Jump to content



Photo

To charge or to be charged...


  • Please log in to reply
46 replies to this topic

#1 ak-73

ak-73

    Member

  • Members
  • 4,057 posts

Posted 21 August 2013 - 02:04 PM

Now we know that in DH1/RT/DW it was disadvantegous to be the one charging (with melee specialists) because it meant that you could strike only once and the enemy strike back multiple times.

 

So I'm trying to figure out how this works in DH2 beta...

 

So let's say I am starting out of charge range, I have to spend 2 AP to get into charge range, another 1 AP for the charge to make contact and then have only 1 AP left to attack. Probably not enough to make an attack at all, right?

 

Then let's say I am already in charge range and move in (1 AP) and then make my attack. The enemy then spends 1 AP on Evade (if left) and on his turn he can strike back with full AP? If so, this is not good.

 

Here's the reason for the anomaly: as the 2 combatants make contact in pseudo-reality both have the same time left within those 5 seconds for attacking the other (ignoring weapon reach). The system doesnt seem to account for that. The charger needs to spend the time charging but the person charged can spend all the time on the charger, causing the mismodeling.

 

If there is an error in my reading of the rules, I'd be happy to be informed of it, thanks.

 

Alex


My 40K Blog (essentially a Best Of FFG Forums):

http://www.40kroleplay.weebly.com

House Rules, Rule Clarifications, Game Aids, New Creatures, consolidated official Deathwatch Squad Mode rules, 40K Tabletop to 40K Roleplay comversions, etc.


#2 KommissarK

KommissarK

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,503 posts

Posted 21 August 2013 - 02:12 PM

Well you appear to completely gloss over the bonus damage, which is kind of what the attacker on a charge gets as a benefit.



#3 PhilOfCalth

PhilOfCalth

    Member

  • Members
  • 109 posts

Posted 21 August 2013 - 02:36 PM

I'm not saying that I 100% agree, but you do make some good points. It does make me wonder why the character can only make a singular attack on the round that he charged. Also, is it by design that the eviscerator can never be used on the same round that a charge was made?

 

Personally I would get rid of the rate of fire part or the rule and give the character back the point used to charge for use in any attack action used against the target of his charge.

 

 

Where I disagree with you is, I do feel that if the character spent over half their turn charging that they should have a small disadvantage.



#4 KommissarK

KommissarK

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,503 posts

Posted 21 August 2013 - 02:40 PM

I'm not saying that I 100% agree, but you do make some good points. It does make me wonder why the character can only make a singular attack on the round that he charged. Also, is it by design that the eviscerator can never be used on the same round that a charge was made?

 

Personally I would get rid of the rate of fire part or the rule and give the character back the point used to charge for use in any attack action used against the target of his charge.

 

 

Where I disagree with you is, I do feel that if the character spent over half their turn charging that they should have a small disadvantage.

The reason its RoA 1 cap is to not have to include excessive wording regarding how to work out the bonus damage.

 

And evisicrators are that way because they are terrifying. Look up "Crippling" as a weapon quality and tremble with fear. Its a bit out of line with how "scary" they're supposed to be in the setting (obviously, its never been "good," but this thing is especially more deadly. There is a reason you can't Called Shot with it now).



#5 MagnusPihl

MagnusPihl

    Member

  • Members
  • 219 posts

Posted 21 August 2013 - 02:48 PM

I actually found that Charging was good for the first time in any RPG I've played.

The bonus damage for the range is a cool mechanic, and it seems very, very useful. That little extra damage can mean a world of hurt on the wound charts.

 

EDIT: Bad wording.


Edited by MagnusPihl, 21 August 2013 - 02:49 PM.


#6 knasserII

knasserII

    Member

  • Members
  • 909 posts

Posted 21 August 2013 - 02:51 PM

Charging is always going to be slightly odd in any system where people move according to an initiative pass rather than all at once.

 

You've missed a couple of things in your analysis:

 

 

So let's say I am starting out of charge range, I have to spend 2 AP to get into charge range, another 1 AP for the charge to make contact and then have only 1 AP left to attack. Probably not enough to make an attack at all, right?

