Being the Official Discussion Forum for Astonishing Swordsmen & Sorcerers of Hyperborea™


Visit us at the HYPERBOREA web site!

You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?

4/08/2018 10:00 pm  #21


Re: Escaping "engaged in melee" as a spellcaster

Thanks for the feedback, Jimm.Iblis & thanks for your shambling boar things! I'm sure at least a couple more of your monsters will find their way to my table.  I hear you on the rule-and-move-on thing. As seldom as I get to play dungeoneering games, that is certainly my preferred way to spend my precious weekend time. Even after running games for forty years, that's hard for me to do at this current table with a new system. I'm trying!  Astonishing is great, I agree!

DMPrata, thanks for the breakdown. All your assumptions about my example were correct. I'm getting closer, I think, to understanding the intent of the rules. One more wrinkle. Let's say the door was not at a right angle, but a bit towards Anfar. If Anfar wins initiative and charges Bedic, are they where Bedic stands/stood at the beginning of the round? Or are they both at the door, but Anfar is attempting to strike Bedic before Bedic can reach for the door handle?

The way you phrased your second-to-last sentence suggests Bedic is somewhere between his starting position and the door when Anfar's charge reaches him rather than either at the brazier or the door.

If Anfar wins initiative and engages Bedic before he reaches the door, would you rule that he can sort of shift his intent towards a lateral "backpedalling" and still reach the door, having faced Anfar's charge?

 

4/09/2018 7:48 pm  #22


Re: Escaping "engaged in melee" as a spellcaster

nemomeme wrote:

DMPrata, thanks for the breakdown. All your assumptions about my example were correct. I'm getting closer, I think, to understanding the intent of the rules. One more wrinkle. Let's say the door was not at a right angle, but a bit towards Anfar. If Anfar wins initiative and charges Bedic, are they where Bedic stands/stood at the beginning of the round? Or are they both at the door, but Anfar is attempting to strike Bedic before Bedic can reach for the door handle?

The way you phrased your second-to-last sentence suggests Bedic is somewhere between his starting position and the door when Anfar's charge reaches him rather than either at the brazier or the door.

If Anfar wins initiative and engages Bedic before he reaches the door, would you rule that he can sort of shift his intent towards a lateral "backpedalling" and still reach the door, having faced Anfar's charge?

The movement happens more-or-less simultaneously; Bedic doesn’t just stand still awaiting Anfar’s charge attack. The initiative result just dictates which action is completed first when precise timing matters. In this example, Anfar and Bedic are moving toward each other, with the door betwixt the two. If Anfar wins initiative, he’ll complete his charge attack before Bedic reaches the door. Where exactly they end up depends on comparative MV; Anfar will cover twice the distance that Bedic does. (A map would help here.) Once the charge attack is resolved, sure, Bedic can “backpedal” to the door, but Anfar still can follow as per the rules for backpedalling.

 

4/09/2018 8:19 pm  #23


Re: Escaping "engaged in melee" as a spellcaster

Okay, I thought I had it but there's a big difference between "more-or-less" and |"not" simultaneous with a two-phase round when you're playing with minis. I'll try to complete the example with a map and include a wrinkle that demonstrates why one might need to know how simultaneous movement is after initiative is rolled. At this point, I think all I can do is ask how other people would tend to rule for my example and then make up my own mind.

Again, I've been running role-playing games for almost forty years. I've been more into freeform and rule-light games in the last decade & am drifting towards B/X for my  dungeon-style gaming because it's pretty light.

AS&SH seems to lean into a regimented AD&D style, (especially in its advanced combat options), relative to most games I play these days. At this point I'm just trying to gather data on how other people are handling this unusual two-phase innovation to decide how I want to run it.

Whether I'm running rules-light, rules-medium or rules-heavy, consistency is important for me and for a lot of people I play with. I'm okay with being expedient-but-fair on a case-by-case basis but for something as basic as the combat sequence I'd venture most players would appreciate learning the design intent.

I really appreciate y'all sticking with me on this & I think I know how most people would handle this case for AS&SH (totally simultaneous movement and Bedic is no longer next to the brazier when Anfar strikes but near the door) which is why the wrinkle I want to add has become important. More later.

