Advice on handling combat

[Panjumanju]

The kind of game I'm thinking of has players who are friends that relish going after each other so having them try to kill each other is almost guaranteed. I assume at some point the loser would try to escape, so I'm trying to think of how to handle those scenarios.

The best GM tool is your own good judgement. However, given rules-as-written, if someone is more than one class below you - in a flat open field with no wind - there is no getting away if the superiour fighter is intent to pursue. If anything, the inferiour fighter would be injured and further slowed from there.

That being said, how often does a flat open field with no wind come up?

//Panjumanju

[mAcular Chaotic]

The best GM tool is your own good judgement. However, given rules-as-written, if someone is more than one class below you - in a flat open field with no wind - there is no getting away if the superiour fighter is intent to pursue. If anything, the inferiour fighter would be injured and further slowed from there.

That being said, how often does a flat open field with no wind come up?

//Panjumanju

Yeah, I don't intend to just put them in a featureless room, but I need to know these core fundamentals as the starting point to accurately judge how circumstances would affect them.

I think someone a few ranks below could still escape -- what if the pursuer has much lower fortitude? A long chase could turn into a contest of Fortitude at that point and the pursuer would tire out first.

[Panjumanju]

I think someone a few ranks below could still escape -- what if the pursuer has much lower fortitude? A long chase could turn into a contest of Fortitude at that point and the pursuer would tire out first.

You're exactly right.

//Panjumanju

[Arref]

I think someone a few ranks below could still escape -- what if the pursuer has much lower fortitude?

You are well on the way to answering your own question. Keep in mind when talking about escape options, that there is a complex judgment to make with several factors.

I would arrange them like this:

• What attribute governs the escape plan expertise?
• Is the attribute faster than the attacker's attribute?
• How complex is the environ of escape?

So escaping from an empty field duel, might be Strength then Endurance. As a GM, I note that Warfare of the attacker is the slowest attribute, so breaking off a sword duel and running is a good use of speed.  Hopefully, the escapee is higher in Strength and/or Endurance than the attacker.

If the attacker realizes his target is escaping, he may also realize that chasing at a disadvantage is a bad plan (high warfare) whereas, running to a nearby tree and pulling a bow and arrow out from hiding so you can hit the sib a couple times before they vanish away might be satisfying.

[mAcular Chaotic]

If he was going to fire at the retreating foe, what attributes would that compare? Warfare?

[Artifacts of Amber]

IN standard rules. Warfare would cover shooting at a Running opponent. Dodging  same attack would also be Warfare.

I think the important thing in retreating is remembering how hard Amberites are to kill. So even a nasty injury would be survived. you would just have to be willing to take that chance.



Just my thoughts

[RTrimmer]

If martial arts fall under Strength shouldn't dodging fall there too?
Parrying is clearly Warfare.

IN standard rules. Warfare would cover shooting at a Running opponent. Dodging  same attack would also be Warfare.

I think the important thing in retreating is remembering how hard Amberites are to kill. So even a nasty injury would be survived. you would just have to be willing to take that chance.



Just my thoughts

[Panjumanju]

If martial arts fall under Strength shouldn't dodging fall there too?
Parrying is clearly Warfare.

Dodging a bullet is something beyond the reach of martial arts. (Just ask the Boxer Rebellion.) In the letter of the rules, avoiding projectiles falls under Warfare.

I would let a player use their Strength to do it, though, if they're being clever about it - like grabbing things and throwing them behind, or ducking behind library book shelves or something.

//Panjumanju

[mAcular Chaotic]

Hmm, that raises an interesting point.

Throwing things uses Strength. But Strength is faster than warfare.

Using a gun would presumably be warfare. So you could throw something faster than somebody could shoot you?

[Artifacts of Amber]

Depends gun pointed at you ready then no, Gun faster. Superior weapon trumps inferior weapon.

Rock in hand, gun in holster then maybe.

All depends that is what makes Amber diceless great and a great pain in the ass to run,

Honestly you just have to have it fixed in your head how it works and which is gonna be different from GM to GM in Amber. So basically there are no clear cut rules you have to develop or have the instinct to know what feels far and right for you.

Just my thoughts.

[RTrimmer]

Nobody dodges bullets, they look to where the gunman is pointing and try to be elsewhere or get to cover.