 

Melee attacks have a variable AP cost. You can put in as many as you like. Including the minimum of 1. Now the limiter of only spending 1 AP is that you may limit the number of hits you get. If you have a melee weapon with a RoF of 1 or higher you're fine to attack. If you don't, then yes, you cannot attack with only 1AP. Most of the melee weapons have a RoF that varies according to a characteristic (e.g. S for swords, WS for chainswords). So most characters that would willingly charge into melee would be able to attack, though less skilled melee fighters may not be able to use a charge for an advantage from extreme range.

 

I get the impression from your phrasing that you regard this as a bug, but I see no intrinsic reason for that this is necessarily a minus rather than just a way things work. You either charge from close by or you know what you're doing. An unskilled fighter running 12m to attack someone maybe shouldn't get an advantage from that. At any rate, it is what it is. So long as you're not attacking from extreme range though, or if you're using an easier weapon like a knife, you can charge someone.

 

 

 

Then let's say I am already in charge range and move in (1 AP) and then make my attack. The enemy then spends 1 AP on Evade (if left) and on his turn he can strike back with full AP? If so, this is not good.

 

Actually, no. Firstly Evade uses an AP so for your charge move (cost 1 AP), they spend for Evade (1 AP), so this isn't a net loss for the charger. In any case, a charge costs 1 AP and a melee attack can cost 1 AP, so the AP-impact is the same whether you attack with a charge or without. The only difference is that with a straight Melee Attack option, you can choose to spend more AP if you wish.

 

Here's the reason for the anomaly: as the 2 combatants make contact in pseudo-reality both have the same time left within those 5 seconds for attacking the other (ignoring weapon reach). The system doesnt seem to account for that. The charger needs to spend the time charging but the person charged can spend all the time on the charger, causing the mismodeling.

 

I'm not sure what you mean by the above, but I assume it's following on from the misunderstanding above about AP costs.

 

At any rate, there can be a significant advantage to charging. It can give a significant damage bonus. In my test combat comparison between DH1 and DH2 (elsewhere), a Maletant charged the party assassin and due to the additional damage bonus, all but took her out of the fight in one hit from perfect health. (Shattered her leg leaving her crippled and prone). Without the bonus, she would have been temporarily down, but able to rejoin the fight.

 

And the bonus increases with movement rate. I can't wait to see a Harlequinn charging. Then again, they would have a higher RoF probably so it would be an interesting tactical decision.

 

In any case, the net result of charging is that if you're very skilled, it might be more sensible to take a more cautious approach (relying on your higher RoF), but less skilled might favour the high damage, as would the highly skilled when facing particularly tough opponents they were struggling to damage. I quite enjoy these sorts of tactical trade-offs, personally.


I lack credentials.


#7 ak-73

ak-73

    Member

  • Members
  • 4,057 posts

Posted 21 August 2013 - 02:54 PM

Yeah, the Ab damage bonus doesn't cut it for me. Just as in D&D 3.x.

 

There's 2 possible modifications I can come up with now:

1. The receiver can't spend more AP on coutnerattack than the charger. (realistic)

2. Both sides can only make 1 hit max initially. (maybe even the receiver gets the same damage bonus, as the relative speed is the same for both).

 

In both cases one has to take into account that the charge might happen late in the round and then next round there is a new init phase...

Edit:

 

Actually, no. Firstly Evade uses an AP so for your charge move (cost 1 AP), they spend for Evade (1 AP), so this isn't a net loss for the charger.

 

The receiver replenishes this as his turn comes. So, it's a net loss of the whole of movement for the attacker. That's the point. And it's bad. Same as in DH1/RT/DW.

 

Alex


Edited by ak-73, 21 August 2013 - 03:00 PM.

My 40K Blog (essentially a Best Of FFG Forums):

http://www.40kroleplay.weebly.com

House Rules, Rule Clarifications, Game Aids, New Creatures, consolidated official Deathwatch Squad Mode rules, 40K Tabletop to 40K Roleplay comversions, etc.