 

4/09/2018 9:16 pm  #24


Re: Escaping "engaged in melee" as a spellcaster

Okay, here's the map and wrinkle:
http://i68.tinypic.com/2dbmlir.jpg

Bedic, standing next to a brazier and headed to his left toward the door, now has an ally, Chandra, who is standing still and on her guard. Even if Anfar beats Bedic on initiative, Chandra is in the path of Anfar's charge towards Bedic if movement is either simultaneous or "more-or-less simultaneous". 

If you resolve the movement of those who win initiative first, Anfar has a clear path towards Bedic. In my initial sans-Chandra example, given more-or-less simultaneous movement, Anfar is striking at Bedic near the door rather than the brazier.

 

4/22/2018 11:40 am  #25


Re: Escaping "engaged in melee" as a spellcaster

No opinions on how people run this? We're going to try to play AS&SH again this coming weekend and would really welcome opinions from anyone that's trying to go the RAW two-phase combat round route.

 

4/22/2018 3:53 pm  #26


Re: Escaping "engaged in melee" as a spellcaster

I don't use the 2 phase system very strictly so this is my opinion.

But It looks like  if A wins initiative he gets to attack B with a charge. Unless C has a held phase from a previous round she will not get to interrupt as she lost initiative. This assumes C and B are on the same side.

Where exactly B is when attacked is adjudicated by the Ref.

If C and B win initiative then B gets to the door and is protected by C as she interrupts the charge of A

But there seems to be some flexibility to say because C (losing initiative) was in the midst of moving to "guard" and B was moving to the door she could position to accept the attack but not melee back until her phase one (unless her WC was higher)  This assumes some simultaneous movement which is reasonable.

There is probably no right answer as the flexibility of the 2 phase system may require some Ref adjudication.



 


“How can I wear the harness of toil
And sweat at the daily round,
While in my soul forever
The drums of Pictdom sound?” 
 

4/22/2018 4:54 pm  #27


Re: Escaping "engaged in melee" as a spellcaster

C and B are on the same side and C is not moving. Maybe the only thing she said is "If anyone tries to run by me I will engage them in melee and try to hit them." 

For this example if movement is truly simultaneous A charging directly at B will be running due south and will be engaged with C as she is close enough to engage/stop him. But if movement is not exactly simultaneous, then A winning initiative will put him next to B and they'll both be near the brazier at the conclusion of A's charge. When you're using minis and maps, this difference is critical. Do people playing ASSH with maps and minis using the RAW have everyone lift up their minis simultaneously irrespective of initiative and starting moving them around the map in concert? If that's the RAW case, that's cool but I've never heard of anything like this & it strikes me as unusual.

It's fine if the answer is "The RAW don't inform you on this point and aren't meant to. Decide how you want to run it for your game." I'll make a decision and then stick with it for consistency (probably that movement is "phased by initiative" for cases like this). Absent some official clarification I'm just gathering opinions. Thank you for yours.

 

4/22/2018 7:40 pm  #28


Re: Escaping "engaged in melee" as a spellcaster

Nemomeme - do you know of an alternate table-top ruleset that handles the circumstance to your liking?

I don't know of one that will satisfy your conundrum. Such is the power of initiative.

If B or C were my character, and A got the jump on me, next time I'd think twice about warming my hands by the brazier when the likes of A are nearby.

Last edited by Dwindle (4/22/2018 7:42 pm)

 

4/22/2018 7:47 pm  #29


Re: Escaping "engaged in melee" as a spellcaster

Dwindle wrote:

If B or C were my character, and A got the jump on me, next time I'd think twice about warming my hands by the brazier when the likes of A are nearby.

Amen to that!


3d6 straight.
 

4/22/2018 8:16 pm  #30


Re: Escaping "engaged in melee" as a spellcaster

I'll assume I'm not making myself clear rather than that you're just messing with me, Dwindle. http://cdn.boardhost.com/emoticons/confused.png


I've played every version of D&D from OD&D to 5E along with Dungeon Crawl Classics, Lamentations of the Flame PrincessBeyond the Wall, Into The Odd, Swords & Wizardry, Labyrinth Lord & others. None of them have two-phase combat & it's clear to me for each of those rule sets how this situation would work. All of them solve this conundrum; I'm not concerned with Bedic's well-being. If winning initiative means Anfar gets to move entirely before Bedic then that's great. Absent any help, that's probably how I'm going to run it.

really like AS&SH and wanted to try it RAW for at least five sessions before abandoning this element for something more familiar.

