Disarm and Mediate

[Tantarus]

Maybe people play different in different areas. In my experience people chain attacks together rapidly, even now with PTD. To be honest spells are the same way. Almost no one, casts one spell waits to hear defense then casts another against anything that is a strong mob. It is more like:
"I summon a force to disarm your face, With eldritch force I build a prison, With eldritch force I build a prison, With eldritch force I build a prison."

Slays are the same way, You chain them together because if you wait to hear a defense between each call you give them a chance to get another magic armor, to move to a better position to avoid the next one, and so on.

Taking away PTD and only 1 swing is just going to encouraging chaining blows together. In 2.0 you get a lot more per day skills to chain as well.

I should also note during this playtest they where using oversized shields, which makes it a lot harder to work around when they are dropping them.

 

[mythic]

@Tantarus This is why we either need a Flurry 3 rule or Powerful blows and of course, Good Sportsmanship.

No offense, but if you chained 3 disarms and an Eviscerate without even allowing the person to call a defense on the first one, that would be poor sportsmanship on your part.

I can only speak for my chapter, but we have run Flurry 3 up here for a very long time. Normally it's due to icy or slippery conditions (we got rained on every summer event this year) so we want to ensure our players are safe and injury free (which we have been now for 3 seasons). Our combat style is more "theatrical" as a result. We trade insults between sets of 3, we feint a lot more etc. But in the end, we have fun. We are not out to see who can swing the fastest, or hit the hardest.

 

[mythic]

oh, and yes, that Flurry 3 should be extended to spellcasters as well. I have seen some insane casting like you described when I was at Nationals this year. Again, not fun for the person being overwhelmed by a fast caster. It's the same with melee.

 

[Tantarus]

@Tantarus This is why we either need a Flurry 3 rule or Powerful blows and of course, Good Sportsmanship.

No offense, but if you chained 3 disarms and an Eviscerate without even allowing the person to call a defense on the first one, that would be poor sportsmanship on your part.

So a few things.

One, it was a playtest. So I was explicitly pushing the envelope of a melee change I dislike.

Two, chaining PTD and spells is totally common and accepted in the NW. So hardly unsportsmenlike here. It is basically the norm, whether right or wrong.

Three, I asked the head of ARC if it was legal and he said yes. And then I did it to him later that day. If I was playing basketball and asked if dunking was legal and was told yes, does that mean I should not do it because some people consider it unsportsmenlike?

I can only speak for my chapter, but we have run Flurry 3 up here for a very long time. Normally it's due to icy or slippery conditions (we got rained on every summer event this year) so we want to ensure our players are safe and injury free (which we have been now for 3 seasons). Our combat style is more "theatrical" as a result. We trade insults between sets of 3, we feint a lot more etc. But in the end, we have fun. We are not out to see who can swing the fastest, or hit the hardest.

I think it is great that everyone has that kinda gentlemen's agreement. And as I suspected we are coming this from completely different prospectives. To be honest I think I would enjoy that. But that is not how most alliance games are in my experience. I can't do that dueling theatrical kinda fighting against something that swings 25 death with 500 body, when I swing 12s. (Something we encountered last event).

Sounds like this is just a difference in game cultures from different areas.

 

[Tantarus]

Basically it is like this, if Double tapping spells such as rapidly casting Weakness and then Death to break a persons spellshield and kill them is considered okay and sporting. Why should trying to defeat someones shield by rapidly striking it with a disarm into an eviscerate not be considered okay and sporting?

If someone is holding a 2hander with 1 hand while casting a spell. Is hitting that twohander with a slay that they are forced to take, not sporting?

 

[Draven]

It's not the use of an attack on an illegally held item that I think is cheese.

In your 2h example, that player is knowingly taking the risk by putting that 2h in 1

 

[Polare]

Three, I asked the head of ARC if it was legal and he said yes.

Yep, I wanted to try it out for the Playtest. That doesn't mean it's an end-all be-all ruling for every chapter at every time. Asking me a question off the cuff does not make the answer authoritative

-Bryan

 

[Muir]

Maybe people play different in different areas. In my experience people chain attacks together rapidly, even now with PTD. To be honest spells are the same way. Almost no one, casts one spell waits to hear defense then casts another against anything that is a strong mob. It is more like:
"I summon a force to disarm your face, With eldritch force I build a prison, With eldritch force I build a prison, With eldritch force I build a prison."

Slays are the same way, You chain them together because if you wait to hear a defense between each call you give them a chance to get another magic armor, to move to a better position to avoid the next one, and so on.

Taking away PTD and only 1 swing is just going to encouraging chaining blows together. In 2.0 you get a lot more per day skills to chain as well.

I should also note during this playtest they where using oversized shields, which makes it a lot harder to work around when they are dropping them.

This is flatly one of the issues with our rules system that requires us as players to operate with consideration.

We don't have the luxury of an MMO-style computer system backing our combat mechanics to account for split second timing, so keeping control of the speed of combat to keep it at a level human brainmeat can process is absolutely necessary for a fair and honest game.

 

[Tantarus]

Yep, I wanted to try it out for the Playtest. That doesn't mean it's an end-all be-all ruling for every chapter at every time. Asking me a question off the cuff does not make the answer authoritative

-Bryan

Yes I didn't mean to imply that it was beyond that. All of this is in the context of the playtest, hence the forum we are in.

That is also why I didnt even include it in my original post or question. Only mentioned it when other people brought the discuss that direction. Hoping we could move back to the topic and not harp on the legality of the chaining attacks.

 

[Tantarus]

It's not the use of an attack on an illegally held item that I think is cheese.

And that is kinda my whole point. The 2.0 change makes this a lot more likely to happen. Removing PTD, adding shields as legal targets for disarm/shatter encourages this if anything. So I bring it to peoples attention to try and get it fixed or changed.

Just because I did it in a playtest does not mean I think it should be this way. In fact quiet the opposite. That is the purpose of a playtest, to test and find problems. And I have a big problem with the new disarm/shatter mechanics. I think they make shields terrible and add a ton of exceptions and corner cases. Lets look at the Pros and Cons of the change.

Cons:
Makes shields less useful.
Creates exceptions to the function of Weapon shield and how it works for certain attacks vs others.
Creates problems with chaining Special weapon attacks against shields.
Makes it so not all weapon attacks have uniform legal targets.

Pros:
Makes shields less useful.
Makes disarm/shatter strikes more useful.

I am sure I am not seeing or missing some. Feel free to add your own!

But I really feel like anything gained by this change is lost in all the exceptions it creates from how weapon attacks generally work.

 

[Gilwing]

@Tantarus This is why we either need a Flurry 3 rule or Powerful blows and of course, Good Sportsmanship.

No offense, but if you chained 3 disarms and an Eviscerate without even allowing the person to call a defense on the first one, that would be poor sportsmanship on your part.

I can only speak for my chapter, but we have run Flurry 3 up here for a very long time. Normally it's due to icy or slippery conditions (we got rained on every summer event this year) so we want to ensure our players are safe and injury free (which we have been now for 3 seasons). Our combat style is more "theatrical" as a result. We trade insults between sets of 3, we feint a lot more etc. But in the end, we have fun. We are not out to see who can swing the fastest, or hit the hardest.

Working off the, Alliance larp is a team game the Flurry 3 rule is basically null when you have say 3 people fighting one person. So player A goes disarm, disarm, disarm, player B goes Slay, slay, slay and player C goes insta kill and by that time player A can start again. Flury 3 will only works as intended with 1v1's. I have rarely fought 1v1.