Topic: An idea for semplifying Feinting

[Arioch]

Any version of RM's Feinting rules seem a bit too complicated to me, requiring additional rolls if not developing a separate skill for it... to me feinting is a basic part of every melee fighting style, together with parrying and imo should be much easier to use in combat. So recently, I've came up with this idea for it, it's very simple, but it should inject a bit of dynamism in combat, without changing the rules too much.

Feinting: At the start of each round, when attacks and parries are declared, a combatant may decide to use up to half his OB to feint. Each point of OB dedicated to feinting reduce by 2 points the amount of OB used by his opponent to parry against him. Feint cannot reduce the parry bonus below 0. A character cannot feint if he cannot attack, or if his target isn't aware of him.

Example: Fighter A and Fighter B have each an OB of 100 and a DB of 30. At the beginning of the round, Fighter A decides to use 25 points of his OB to parry, 25 points to feint and 50 to attack. Fighter B parries with 30 points, and attacks with 70.
A goes first. B total DB against his attack is: 30 + his parry (30) - A's Feint x2 (25x2=50), which would bring his parry bonus to -20, but since Feinting cannot reduce the parry bonus below 0, B's final DB will be 30. His whole parry bonus has been cancelled by A's feinting and A's 20 additional feint points are lost.

What do you think? Too powerful? Useless? Other opinions?

[markc]

  IMO it is too powerful and always assumes the feint works. IMO there has to be some chance that it will not work and have a negative effect besides the lot OB if it does not work.


MDC

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

"B" would need a way to be able to avoid the Feint.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fencing_terms

Feint
    An offensive movement resembling an attack in all but its continuance. It is an attack into one line with the intention of switching to another line before the attack is completed. A feint is intended to draw a reaction from an opponent. This is the ‘intention’, and the reaction is generally a parry, which can then be deceived.

Basically, a Feint is a trick, an attempt to sucker the foe into making a move that allows you to attack from an unexpected direction (I.e. like pretending to thrust, changing it to a slash at the last moment).

As such, I think that the foe needs to have some sort of chance to realize that the action is a Feint and be able to react/defend accordingly.

[RandalThor]

Here's a way to use the above rule to keep the number of rolls down, but put in the possiblity that the target of the feint might not be fooled by it (which I think should be in there also):

The target rolls an RR Level vs. Level, or based on the number of ranks in the given skill. Just the one roll though. If he (the target) succeeds, the feint doesn't work, but the attacker still uses those points of OB - which basically get tossed out there into the ether. If the target fails, then the feint works as described.

That still keeps the number of rolls down pretty-well, I believe; only adding in one to a basic attack.

[Arioch]

Yes, I think you're right. As you pointed out the only way to protect oneself from a feint would be macking a full-out attack, but that wouldn't help you against the opponent's attack... I'd like to find a way to give fighters a way to counter feint without making it too much complicated and without adding more rolls (not even a single RR), but at the moment nothing comes to my mind to solve the problem. Mumble mumble...

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

Hmm..... How about....

Both have OB of 100 and DB of 30

ChrA decided to Feint, and is putting 30 into Parrying, CharB is going to Parry, putting 30 into Parrying. This gives both an effective OB of 70 for the round.

CharA is informed by GM that he has to use 30 OB minimum to Feint. CharA decides to put 50 into the Feint, leaving him an effective OB of 20.

CharB has to make a Perception roll at -20 (the amount in the feint over what is required). If he fails his perception roll, the feint succeeds, and CharA gets +20 to his OB because the true attack is a surprise, and CharB does NOT get his Parrying DB against the attack.

If CharB succeeds in his Perception roll, then CharA does not get the +20 to OB and CharB gets to use his Parrying DB against the attack.


Basically, the character doing the Feinting has to match the amount being put into parrying by the foe in order to draw him out and possibly make a successful feint.

The amount put over the minimum required acts as a negative mod to the Perception roll to see and recognize the Feint (the defender MUST get a roll - no way around it).

Also, remember that Parrying is supposed to be good for all attacks from a single foe. So... A successful Feint will remove that Parrying bonus from the foe's DB for the remaining attack (which gets a +20 because it is basically a surprise attack).

[RandalThor]

Again Rasyr, you can take an attempt at simplifying a rule and making it very complicated indeed. 

Though you did give me the idea of using Situational Awareness: Combat instead of an RR - or as the base for the RR. That is one of the reason's for the skill, I would imagine.

