I don't understand the combat rules.

[Polar Bear]

I just GM'd my first DWAiTS game yesterday, and I did all right, but I need some things clarified for me.

1) Let's say George shoots at a Graske.  George is coordination 3, marksman 2.  How do I know what difficulty the shot is?

2) Suppose George tries to punch a Graske from behind, and he's strength 4, fighting 2.  How do I know how difficult it is to punch a Graske from behind?

3) Suppose George missed somehow--he rolled double ones or something.  The Graske turns around, and now it's a fair fight.  The Graske has straight 2s.  How does that combat work?  About all I know is that damage is 1/2/4, with the variable damage based on how many points above difficulty your die roll was--but again, I don't understand how to establish "difficulty" in any of these circumstances.

Thanks so much!

[da professor]

1) The Graske rolls Coordination+Dodge, the total of its roll is George's difficulty

2) The Graske rolls Coordination+ Dodge to set George's difficulty, but George gets a bonus to his roll to attack- I would give +2 if the Graske notices him at the last moment, +5 if it's completely caught by surprise.

[Polar Bear]

Dec 30, 2013 14:10:22 GMT da professor said:

1) The Graske rolls Coordination+Dodge, the total of its roll is George's difficulty

2) The Graske rolls Coordination+ Dodge to set George's difficulty, but George gets a bonus to his roll to attack- I would give +2 if the Graske notices him at the last moment, +5 if it's completely caught by surprise.

Thanks for answering.

I don't understand "Coordination + Dodge."  I mean, Coordination, yeah, the attribute = 2, but there's no attribute or skill labeled "Dodge," so I'm not sure what to do with that one.

[Stormcrow]

Dec 30, 2013 7:44:14 GMT Polar Bear said:

Let's say George shoots at a Graske.  George is coordination 3, marksman 2.  How do I know what difficulty the shot is?

I assume you're conducting the fight as an extended conflict.


If the Graske isn't trying to dodge the shot, it's a Normal (12) roll against Coordination + Marksman. The referee may choose to apply a complication due to range or speed—for instance, the table of example complications lists 20+ meters modifying the difficulty by -1, the target moving at running speed modifying the difficulty by -2. Since this isn't a combat game, the rules for ranged weapons are no more extensive than that.

If, on the other hand, the Graske is resisting—trying to dodge—the roll becomes a contested roll. The Graske rolls Awareness + Coordination. The result of this roll becomes the difficulty of George's Coordination + Marksman roll. Again, complications may be applied at the referee's discretion.

Suppose George tries to punch a Graske from behind, and he's strength 4, fighting 2.  How do I know how difficult it is to punch a Graske from behind?

Again, let's assume an extended conflict.

In this situation it's important to know whether the Graske will fight back, try to avoid the blow, or do nothing.

If the Graske is unaware of the attack, he'll do nothing and George need only roll against a Normal difficulty.

If the Graske tries to dodge, this is the same as the ranged weapon example, and it's a contested roll of Strength + Fighting resisted by—I'd say—Coordination + Fighting. The Graske will probably have a complication applied to his resistance roll because he's being attacked from behind.

If the Graske fights back, this is a contested roll of Strength + Fighting on both sides. The Graske will still probably have a complication applied because he's backward and needs to turn around.

Suppose George missed somehow--he rolled double ones or something.  The Graske turns around, and now it's a fair fight.  The Graske has straight 2s.  How does that combat work?  About all I know is that damage is 1/2/4, with the variable damage based on how many points above difficulty your die roll was--but again, I don't understand how to establish "difficulty" in any of these circumstances.

Same as above. Once you've worked out the difficulty, the success roll will determine damage.

[misterharry]

Dec 30, 2013 16:18:09 GMT Polar Bear said:

Dec 30, 2013 14:10:22 GMT da professor said:

1) The Graske rolls Coordination+Dodge, the total of its roll is George's difficulty

2) The Graske rolls Coordination+ Dodge to set George's difficulty, but George gets a bonus to his roll to attack- I would give +2 if the Graske notices him at the last moment, +5 if it's completely caught by surprise.

