Mundane Counterattacks - attacking while defending?

[Lord Isfa]

OK, my players have come up with a gripe against the system that I cannot even fathom. They think the system is bad because they cannot attack while defending (without a counterattack Charm).


Here's what happens:


ST: The Zombie takes a swipe at you with his claws. (On Zombie's turn)


PL: I duck down swiftly and sweep his legs out from under him.


Major problem here is it really sounds reasonable but it doesn't seem fair (in my eyes at least) to attackers. I know defense is supposed to get priority, but to the point of retaliative strikes? The counterattack rules are admittedly sparse on this matter and I can't seem to convince them of any arguments otherwise.


Please help. Am I the one in the wrong here? Have any of you handled anything like this?

 

[Persell]

Sounds like you have a bad case of munchkins...


You could point out to your players that the combat timing is counted in seconds, so the above example could stretch across both characters' actions.


Zombie's Tick


Zombie: He swipes at your head, his putrid claws trying to drag your eyes from their sockets.


PC: I drop to the ground, allowing the zombie's claws to sail harmlessly over my head.


PC's Tick


PC: Still low to the ground, my legs shoot out to scissor the zombie's legs out from under him


Zombie: Dies....again

 

[skafte]

I second Captain Indigos explanation. That or you will have to take guard action untill the zombie makes it's attack, and then you can attack on the same tick.


If they can't accept that explanation, make the ticks much much shorter than 1 sec, that way even if the pc have to wait 4 tick until it's her action again, it will only be a mili second and perhaps more acceptable.


Besides from that, they will in any rpg have to accept that the rules, specially in combat is only a simulation of real world stuff, and unless you want crazy complex rules that will take a whole session per action - or they want to live play it - then the rules will never match the real world.

 

[Moonsilver]

They can attack and defend at the same time. But in this game it is called stunting your defence.


So he attacks the zombie while describing a defence stunt. If the zombie misses he gets one mote back too, what more do they want?


Sounds to me like you would only get this question if they have played in games where you can do defence actions as you attack. Like in normal WW rules, dividing dice pool between attack and dodge. Just tell them guys this is a different game, different rules.

 

[Vanman]

In most games I've played, you can't do this - or you can only do it in specific situations. Just like in Exalted. There are very few systems where you can defend and attack in the same round - unless you are delaying an action, like Skafte's suggestion of guarding until the zombie attacks.


Here's the other thing. Let your players know that if they can attack at the same time they defend, so can the bad guys. A lot of times, that shuts the players up.

 

[Persell]

Ya know, its surprising just how many problems from players that logic resolves.  

 

[Ledaal Kajiri]

Well...They are defending, so long as they are using their DVs. If they want to attack at the same time their foe attacks and lack charms for such, then they should use either the Aim or Guard action and wait...most likely guard for what they seem to want. Generally this is a waste of effort for zombies, when simply killing the damn things would be smarter, but that's their choice. They don't get a retaliatory attack until their own action. Does this mean it can't have similar cinematics? No.

 

[Praedoran]

I believe you can


You can counterattack without special charms.  It's called acting on the same tick.  Since DV penalties for acting don't occur until after your action has occured, they could technically guard until the zombie's tick and act then.  This would be an effective example of keeping your guard up until the right moment to strike.


Alternatively, if they have the actions to do so, ie. guarding, they could similarly wait until the tick after the zombie attacks to get their attack in against his lower DV.


If you wanted to house rule it, declare that player's must declare their intentions to counterattack on their turn when they attack, rather than just letting them get free attacks whenever they want.


Example:  I declare a flurry, attack and counterattackx2. This is a triple action flurry, thus giving me a -3 to my attack, a -4 to my counterattack, and -5 on my second counterattack.  However, when the Zombie attacks, I've only acted out part of my offense, resulting in only a -1 DV penalty.


Zombie swings, I declare use of my counterattack, and then use my second blow to follow up (ie. Trip the zombie and then strike him on the ground).


In all fairness though, your character's speed and ability to counterattack should be limited.  Defending is a reflexive action, done in response to an attack.  It is not an action in itself and therefore incapable of counterattacking.  When a character dodges, that's their reflexive defense.  Attacking is always an action that must be done on a character's ready tick, being unable to counter the zombie just means that they weren't ready to counter.

 

[Moonsilver]

I thought your action DV penalty was applied as you take the action.


So I am using a 6 tick Charm on tick 12, so from 12 to 17 I take the -1 to DV?


I adding this as 12, 13, 14 ,15 , 16, 17. 6 ticks.

 

[Praedoran]

Yes and no


Since actions happen simutaneously on the same tick, when two characters attack at the same time they aren't suffering their DV penalty.  Afterall, you can't suffer a DV penalty for something you did until after you've done it right?


to quote the book

nothing actually happens until every action is rolled and the tick is concluded, so actions desregard the effects of "previous" rolls made in the same tick

By disregarding the effects of previous rolls, that means the characters aren't applying damage OR DV penalties until everything is done rolling.

 

[Moonsilver]

“In addition to speed most actions have a defensive penalty, determining how much the action reduces the characters Defense Value until her next action refreshes this trait.â€

 

[Praedoran]

Aye


It is a special case, but according to the 2e Combat Wiki, they ruled in favor of no DV penalty.  Again, this is because you have not actually taken any actions in a simutaneous tick until everyone has finished rolling.  Both of your quotes dictate an action or attack that has to occur, while the same occurance rule states that nothing happens until everything is done, thus no actions and no DV penalty.


Personally, the arguement could go your way as well (if the ST deems it so), especially if he deems that drawing your sword while being attacked at the same time should apply a DV penalty.


The exception to this special case would of course be counterattacks, because they occur after an -attack- roll has been -made- (and it actually has been made despite the same tick rule).