Last edited by nemomeme (4/22/2018 8:17 pm)

 

4/22/2018 8:41 pm  #31


Re: Escaping "engaged in melee" as a spellcaster

I'm not messing, Nemomeme.

RAW says exactly that, as best as I can tell; if A wins initative and can complete full movement before B with half movement exits, the charge vests.

C is only in play if his/her initiative beats B, which is alphabetically unreasonable.

My "lesson learned" story was for your players - the dice aren't always on your side, nor are they always opposed. May B and C one day be as A; unstoppable!

Last edited by Dwindle (4/23/2018 8:28 am)

 

4/23/2018 6:23 am  #32


Re: Escaping "engaged in melee" as a spellcaster

Dwindle wrote:

RAW says exactly that, as best as I can tell; if A wins initative and can complete full movement before B with half movement exits, the charge vests.

This is the way I read it as well.  This is the way I would run the phase.  






 


“How can I wear the harness of toil
And sweat at the daily round,
While in my soul forever
The drums of Pictdom sound?” 
 

4/24/2018 6:27 am  #33


Re: Escaping "engaged in melee" as a spellcaster

nemomeme wrote:

Okay, here's the map and wrinkle:
http://i68.tinypic.com/2dbmlir.jpg

Bedic, standing next to a brazier and headed to his left toward the door, now has an ally, Chandra, who is standing still and on her guard. Even if Anfar beats Bedic on initiative, Chandra is in the path of Anfar's charge towards Bedic if movement is either simultaneous or "more-or-less simultaneous". 

If you resolve the movement of those who win initiative first, Anfar has a clear path towards Bedic. In my initial sans-Chandra example, given more-or-less simultaneous movement, Anfar is striking at Bedic near the door rather than the brazier.

I can give you a pretty clear answer to this question, but I would need the MV of both A and B. 


Astonishing Swordsmen & Sorcerers of Hyperborea - A Role-Playing Game of Swords, Sorcery, and Weird Fantasy
 

4/25/2018 10:30 pm  #34


Re: Escaping "engaged in melee" as a spellcaster

Hi Ghul! 

Really looking forward to my Anthropophagi and Beasts!

Speaking of things starting with A and B, Anfar and Bedic are two typical unarmored and unencumbered human-type folk in this example (MV 40'). Anfar is charging, Bedic is moving.

 

4/26/2018 8:00 am  #35


Re: Escaping "engaged in melee" as a spellcaster

Thanks, nemomeme, and I do hope you enjoy the new adventures.

So, yes, since movement is more or less simultaneous, RAW, it works as this:

Action Declaration: Anfar to charge attack Bedic; Bedic to move to door to try to exit; Chandra to defend Bedic's exit.
Roll Initiative: Anfar (side one) rolls higher than Bedic and Chandra (side two).

Phase 1:
 - Anfar blows past Chandra before she can defend Bedic.
-  Bedic reaches the door and is about to open it, but Anfar has met him and makes his charge attack (+2 damage if he hits).
- Chandra attacks Anfar (Anfar loses DX bonus to AC, if applicable, or -1 if no bonus applies). 

A Phase 2 would only apply if Bedric tells me that he absolutely does not stop moving to exit the room, and is going through that door. If so, I would give Anfar a free attack against Bedric for attempting to disengage melee.

I can predict what could happen next: Bedric can try to tell me that he's closing the door, too, but I would say, "That would have to be your action declaration for the next round." This leaves open the possibility that Anfar would attack him again (if he wins initiative) before Bedric can close the door. At this point, Anfar would go into his normal attack routing, too (3/2? 2/1?). 
 


Astonishing Swordsmen & Sorcerers of Hyperborea - A Role-Playing Game of Swords, Sorcery, and Weird Fantasy
 

4/26/2018 9:59 am  #36


Re: Escaping "engaged in melee" as a spellcaster

Okay, so this is neither of the two answers I might have anticipated.

Anfar won initiative and has achieved a straight line charge, but Bedic is also at the door at the moment/point Anfar reaches him? And he also didn't become engaged with Chandra on his path from his starting position to the door? Is that peculiar to charges and/or because he won initiative?