Thanks for answering.

I don't understand "Coordination + Dodge."  I mean, Coordination, yeah, the attribute = 2, but there's no attribute or skill labeled "Dodge," so I'm not sure what to do with that one.

Have a look at the Reactions table on page 47 of the GM's Guide: the Reaction to Combat is Awareness + Coordination or Fighting. Dodging against ranged attacks is more likely to use Awareness + Coordination (dodging to one side, for example); dodging against a close-combat attack is more likely to be Awareness + Fighting.

I would say though that the GM should be flexible in deciding which attributes and skills are applicable in any specific situation - go with what seems right at the time. Maybe use Coordination + Athletics instead, for example if the dodge involves attempting to leap behind any convenient cover. In the case of the Graske being attacked from behind, apply a -4 penalty to his attempt to avoid being hit.

EDIT: Having read Stormcrow's reply, you can see that there is indeed flexibility in what GM's do. However, I would disagree in using Marksman as part of the roll to avoid being shot - just because you yourself are a good shot, that has no bearing on how well you're able to evade bullets. I also don't agree that Stength should be the measure of how well you can hit somebody in close combat - instead, it's how much damage you deliver if you do hit and you should be using Coordination as the Attribute in the roll to hit.

[Stormcrow]

Dec 30, 2013 17:20:00 GMT misterharry said:

Having read Stormcrow's reply, you can see that there is indeed flexibility in what GM's do. However, I would disagree in using Marksman as part of the roll to avoid being shot - just because you yourself are a good shot, that has no bearing on how well you're able to evade bullets.

I didn't say anything about using Marksman to avoid being shot.

I also don't agree that Stength should be the measure of how well you can hit somebody in close combat - instead, it's how much damage you deliver if you do hit and you should be using Coordination as the Attribute in the roll to hit.

Strength lets you break through an opponent's defenses. And since your success at Strength + Fighting determines how much damage you do, you need to apply Strength to do damage. Besides, I'm just going off the table on page 43 of the Gamemaster's Guide.

However, I agree that the referee is free to choose whatever combinations of attributes and skills make more sense for a given situation. If that Graske is unaware of the incoming punch, he might have to resist with Awareness + Fighting, for instance.

[misterharry]

Dec 30, 2013 17:45:51 GMT Stormcrow said:

Dec 30, 2013 17:20:00 GMT misterharry said:

Having read Stormcrow's reply, you can see that there is indeed flexibility in what GM's do. However, I would disagree in using Marksman as part of the roll to avoid being shot - just because you yourself are a good shot, that has no bearing on how well you're able to evade bullets.

I didn't say anything about using Marksman to avoid being shot.

I misunderstood your post - apologies.

I also don't agree that Stength should be the measure of how well you can hit somebody in close combat - instead, it's how much damage you deliver if you do hit and you should be using Coordination as the Attribute in the roll to hit.

Strength lets you break through an opponent's defenses. And since your success at Strength + Fighting determines how much damage you do, you need to apply Strength to do damage. Besides, I'm just going off the table on page 43 of the Gamemaster's Guide.

Oh yes, that's page 43 of the 10th Doctor edition. I don't think the 11th Doctor edition says that - at least, I've not found it (and still disagree that Strength should be used to determine whether you hit a target).

[Polar Bear]

Oh! Misterharry! Hello!

For my first GM (and indeed, my first DWAiTS) excursion, I led my 4 eldest through your adventure "The Anti-Claus." They loved it! I really liked the way you formatted everything; it was very easy to follow. I ended up adding a three-page map of the Thames Frost Fair, but aside from that, everything was really right there. I've printed out many of your other adventures, and plan to take our little group (Sixie, Frobisher, and two original human PCs) through "Flux" and "...Moor" as their second and third adventures. I'm also using your enormous character book as a resource (though I didn't print that whole thing out!)