#8 knasserII

knasserII

    Member

  • Members
  • 909 posts

Posted 21 August 2013 - 02:57 PM

The reason its RoA 1 cap is to not have to include excessive wording regarding how to work out the bonus damage.

 

 

And evisicrators are that way because they are terrifying. Look up "Crippling" as a weapon quality and tremble with fear. Its a bit out of line with how "scary" they're supposed to be in the setting (obviously, its never been "good," but this thing is especially more deadly. There is a reason you can't Called Shot with it now).

 

 

Heh - you're not wrong! An eviscerator is a giant, two-handed chainsaw with teeth that look about 1" long. Take a moment to visualize that and then consider how many times in three seconds you ought to be able to attack someone with it. ;)

 

And keep in mind that for a character who is not exceptionally skilled (e.g. WS < 40), a sword has a RoF of 1/2.


Edited by knasserII, 21 August 2013 - 03:00 PM.

I lack credentials.


#9 knasserII

knasserII

    Member

  • Members
  • 909 posts

Posted 21 August 2013 - 02:58 PM

Yeah, the Ab damage bonus doesn't cut it for me. Just as in D&D 3.x.

 

There's 2 possible modifications I can come up with now:

1. The receiver can't spend more AP on coutnerattack than the charger. (realistic)

2. Both sides can only make 1 hit max initially. (maybe even the receiver gets the same damage bonus, as the relative speed is the same for both).

 

Just to absolutely clarify this, you're proposing a change such that if someone is charged, they are only allowed to spend equivalent AP in attacking back?


I lack credentials.


#10 ak-73

ak-73

    Member

  • Members
  • 4,057 posts

Posted 21 August 2013 - 03:02 PM

Just to absolutely clarify this, you're proposing a change such that if someone is charged, they are only allowed to spend equivalent AP in attacking back?

 

Something like that, yes. Something that prevents the disparity in attacks which made all the difference in previous systems. I see no reason why it wont make all the difference in DH2 too.

 

Alex

PS I added an edit in my above post, not sure if you'll see it without notice.


My 40K Blog (essentially a Best Of FFG Forums):

http://www.40kroleplay.weebly.com

House Rules, Rule Clarifications, Game Aids, New Creatures, consolidated official Deathwatch Squad Mode rules, 40K Tabletop to 40K Roleplay comversions, etc.


#11 knasserII

knasserII

    Member

  • Members
  • 909 posts

Posted 21 August 2013 - 03:09 PM

 

Just to absolutely clarify this, you're proposing a change such that if someone is charged, they are only allowed to spend equivalent AP in attacking back?

 

Something like that, yes. Something that prevents the disparity in attacks which made all the difference in previous systems. I see no reason why it wont make all the difference in DH2 too.

 

I can understand the reasoning behind it - if there's only time for the attacker to get one blow in, there should only be time for the defender to get one blow in. Well, adjusted for RoF obviously, but that's the principle.

 

There is a logic to that, but I'm thinking through the ramifications and I'm not comfortable I've thought of them all yet. One obvious one is that this can be used offensively against opponents to block their AP usage. E.g.

 

   GM: The harlequinne solitaire is just a couple of meters away and holds a shuriken pistol and powersword.

   Player: I charge him. It's the safest way!

 

Like I say, I can see the logic of it, but I'm worried about unforeseen consequences. You're trying to introduce a mechanic to simulate simultaneous movement in a rules system built around sequential turns. Not saying you can't or shouldn't, but I don't know where that road leads. For example, how are we going to work out when A charges B who charges C who charges D ?


I lack credentials.


#12 MagnusPihl

MagnusPihl

    Member

  • Members
  • 219 posts

Posted 21 August 2013 - 03:09 PM

That seems like it would be very easily abused... Charge someone who's carrying a heavy melee weapon and hit them with your dagger. They won't be able to attack you in the next round, since they can only use 1 AP, so they'll either have to wait around, or Disengage, which will just set them up for another Charge.

