More questions about maneuvres and crossbow/bow loading.

[plutonick 0]

I am trying to get a feel on how other GMs are handling maneuvres.

 

1.  am particularly interested on how do you handle the first turn of combat. Do you let players enter combat with their crossbows preloaded? My players always insist on traveling or entering a hostile area with their bows/crossbows preloaded. (and swords unsheathed and ready).

 

2. Do you require 1 maneuvre to switch from bow to sword? Or do you require 2 maneuvres?

 

3. Some cards specifically state 'add a purple die if engaged', but players can easily overcome this by 'using an action, disengaging', or is this against the rules?

[Ralzar 198]

plutonick said:

 

I am trying to get a feel on how other GMs are handling maneuvres.

 

1.  am particularly interested on how do you handle the first turn of combat. Do you let players enter combat with their crossbows preloaded? My players always insist on traveling or entering a hostile area with their bows/crossbows preloaded. (and swords unsheathed and ready).

 

2. Do you require 1 maneuvre to switch from bow to sword? Or do you require 2 maneuvres?

 

3. Some cards specifically state 'add a purple die if engaged', but players can easily overcome this by 'using an action, disengaging', or is this against the rules?

 

 

1: As long as it doesn't sound weird for the characters to have their weapons drawn/loaded it's ok. But if they, for example, are ambushed while walking down a street, they start with weapons sheathed/unloaded.

2: 1 maneuvre. Allthough I can see the argument for 2 maneuvres I've never really thought about it.

3: As long as the character disengages and then uses the action, no. The action simply strongly encourages the character to use his manouvre (as long as he can move) thereby hindering him from using it for something else.

[Cwell2101 0]

i'd do 2/ with one manoeuver if the character drops the equiped weapon on the ground (droping the item considered free)

2 manoeuvres if he wants it seathed / on his back / whatever is not "droped on the ground".

[pumpkin 0]

 

We require two maneouvres to disengage (house rule) to help stop the archer from stepping back and off loading his weapon; they can still do it but it costs a point of fatigue.

We also allow an action to be traded in for an extra maneouvre, so if you really need to disengage, you can do without taking fatigue by doing nothing but disengaging for the round

I'd be inclined to make people occassionally roll a misfortune dice if they walk around with loaded crossbows, especially when jupming around or something like that, i doubt they have much of a safty catch going on, and are therefore prone to going off when least expected (and straight into the back of your comrade, obviously!) ..same with swords, chance of them being dropped down a pit etc if you walk around with them in your hands constantly

 

[Mecha Ace 0]

I must say this hasn't come up in our group. A few thoughts though

If your players insist on walking around with their bows/crossbows ready, if you're feeling especially mean then you can always have the string snap at horrible moments. Generally when simply carrying a bow/crossbow then it would be unstrung for this very reason, as it weakens the string, and would only be strung shortly before combat.

I'd agree with above, 2 manoeuvres if you want to sheath/unsheath or 1 if you just then draw another weapon. Course again if you are feeling especially mean it gives you opportunity to do stuff to equipment.

 

 

[arscott 9]

plutonick said:

I am trying to get a feel on how other GMs are handling maneuvres.

 

1.  am particularly interested on how do you handle the first turn of combat. Do you let players enter combat with their crossbows preloaded? My players always insist on traveling or entering a hostile area with their bows/crossbows preloaded. (and swords unsheathed and ready).

 

2. Do you require 1 maneuvre to switch from bow to sword? Or do you require 2 maneuvres?

 

3. Some cards specifically state 'add a purple die if engaged', but players can easily overcome this by 'using an action, disengaging', or is this against the rules?

1)If they're in a "weapons out" situation, then yes.  If they were surprised and didn't have a chance to go for their weapons, then they'll need a maneuver.  It would make sense for the characters to be ready to attack at a moment's notice, and they'll usually need that maneuver to close to range, aim, or reload.

2)One maneouvre to switch weaponsbecause it keeps options alive.  In my experience, when it costs two, players will just their weapons instead, which makes the combat less interesting in the long run.

3)Forcing the players to disengage is the exact point of those actions.  Most are either ranged attacks (which means they don't have a free maneouvre to reload) or spells (which means they don't have a free maneouvre to maintain power.)

[mart_in_brasil 0]

Nice ideas from everyone else.

1) situational ... there are times when it is really the right thing to do to have your bow loaded and sword drawn.  But if you think the characters are over-using this then: (i) village/town setting definitely going to get hostile or fearful reactions from the populace; (ii) over a period of time a bow string kept under tension stretches and becomes less effective+misfortune dice until it is replaced (iii) accidents ... oops you've just shot yourself in the foot {when a chaos star comes up for some other roll}

2) 2 unless the first weapon is just dropped

3) Depends ... if the engagement, in the engagement the opponents outnumber the players then simply disengaging is not easy requiring a roll or even allowing a free basic melee attack against the character.