Anyway, THANK YOU for your generosity in sharing those resources! And thank you for your help on this thread--the advice is much appreciated! The conflict in "Flux" will go much more smoothly than the battle against the Atnas did.

[misterharry]

Glad to hear you had fun with The Anti-Claus - hope you enjoy the others too!

As for the characters compilation, credit for that really goes to everyone on this forum who posted the write-ups.

[Wombat]

Dec 30, 2013 17:12:34 GMT Stormcrow said:

Dec 30, 2013 7:44:14 GMT Polar Bear said:

Let's say George shoots at a Graske.  George is coordination 3, marksman 2.  How do I know what difficulty the shot is?

I assume you're conducting the fight as an extended conflict.


If the Graske isn't trying to dodge the shot, it's a Normal (12) roll against Coordination + Marksman. The referee may choose to apply a complication due to range or speed—for instance, the table of example complications lists 20+ meters modifying the difficulty by -1, the target moving at running speed modifying the difficulty by -2. Since this isn't a combat game, the rules for ranged weapons are no more extensive than that.

If, on the other hand, the Graske is resisting—trying to dodge—the roll becomes a contested roll. The Graske rolls Awareness + Coordination. The result of this roll becomes the difficulty of George's Coordination + Marksman roll. Again, complications may be applied at the referee's discretion.

Suppose George tries to punch a Graske from behind, and he's strength 4, fighting 2.  How do I know how difficult it is to punch a Graske from behind?

Again, let's assume an extended conflict.

In this situation it's important to know whether the Graske will fight back, try to avoid the blow, or do nothing.

If the Graske is unaware of the attack, he'll do nothing and George need only roll against a Normal difficulty.

If the Graske tries to dodge, this is the same as the ranged weapon example, and it's a contested roll of Strength + Fighting resisted by—I'd say—Coordination + Fighting. The Graske will probably have a complication applied to his resistance roll because he's being attacked from behind.

If the Graske fights back, this is a contested roll of Strength + Fighting on both sides. The Graske will still probably have a complication applied because he's backward and needs to turn around.

Suppose George missed somehow--he rolled double ones or something.  The Graske turns around, and now it's a fair fight.  The Graske has straight 2s.  How does that combat work?  About all I know is that damage is 1/2/4, with the variable damage based on how many points above difficulty your die roll was--but again, I don't understand how to establish "difficulty" in any of these circumstances.

Same as above. Once you've worked out the difficulty, the success roll will determine damage.

That's extremely helpful. The extended conflicts in the 10th Doctor version of the game say that a character's resistance roll is the difficulty for the attack roll. Which is fine but it doesn't specifically state in the rules what to do if the character isn't resisting. I've been using a standard difficulty (12). I think the extended conflict section of the rules could do with updating to make that clearer.

[Stormcrow]

Mar 6, 2014 13:10:36 GMT Wombat said:

The extended conflicts in the 10th Doctor version of the game say that a character's resistance roll is the difficulty for the attack roll. Which is fine but it doesn't specifically state in the rules what to do if the character isn't resisting.

If a character isn't resisting, it's not a conflict. The referee sets a difficulty, just as with any uncontested roll.

[simonf]

Dec 30, 2013 17:12:34 GMT Stormcrow said:

If the Graske isn't trying to dodge the shot, it's a Normal (12) roll against Coordination + Marksman. 

Thank you, that answers a question that I had about Difficulty when the target is not trying to dodge a shot. I assume though, that the Difficulty would be 15 against a moving target. 

[Stormcrow]

Jul 4, 2019 23:44:06 GMT simonf said:

Thank you, that answers a question that I had about Difficulty when the target is not trying to dodge a shot. I assume though, that the Difficulty would be 15 against a moving target. 

The original problem was not asked about a moving target. But yes, if the Graske in question were moving horizontally across the field of view, then 15 would be the best difficulty number to start with. If it were running straight at or away from the shooter, then I would stick with 12.