But, Arioch, I can virtually guarantee you that you will not be able to do this without at least one extra roll. Except, maybe...

That feinter has a feint skill* higher than the feintee (he, he) has in Situational Awareness: Combat, the feint works, if not, it doesn't. But that is still a Yes or No situation going into it (even if the player doesn't know yet) with no Maybe about it. And means that once they do know, they will either continue to do it (if yes) or not ever try again (if no).

*You can compare bonues, ranks, whatever way you think is best. I think that it is best if you use the bonues, it allows for more variation.

[Arioch]

Basically, the character doing the Feinting has to match the amount being put into parrying by the foe in order to draw him out and possibly make a successful feint.

I was thinking something similar, but again without the Perception roll: you have to meet or exceed the amount put into parrying by your foe with your feint, otherwise your feint is wasted and you get some nasty drawback (penalty to your DB equal to your feint, for example)...
This would make Feinting a riskier, assuming that combatants choose their OB/DB/Feint in secret, and then reveal them together. It would be a sort of rock, scissor, paper game: Parry beats Attack; Feint beats Parry; Attack beats Feint.

[RandalThor]

But you are still totally ignoring the idea that fighters read each other (Like poker players, only in a fraction of the time, and with - usually - much more deadly consequences for failure), particularly when you are talking about a 10 second combat round* like RM has. If a combatant has no chance of noticing and understanding what their opponent is doing, then all you get is a secret bidding war, which you just might as well have each of them roll one die and the higher roller wins out-right.

I understand you desire to speed things up in game (I really, really do) but, just like the Hit Point scenario, going to basic/abstract loses too much flavor of the RM system, including why to have certain skills. The reason a fighter is a better combatant than the mage isn't (only) because of his higher OB, but in his ability to read a combat situation better, and, therefore, be able to choose what to do better. (Hopefully.  )

*HARP has a 2-second combat round, which practically null-and-voids any Combat Perception capabilities. It is just too fast, I believe. I think that the Action Percentages should be lowered to reflect the length of the combat round, by around 10-20%. (Things should take 80-90% of the action they do currently. JMO.)

[rdanhenry]

Here's my simplification of feinting, one that I think is appropriate for the level of abstraction at which Rolemaster combat takes place:

I assume that the ability to feint and respond to feints is included in any combat training and is represented by OB (which can be shifted to DB) gained by developing skill in a weapon or weapon category. Specific feint maneuvers seem out of place in Rolemaster, being more suited to a blow-by-blow combat system.

[yammahoper]

Feint should be a static mnv.  It requires 20% activity to perform.  Penalty to perform is equal to the skill rank bonus of your foe.

Success: +50 Ob mod
Near success: +40 OB mod
     Partial success: +30 OB mod
     Absolute Success :+100 OB mod, foe suffers additional A unbalance crit rolled seperately.
     Failure: for recieves +20 OB mod with next attack against you.  He also wins init next rnd.
     Absolute Failure: foe recieves a +50 OB mod on nextattack against you.  He wins inti next rnd   You suffer an A unbalance crit this rnd, even if n other damage is suffered.
     Spetacular failure: foe lands an E crit of weapon type against you, a C unbalance crit, has init against your for three rounds and has gained back/flank positional mods on you.  Good Luck
     Natural 66: you both feint at the same time and knock your heads together.  You will wake up in 20-Co Mod rnds.  When you do wake up, you are stun no parry for 10-Co mod rnds. 


Or what ever.  Nastier if you like deadly, more freindly if you like romance.

[Grinnen Baeritt]

As mentioned above, the feint is an attempt to decieve. If the attempt fails there should be no positive effect for the attacker (In fact, if the opponent reads it, could lead to big problems..).

The original proposition is simple, but how about x3 IN bonus of the target (or ranks in another suitable skill e.g Combat Awareness) be used as an automatic limiting/countering factor?

Example. The attacker has an OB of 100, spends 25 of it to feint. This reduces his own attack to +75 and reduces the defenders Parry by 50 points. If the opponent had allocated 50 points to parry then 50 would normally have been deducted by the feint, completely negating it.
However, if the opponent has a IN bonus of 5, this automatically offsets 15 points of the feint reduction... making it 35.
So that, in this case, the defender still benifits from +15 db from what would have been a +50 parry.

If the amount used to feint doesn't exceed the opposing automatic reduction it has no effect other than wasting the Ob of the attacker. Additionally, if the amount of points gained from the feint exceeds that required to cancel out those used to parry, then the excess is wasted. Either way, the risk is proportiate to the advantage.