 

If Charge really is too weak as-is, I can see adding a further damage or WS bonus to the charger, but personally I don't see the need. Can you expand on why the current damage bonus doesn't "cut it for you"? It seems like a pretty solid deal to me, especially since you'd probably be using the 1 AP from the Charge to Move anyway, if you want to get into melee.. it's basically free damage.



#13 knasserII

knasserII

    Member

  • Members
  • 909 posts

Posted 21 August 2013 - 03:14 PM

 

Actually, no. Firstly Evade uses an AP so for your charge move (cost 1 AP), they spend for Evade (1 AP), so this isn't a net loss for the charger.

 

The receiver replenishes this as his turn comes. So, it's a net loss of the whole of movement for the attacker. That's the point. And it's bad. Same as in DH1/RT/DW.

 

Alex

 

I think I see the confusion. I may not have read you correctly. When you say it's a net loss for the attacker, the only circumstance I see that you might think this is if the attacker were say within charge range already, e.g. they're a couple of metres away, and they charge for 1AP and you are saying it's a waste because they have 3AP unused.

 

If I've read that right and this is what you're saying, then it's a mistake. They'd spend the 1AP on the charge and get their 1 attack with it. But they'd still have 3AP left so they could try and disengage (hit and run, but good luck with that), follow up with 3APs worth of follow-up Melee Attack action (for which they'd get no charge bonus), or be sensible and keep an AP or two back for Evading.

 

If this is a point of confusion, then I can see how you came to this conclusion. But a Charge is essentially a single Move action and Attack for 1AP instead of 2AP (one bonus) with additional damage (a second bonus). Looked at that from that point of view it's extremely nice.


I lack credentials.


#14 knasserII

knasserII

    Member

  • Members
  • 909 posts

Posted 21 August 2013 - 03:16 PM

That seems like it would be very easily abused... Charge someone who's carrying a heavy melee weapon and hit them with your dagger. They won't be able to attack you in the next round, since they can only use 1 AP, so they'll either have to wait around, or Disengage, which will just set them up for another Charge.

 

Ah now I knew my spider sense was tingling! That's exactly the sort of thing I meant when I wrote I was worried about unforeseen consequences. Good catch!


I lack credentials.


#15 MagnusPihl

MagnusPihl

    Member

  • Members
  • 219 posts

Posted 21 August 2013 - 03:22 PM

...

If I've read that right and this is what you're saying, then it's a mistake. They'd spend the 1AP on the charge and get their 1 attack with it. But they'd still have 3AP left so they could try and disengage (hit and run, but good luck with that), follow up with 3APs worth of follow-up Melee Attack action (for which they'd get no charge bonus), or be sensible and keep an AP or two back for Evading.

 

If this is a point of confusion, then I can see how you came to this conclusion. But a Charge is essentially a single Move action and Attack for 1AP instead of 2AP (one bonus) with additional damage (a second bonus). Looked at that from that point of view it's extremely nice.

 

 

I think you might be making a small but important mistake here, knasserll:

 

The Charge action (unless I'm reading it wrong) does not include the attack. It just sets you up for your next attack action, kind of like Aim.

 

Basically, Charge is a normal move action that can only move in a straight line. If you follow it up (immediately!) with an attack, that attack gets a damage bonus.

 

There's two sides to that coin:

 

The bad: You can't spend extra AP to get extra attacks, hurting your overall damage potential. You can, however, spend that AP on Aim, Called Shot or future Evades. This "problem" only comes up if you have AP to spare.

 

The good: If you're set up correctly, it's a normal move with a free bonus to the damage of your next attack. Free is good.



#16 knasserII

knasserII

    Member

  • Members
  • 909 posts

Posted 21 August 2013 - 03:24 PM

 

...

If I've read that right and this is what you're saying, then it's a mistake. They'd spend the 1AP on the charge and get their 1 attack with it. But they'd still have 3AP left so they could try and disengage (hit and run, but good luck with that), follow up with 3APs worth of follow-up Melee Attack action (for which they'd get no charge bonus), or be sensible and keep an AP or two back for Evading.