Thank you for your response.

 

4/26/2018 11:38 am  #37


Re: Escaping "engaged in melee" as a spellcaster

Ultimately, you are the final arbiter of your game, so the decision is ultimately yours on when and how combatants clash.

Since you said they all have 40 MV, the following applies:

Anfar can move 40 on Phase 1, because he is charging.
Bedic can move 20 on Phase 1, because he is simply moving normally.
Chandra does not get to attack because she lost initiative. 

AS&SH is not assumed to be a grid-based miniatures game. If you enjoy resolving combat with a grid and miniatures, it is certainly your prerogative! You can also allow for all the "attacks of opportunities" that you wish to impose in your own game. So, if your group and you enjoy some of the newer AoO methods (in which case Chandra would get a free attack regardless of initiative, because her threatened squares were entered), then feel free to do so! 

If you find the flow of movement during the sequence to be cumbersome to your play-style, then have each actor go in order of initiative, in which case Anfar attacks Bedric before Bedric does anything. It's fine! Personally, I try to promote more cinematic action in which the parts start moving more or less simultaneously, but initiative ultimately provides one side or the other the chance to deliver a telling blow first.


 


Astonishing Swordsmen & Sorcerers of Hyperborea - A Role-Playing Game of Swords, Sorcery, and Weird Fantasy
 

4/26/2018 1:16 pm  #38


Re: Escaping "engaged in melee" as a spellcaster

If movement is simultaneous then Anfar is charging almost directly though Chandra, perhaps clipping her on her right side; I thought the RAW was that was a situation where Anfar would now be engaged in melee with Chandra, similar to Moldvay Basic in that regard and would not even be able to reach Bedic. But it sounds like that's not the case for reasons I'm still not clear on. I wasn't looking to add AoO.

Ghul wrote:

- Chandra attacks Anfar (Anfar loses DX bonus to AC, if applicable, or -1 if no bonus applies).

Ghul wrote:

Chandra does not get to attack because she lost initiative.

It wasn't a part of my original query, but these two statements seem contradictory to me.

Ghul wrote:

If you find the flow of movement during the sequence to be cumbersome to your play-style, then have each actor go in order of initiative, in which case Anfar attacks Bedric before Bedric does anything. It's fine!

I think that might be a good idea for me. Thanks for your help and patience.

 

4/26/2018 2:30 pm  #39


Re: Escaping "engaged in melee" as a spellcaster

nemomeme wrote:

If movement is simultaneous then Anfar is charging almost directly though Chandra, perhaps clipping her on her right side; I thought the RAW was that was a situation where Anfar would now be engaged in melee with Chandra, similar to Moldvay Basic in that regard and would not even be able to reach Bedic. But it sounds like that's not the case for reasons I'm still not clear on. I wasn't looking to add AoO.

Ghul wrote:

- Chandra attacks Anfar (Anfar loses DX bonus to AC, if applicable, or -1 if no bonus applies).

Ghul wrote:

Chandra does not get to attack because she lost initiative.

It wasn't a part of my original query, but these two statements seem contradictory to me.

Losing initiative does not mean that you don't get a chance to attack the entire round. When you added Chandra to your simulation, I thought you wanted to know if she could attack Anfar before Anfar got to Bedric. Why did you add Chandra if you only wanted your original query answered? Now I must admit confusion, so my apologies for that. 
 


Astonishing Swordsmen & Sorcerers of Hyperborea - A Role-Playing Game of Swords, Sorcery, and Weird Fantasy
 

4/26/2018 2:58 pm  #40


Re: Escaping "engaged in melee" as a spellcaster

Chandra is there because if movement is simultaneous in AS&SH then she's almost directly in the path between Anfar and Bedic if Bedic gets to move to the door even having lost initiative. And even if she's not directly in the path, she's close enough to potentially be engaging Anfar in melee whether or not she gets to strike at him this round. If AS&SH worked like B/X or ACKs, etc. in this regard.

 

Board footera





“Astonishing Swordsmen & Sorcerers of Hyperborea”, “AS&SH”, and all other North Wind Adventures product names and their respective logos are trademarks of North Wind Adventures, LLC in the USA and other countries. ©2019 North Wind Adventures, LLC.