confused :/ *oops, i forgot to ask :0

[Oldtoby]

Hello, just opened up TOR and have to say...looks amazing so far! I am , however, a bit confused about the combat system. The Battle roll, or battle advantage roll (for extra dice)...do players make that roll only once at the start of the battle or every round of combat? Also, how is it established if the players are defending?. Do they just say: "We are defending"? Appreciate any help

Hi again, i should have asked this the first time
Do the extra dice awarded by succeeding the Combat advantage roll carry throughout the entire fight?
So, if i rolled a "great success" by getting 2 6's in my roll, i now have 2 extra dice for every attack until the fight concludes?

[Kurt]

Hi Oldtoby,

Regarding Combat Advantages: They are rolled at the beginning of each close combat encounter, not each combat round. So if your players ran into a party of orcs in the morning and were not taken by surprise, they would get to roll for Combat Advantage once at the beginning of the close combat encounter. This is done after the initial volley if there is an opportunity to do so. If later that evening the party stumbled across a cave troll cooking a tasty dwarf with mushrooms and carrots, then the players would get to roll for another Combat Advantage at the beginning of that close combat encounter.

Regarding Stances: You are correct, the heros just declare what stance they intend to fight in. I found this confusing too as stance is not related to position. I figure that a character can be fighting defensively whilst standing at the front of the fight, sacrificing opportunities to strike in favour of blocking and parrying attacks.

I could be wrong though, I'm new too

Cheers,
Kurt

[aramis]

Sequence

• Decide initiative and range
• Initial Volley
• Initial Battle Roll for bonus dice
• Into Turn Process
  Repeat until finished:
  • Declare Stances
  • Initiative Side attacks
  • Non-initiative side attacks

Except for Rearward, the stances don't dictate position. Rearward implies that you're being screened by two others, and so aren't actually in the battle line. They do, however, imply position. Someone forward is pursing his target past others, someone defensive is holding back, probably back to cover (if there is any). Someone in open is in the main line of skirmish...

My experience in the SCA shows me that fights the size of a typical RPG fight tend to have a main skirmish line develop... and it's in that light that I interpret stances.

[Oldtoby]

Thanks guys! Really appreciate the speedy and concise answers

[Kurt]

My experience in the SCA shows me that fights the size of a typical RPG fight tend to have a main skirmish line develop... and it's in that light that I interpret stances.

Hi Aramis,

When I was in my 20's I fought competitively in the ring. My stance in this small arena would change according to the range of my opponent and how tired either of us were. Stance was based on fighting strategically. If my opponent was at a distance and I was tired I would stand in a traditional Taekwondo stance, leaning back and using my kicks to attack or defend. If the opponent was closer I would stand more like a kickboxer/boxer as my opponent was now in arms reach. My rational for stances is related to my fighting experience in the ring. It's about combating an opponent strategically rather than position. For example, "I've been wounded and my endurance is low, I think I will fight my opponent defensively and try to wear him down or prolong the fight until others can come to my aid."

Unless there was a geographical reason for it I didn't think skirmishes in the wilderness would have a line, particularly with a party of four. I imagined the skirmishes the heroes in TOR would be fighting were exactly that ... skirmishes, an episode of irregular or unpremeditated fighting. Not using the traditional line formation of armies.

Certainly an interesting discussion though.

Cheers,
Kurt

[aramis]

Medieval weapons, and especially the shield, tend to make 2v2 side by side safer than 2x 1v1's... especially if one side is an Excellent and a Poor vs 2 decent fighters...

I've done both SCA Rapier and SCA Heavy, and field heraldry and marshalling for smaller wars (≤30 fighters total). A line usually forms, and while the line often turns, skilled fighters tend to fight best in lines. You can parry not just your own incoming, but prevent openings and block shots to your buddy. Even when it's a grand melee (everyone vs everyone), lines and knots form.

Boxing and modern martial arts tend to emphasize 1-on-1's, but a skirmish isn't usually just a bunch of 1-on-1's...

Think back to childhood scrabbles - almost never multiple 1-on-1's... the bully and his two or three buddies gang up on the biggest threat, while the lesser target types flee or gang up...

[Kurt]

Hi Aramis,

Yes, I can see that now, particularly with shield and spears (turtle!). The names of the stances also lean towards positioning.

However I still don't see that a hero has to walk 10" to change fighting style (fight defensively), it doesn't make sense. Although I agree that two people fighting side by side is much better, a line of two is not much of a line. What if two orcs move around the outside forcing the two to fight back to back? One hero may fight in defensive stance and the hero standing right next to him may fight in forward stance. Stance refers to the way in which someone stands, a person's posture. So, for me at least, the modification of TN and associated descriptions tend to indicate fighting style, where perhaps the name of 'Forward' seems to associate a position. I see skirmishes with a party of four as being chaotic and messy, there are those that are ranged and the rest are close combat using a variety of styles (aggressive, defensive) and tactics (which may be a line, or blocking a corridor, or up against a wall) doing their best to outlive their opponents.

If I only need to worry about stance and assume that it takes into account position that would make combat management a lot easier.

Cheers,
Kurt

[Kurt]

The reason why I bring this up is because I was thinking that I'd have miniatures out on the table representing combatants position relative to each other and have tokens on the stance mat to show what stance they were fighting in.

Unless the entire combat is handled on the stance mat with all pieces there. This would combine fighting style and position treating it as an abstraction of what's really taking place to simplify combat.

What do other people do when managing combat?

Cheers,
Kurt

[Hermes Serpent]

I put figures on the stance mat and tell new players that the stances are not positions just fighting style and if you read the rules that's what they tell you despite the poor choice of name for the stances. Stances page 172 revised rules.

Regarding the defending position. Again if you read the rules they tell you that attackers or defenders (in a going first or second way) depend entirely upon your approach. If you let the enemy come to you then you are defending and if you charge in then you are the attacker. Page 170 of the revised rules 'Determine Initiative' tells you what you need to know but mostly the Company are defending and go first in the Initiative.

[Kurt]

Hi Hermes,

Thanks for the response. I did read the rules on Combat and it was a little confusing. As mentioned above the modifications to TN and associated descriptions in the table on page 172 read as fighting style, such as "Exploiting any opportunity to attack, to the point of exposing yourself to the retaliation of you enemies", and the stance names read as positions. Then there is the text on Rearward Stance "... and may be targeted only by attackers using ranged weapons" (page 173) which implies a blocking line, as Aramis points out. I have read the section on Determining Initiative and understand that. Like you, I assumed that the stances were fighting styles, it makes sense to me.

The problem (and reason for confusion) is that I am transitioning from D&D where miniatures are out on a table showing position to TOR where fighting style is taken into account using a stance mat.

So you do the mechanics of the combat using the Stance Mat and narrate the excitement and details of combat, where people are positioned and other complications (see table on page 181) rather than have the visual representation of miniatures out on the table?

Cheers,
Kurt