 

[pastaav]

Any version of RM's Feinting rules seem a bit too complicated to me, requiring additional rolls if not developing a separate skill for it... to me feinting is a basic part of every melee fighting style, together with parrying and imo should be much easier to use in combat.

If it is part of every fighting styyle you could easily argue that it is part of the actual OB of the character. The difference between the expert fighter and the newbie is probably how many feints you have managed to fit into your fighting style.

The question is thus why you would want feinting as an explicit maneuver at your gaming table and not include it in the general fighting abstraction. If you make that descision then I think it will be much more easy to see in what situations it is motivated with extra rolls and steps to include explicit feinting and in what circumstances they bog down gameplay.

In my game I made the decision that situation with two material arts masters facing each other there is a real problem. Typically the Adrendal Defense bonus would be so massive that the martial arts masters basically are standing and making +0 attacks until someone open end their roll. Not very epic if you ask me...the rule I decided to make is described in the thread http://www.ironcrown.com/ICEforums/index.php?topic=6953

[Arioch]

But you are still totally ignoring the idea that fighters read each other (Like poker players, only in a fraction of the time, and with - usually - much more deadly consequences for failure), particularly when you are talking about a 10 second combat round* like RM has.

Yes, I'm basically ignoring that, but remember that my goal is to make feinting more simple & fun to use, not more realistic. I'm not still totally convinced that my idea will be fun to play, tought 

@ rdanhenry: you're right, but players love to see that the actions done in the fiction by their characters are met by some specific mechanical effect, it helps them to visualize the scene and encourages them to describe colorfully their actions. If feinting has the same effect then simply attacking, many players will simply soon stop to do it, because it has no impact on the game.

@ yamma: nice, but a bit nasty 

@ grinnen: that's an idea, but it starts to become a bit cumbersome to keep track of...


Edit: @ Pastaav: i think I've answered the question in this post, and I agree with you on the AD problem

[yammahoper]

Honestly I do not like the idea of feint as a seperate skill since it would seem to me to be part of the natural order of combat.  A jab, a leading sway this way then a strike: all part of what is done in every fight.

Worse, from a mechanics point of view, if you make the skill to neat, then everyone has to have it and use it over and over again.

This skill is not needed. 

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

Hmm.. actually, being able to Feint effectively could be considered something along the lines of a talent, in that it is something that is learned once, but can be applied to almost any melee based skill, with the quality of the feint being dependent upon good one is with a weapon (like how parry is intrinsically (potentially) better with higher skill bonuses).

As I stated before, the main issue that Arioch seems to want to get around is giving the person that the feint is being used against some way or method of avoiding the fate of the feint.

The major problem there is that is a player uses it against a NPC, other NPCs could use it against the PCs, and that is when the uproar really starts.....

Some points to consider (IMO) --

1) The Feint cannot be an automatic success, it has to have some chance of failing or else it will be too powerful - period.

2) The defender should, IMO, be the one who determines whether the feint fails or not.

3) The purpose of the feint is to trick the foe into defending in one area while you attack another. I translate this into removing any benefits of parrying and/or gaining a bonus to your real attack.

To simplify my earlier proposal, try it like this...

CharA & CharB both have OB of 100 and DB of 30.

CharA declares that he is feinting with 30 points, parrying with 30 points and attacking with the remaining 40 OB.

CharB declares that he is parrying with 40 and attacking with the remaining 60 OB.

CharA gets initiative, he does his Feint. CharB must make a Perception roll (the specific skill to be determined by the version of RM being used), using the amount that CharA put into Feinting as a negative modifier.

If the perception fails, CharA makes his attack with a +20 for the surprising direction of the attack (total OB of 60), and CharB has a DB of 30 against the attack (no bonus from parrying).

If the perception succeeds, CharA's attack only has an OB of 40, and CharB has a DB of 70 against the attack because he was not fooled and/or he spotted the real attack in time.

That is as simplified as I think you are going to be able to get it without making it too powerful by granting an ability that essentially cannot be stopped.

One of the most important points, IMO, is that a Feint is an attempt to trick the foe. To me, that means that the foe MUST get a roll to prevent being tricked, be it a RR or a simple perception (personally, I like perception roll better because it then presumes that skilled combatants are likely going to look for such things, which they most likely would.

[rdanhenry]

If I were using a Feint skill, I'd probably want to use Situational Awareness: Combat as the countering skill.