Who is going to be better at that in combat time, a gunman, a swordsman or a martial artist?

Dodging a bullet is something beyond the reach of martial arts. (Just ask the Boxer Rebellion.) In the letter of the rules, avoiding projectiles falls under Warfare.

I would let a player use their Strength to do it, though, if they're being clever about it - like grabbing things and throwing them behind, or ducking behind library book shelves or something.

//Panjumanju

[mAcular Chaotic]

Well, to me it seems like the natural outcome would be that you'd get shot without being able to do anything. But that conflicts with the rules of Strength being faster.

[RTrimmer]

I've been told by experienced hunters that it's surprisingly hard to hit a moving animal, even (or especially) at close range.

I remember watching some half-assed martial artists (not even black belts, karate and taekwando IIRC) spar at close range and thinking, "Right. Shotgun, pump shotgun, from as far away as possible, keep firing."

Well, to me it seems like the natural outcome would be that you'd get shot without being able to do anything. But that conflicts with the rules of Strength being faster.

[Arref]

Well, to me it seems like the natural outcome would be that you'd get shot without being able to do anything. But that conflicts with the rules of Strength being faster.

Here is how I rule in this sort of situation. Your Mileage May Vary.

It's important to remember that you can have 'parallel conflicts' or even 'overlapping conflicts' running in the same scene. It is also important to remember that the PC running away made a choice because they were losing the Warfare contest. Once you've lost a conflict, the choices you make are about how the "you lost" is playing out.

Duel in field, several rounds exchanged, results in mounting damage to weaker Warfare.
Player A is going to win the duel.
Player B decides to escape, switches to Strength, and leaves between A choices (faster attribute) of the Warfare duel.
Therefore Player B begins escape and does not take a back blow, due to faster attribute.
Player A choice is to continue Warfare attacks while Player B escapes, but can only do so by throwing a sword (bad choice) or getting a ranged weapon (which has been hidden nearby), elects to get ranged weapon.
Player B escape proceeds to far range, Strength and Endurance conflict, Player B is 'winning the escape'.

Player A gets the ranged weapon, pops several more hits into Player B at range, but cannot change 'winning the escape'.

Scene ends.

Imagine that the choices are different. Imagine Player B decides to change to Psyche because they are losing the Warfare contest. Psyche is also faster than Warfare.

Player A is going to win the duel.
Player B decides to attack mind, switches to Psyche, and gains mental touch between A choices (faster attribute) of the Warfare duel.
Therefore Player B begins mental assault and DOES take the next blow, due to faster attribute but all Psyche attacks require two stage conflict (connection and then assault).
Player A choice is 'does not panic', continues Warfare attacks while Player B touches mind, realizes the fight must end fast. Consults with GM as to how they will 'win the Warfare contest' since Player B is switching to another attribute.

GM rules that several exchanges of Warfare result are already going against Player B, so Player A can call the final 'now I put you down' for Player B.

Player B loses.
Player A has a bad headache from final all out mental attack try.

In both examples above, there was never a doubt that Warfare contest was going to go to Player A.

In the first example, Player B made a good choice about how they could affect the loss. They escaped.

In the second example, Player B made a 'role playing' choice about how they could affect the loss. They may have hoped Player A would be intimidated, or would make the mistake of thinking they had superior Psyche to respond with. Instead Player A stays the course with Warfare and completes the win.

[Arref]

Hmm, that raises an interesting point.

Throwing things uses Strength. But Strength is faster than warfare.

Using a gun would presumably be warfare. So you could throw something faster than somebody could shoot you?

In my games I always rule you can throw things faster than you can be shot at range.

The Strength strategy has two overall choices against a ranged opponent: defense to win or offense to win?

To me this means, does the Player Character use objects at hand to block shots until they get closer or do they throw something to damage and take damage from unblocked Warfare shots?

Suddenly you have two opponents using their best attributes to wear each other down if both Players use the offense options. Weapon choices versus Endurance are going to mean a lot in attrition.

If the Strength combatant has limited choices of smaller objects, they should be concerned they need to close fast to arm's reach. Defense is not as good a choice.

If the Warfare combatant has a pistol with six shots, they should be concerned if the opponent can block with a heavy table they picked up. Maybe it is time to escape.