After a few days/weeks, I have some more thoughts on Flurry.
From the OP in this thread, attempting to clarify:
Attack up to 3 times and then just pause. Let you[r] opponent respond in kind. Allow each other to call your defenses. Take a step back (helps eliminate charging) take a breath.
When we say "reset your stance" this means check your footing, check your charge distance and make sure your opponent does the same.
For reference, here is the Flurry rule as-written, copy/pasted from the 0.9 rules document:
This is intended as a constant change to Alliance combat in which players take no more than three consecutive attacks (weapon strikes and/or packet attacks) before pausing and resetting their combat stance. All players involved in a combat should adhere to this rule.
As someone who has never played
Alliance with a Flurry rule, I am forced to read what is there and come to conclusions based on that.
First, it must be stated that the rule does not say "unless you both feel comfortable", it does not say, "unless you are more experienced", it does not say, "at your discretion". It says the rule is Constant - meaning it doesn't change and is always in effect - and that ALL players should follow the rule ALL of the time.
Second is no defined time limit from your third attack and when you can attack that same target again. There are only
physical and
visual queues like "letting your opponent reset their stance/move feet, call defenses, adjust positioning, etc. What happens if your opponent doesn't do that? Do I have to wait for them to meet all of the criteria before attacking again? Do they have to move their feet/reset their stance? Do they have to attack me before I can attack back? What about when fighting multiple foes? The literal writing is 3 straight attacks are allowed from the same attacker,
regardless of target, regardless of the method of attack, and
regardless of temporal transience until the one?/both?/all three? targets reset their stance, check their footing, and call defenses.
To-wit, as written, this underlined part shouldn't be allowed:
For a monster: You can attack multiple opponents 3 times each. Attack one, then switch your target and attack 3 more times, rinse and repeat.
That is four attacks in a row from that monster without "pausing and resetting their combat stance" and without letting their opponent respond in kind, without allowing each target to call their defenses, without taking a step back (which helps eliminate charging) and taking a breath.
If that is to be allowed, it needs to be re-written to be more clear on what is allowed and when it is allowed.
It is often brought up that very few players actually use these forums, and therefore very few players have access to people who wrote the rules and therefore "know what is intended".
For someone new to the game and only reading the ARB, at no point would they read that Flurry rule and came to the conclusions about combat that are outlined above.
And what about when they do ask? Are you going to like having to answer "Oh, it doesn't actually mean that, it's just understood that this what it really means, it's just not clearly written." followed by a lengthy explanation of what is actually means and how it actually plays?
Finally, it is a rulebook, with rules, not a guide book with guidelines that we can pick and choose to follow when they "feel right" because there is an arbitrary understanding between combatants that they may be more comfortable with faster-paced combat.
We don't ever allow physical body contact in a fight, even when people are comfortable doing so. We wouldn't allow to martial artists to just go at it because they want to. We don't allow shield bashing even if both parties are 'okay' with it. The combat rules needs to be solidly defined (one of my big frustrations with charging is that the person has to 'feel' like they are being charged, which is fine, but makes for a inherently difficult situations when one party feels they are being charged while another is upset because in their mind, they were never in any danger of making any contact and were fighting safely. This happens, it makes people upset on both sides, and I can see this rule doing the same kinds of things.
I should be able to read a rule and understand both its intent and its mechanical aspects without having to ask clarification. I don't feel that is too much to ask. The Flurry rule does not meet this standard currently. I feel the current explanation of "at least 1 second between attacks, weapon swings have to be 45+ degrees at the elbow, and are encouraged to be on different parts of the target's body (shoulders then legs, then hip, then back, then arm, for example).
I also feel that better enforcement of the "no machine gunning" rule would help a lot, as would the enforcement of "if I can't understand what you're saying, I don't have to take your effect/skill and your effect/skill is in fact expended".
If you are swinging so fast that you cannot
announce the damage fast enough to keep
up with the swings, then you are “Drum Rolling”
or “Machine Gunning.” Your opponent
should count all of that as one or maybe two
hits.
A weapon swing should progress between
45 to 90 degrees. If you are merely moving your
wrist back and forth to cause your damage, then
you are not fighting correctly and may be subject
to disciplinary action.
Consecutive hits upon the same spot on
the body only count as one hit. You must vary
your hits on your target in order to prevent
machine gunning. For instance, a double hit
upon the right shoulder requires that the victim
take damage only once. However, if more than
two seconds elapses between two scored hits
or if a different location has been hit, then the
damage is taken. For instance, if a warrior
quickly hits the right shoulder, then hits the
shield, and then hits the right shoulder of his
victim, the victim is required to take damage
twice.
I think the above is quite clear. And I think the following buttons it up nicely:
Page 94 of the PDF ARB:
Clear damage “verbals” will be enforced.
If the victim cannot understand the damage
called, he or she does not have to take the damage.
Warriors must pronounce their “verbals”
just like spellcasters must pronounce their spell
incants.
