these are just the long sword stances, but there are many other varieties.

Now, if you consider empty hands you can build an easy defensive stance and move forward and it would look pretty close to natural. If you go into a defensive stance whilst holding a sword, it's pretty obvious that you are trouble. The thing is, you can adopt a defensive, neutral or aggressive stance while unarmed. It is simple and we do it every time we are startled. I would say that yes, it is possible to adopt a stance, albeit a subtle one and approach the figure in the door way.

Mind if I ask what the story behind the question is?

Mike Holmes wrote: This is why people don't go around slightly dangerous places in stances all the time. That, and people will make fun of you.

It is funny, but I'm serious, too. Unless you're in a duel, the neutral stance is the definition of cool. In fact, even starting a duel, neutral stance is cool. You're saying to the opponent, "I don't need a stance to beat you I'm so cool."

Agressive stance out of a duel means that you've lost your cool due to rage. A Defensive stance means you've lost your cool due to fear. You have to have a good reason to lose your cool, or people will think you're a dweeb.

These are important role-playing considerations. No, really. :-)

Mike

Although *mostly* irrelevant, to the excellant points on stance usage pointed out so far, I think it would be a mistake to consider the three stances mostly descriptions of different weapon-holding methods, or the wards/guards from historical combat. The historical wards are not positions that one sits in for any extended period of time, and even beginning a fight by formally entering a guard is a debatable practice. Rather, I like to think of the "stances" as approaches to the beginning of combat, as in the clear case of charging. So a defensive stance simply implies caution, and agressive means zealous, with relatively less regard for one's own safety.

isnt a lot of the stance issue state of mind? I like to sit in vomtag alot but actually be ready to recieve instead of attack..... anyways. just a thought....

If by "state of mind" you mean one's intentions towards the combat, and predilictions for fighting moves, I'd say definitely. This is sort of what I was getting at in fact, since vom tag, for instance, is cannot be labeled simply as an 'offensive' or 'defensive' ward. Essentially none of them can be -- there are leanings in one direction or another to be sure, but you can do anything from any ward: if you always needeed to go into vom tag to be aggressive, you're opponent could predict your actions far too easily.

PS. for those who are not familiar, vom tag is a guard from the German school (usually translated as "the roof") where you hold the sword above your head.

But I'd drop the idea to make maintaining a stance fatiguing. Whether you see "stance" as going fluidly from one position to another while never being caught "off guard" or, for example, maintaining Zornhut (imagine a batter with his baseball bat), it's not going to be exhausting enough to make rules for. IMHO at least. Unless the guy wields a maul, but that's another story. *g*

Mind if I ask what the story behind the question is?

Good points, Richard, others. I do think that as an attitude that it wouldn't be too fatiguing.

But even as a mental state, I do think that it's exhausting over long periods. That is, in combat, the thing that leads to long term fatigue most readily (other than heavy exertion, of course), is waiting for an enemy to attack. When the CO says, "stay frosty" (or whatever movie aphorism you'd like to inject), there is a change in attitude that matters.

The point is that, though it's probably not fatiguing enough in game terms to note, it does mean that, unless a player announces that his character is in a stance, that he's not. Basically what I'm trying to prevent is the player who unrealisitcally says, "While I'm in Taveruun, I'm going to be in a defensive stance." It's just not something that you can do for hours at a time. Hence another reason why ambushes are effective.

If a character has been trying to watch for an ambush for several hours, likeon a patrol or something, then I probably will assign some extra fatigue.

Probably all obvious, but I think it makes for good color.

Mike

Dan Sellars wrote:

Salamander, here goes.

There was this guy following me around the last coupel of towns (I was pretending to be some one else) we thought that he was trying to make contact, but was unsure of my companions. So I went to this bar alone where we had found out he was staying. To try and find out some more information about him.

He was in the bar when I got there talking to a couple of chaps. He seemed suprised to see my character. When he had finished he beconed me to follow him to the other bar (which was through the corridor in question). I followed a minute later (at this point i thought that he wanted to make contact in private and quietly, as some other people we had seen with him had tried to make contact and been assasinated while trying).

On entering the corridor I saw him in a door way off the corrdor to the right, being careful I had stated earlier that my character was being very wary but more from a perception point of view as I didn't trust his mates.

Turns out he was a bounty hunter, I was a the prey ;-( I got koshed and bundeled up. Should have seen it comming I guess ;-) (well my character did in a way he passed suprise but got hit on his full evasion)

The question was really based on me thinking what I could have done instead. (being more suspicious, drawing my knife getting, in a stance would probably have helped, as would not have being stupid and staying out of the corridor ;-)

I wanted to know if stances were a state of readyness that you could use while moving or something that could only be entered if there was time at the begining of a fight ie duel. I can see arguments for both.

I was also wondering how it worked in general, such as a large melee (as mentioned in the thread) sometimes you just don't get time to be ready, I've forgotten the exact rule but would supprise cover this if you pass but only just you can't get into a stance if you get 3 successes you can?

Dan.

Fortunatly my friends, who were following into the Inn a few miniutes later, managed to see me being bundelled out all trussed up. As you said I should have waited for them in the first place.

They managed to save me and I got away with just a bit of bruising and a lesson learned ;-)

Dan.

Hey. I'm not reading everything in the detail that I should due to lack of time (please forgive), so if this was allready covered...

I don't see any reason why you can't hold a stance "indefinitely," as there are a few defensive and offensive positions, and you can switch from one to the other to keep the blood flowing. Half an hour might require a will or EN check, but that's up to the Seneschal IMO.

The other thing to remember is that the issue of defensive/offensive stances is not just specific stances, but also one of attitude. Thus the afforementioned "vom tach" could be offensive, defensive, or neutral, largely based on the mindset of the fighter.

Ooh...Ideas for TFOB...

ANyway.

Jake