 

If this is a point of confusion, then I can see how you came to this conclusion. But a Charge is essentially a single Move action and Attack for 1AP instead of 2AP (one bonus) with additional damage (a second bonus). Looked at that from that point of view it's extremely nice.

 

 

I think you might be making a small but important mistake here, knasserll:

 

The Charge action (unless I'm reading it wrong) does not include the attack. It just sets you up for your next attack action, kind of like Aim.

 

Basically, Charge is a normal move action that can only move in a straight line. If you follow it up (immediately!) with an attack, that attack gets a damage bonus.

 

There's two sides to that coin:

 

The bad: You can't spend extra AP to get extra attacks, hurting your overall damage potential. You can, however, spend that AP on Aim, Called Shot or future Evades. This "problem" only comes up if you have AP to spare.

 

The good: If you're set up correctly, it's a normal move with a free bonus to the damage of your next attack. Free is good.

 

 

Yes. I'm making a mistake. Weirdly I knew this as I've done it previously. I think I've gotten different rules sets muddled up. My apologies. Okay. Re-thinking everything.


I lack credentials.


#17 knasserII

knasserII

    Member

  • Members
  • 909 posts

Posted 21 August 2013 - 03:28 PM

Okay. My mistake. It's less of a bonus than I realized, but still better than just moving and attacking which you'd have to do anyway.

 

Well, potentially better than moving or attacking. It depends on whether you're a master of weapons who wants to slice a million cuts into your opponent or if you are less skilled or just want to hammer a-hard-to-damage opponent with everything you've got.

 

Still, it's your tactical choice what you use so that's good overall.

 

Most melee weapons have a low RoF unless you're very skilled anyway, so that cap often will not be a problem.


Edited by knasserII, 21 August 2013 - 03:29 PM.

I lack credentials.


#18 knasserII

knasserII

    Member

  • Members
  • 909 posts

Posted 21 August 2013 - 03:34 PM

This discussion has pointed out an omission in the Charging rules. Or at least a probable omission,.

 

There is no reference made to charging from vehicles or mounts! I want a Adeptus Ministorum riding a Pachycephalosaur amd running down heretics on some backwater former exodite world with a chainaxe!

 

I can't believe that the intent of the Charging rules is that there should be no mounted combat, or rather that you have to stop your bike / dinosaur / mutant war-grox and trot the last few metres with your lance. 


I lack credentials.


#19 MagnusPihl

MagnusPihl

    Member

  • Members
  • 219 posts

Posted 21 August 2013 - 03:37 PM

Heavy weapons are better suited for charging than light ones, basically. I think that's fine. I like that it's not the default choice in every situation.

 

One oddity that I don't like, however, is that a Whip (and Electro-Flail) is probably the best candidate for the best charging weapon:

Focus on Agility. It's already a fantastic stat. Raising it to, let's say, 70 (which isn't that hard), you can now charge - with a whip - for 1d10+14 damage. Add in something like Weapon Tech and a decent Intelligence score and it gets outright silly. Who needs strength for anything?


Edited by MagnusPihl, 21 August 2013 - 03:38 PM.


#20 knasserII

knasserII

    Member

  • Members
  • 909 posts

Posted 21 August 2013 - 03:44 PM

Heavy weapons are better suited for charging than light ones, basically. I think that's fine. I like that it's not the default choice in every situation.

 

One oddity that I don't like, however, is that a Whip (and Electro-Flail) is probably the best candidate for the best charging weapon:

Focus on Agility. It's already a fantastic stat. Raising it to, let's say, 70 (which isn't that hard), you can now charge - with a whip - for 1d10+14 damage. Add in something like Weapon Tech and a decent Intelligence score and it gets outright silly. Who needs strength for anything?

 

Slaanesh warriors are the best warriors. ;) <_<  :unsure:  :D


I lack credentials.





© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS