Re: Magical Augments - A little extreme?

From: nichughes2001 <nick.hughes_at_...>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 08:04:02 -0000

Usually. Blunt weapons.

>
> But the single swing has three distinct effects happening to
> the other guy, none of which are necessarily dependent on the
> others for success. To smash the shield doesn't help you in
> breaking the sword or cutting the head off. Hence I still
> count three actions.
>

I tried to explain the sequence of events and why each part of the manouvre was helping the next part of the manouvre to take place. Each of the feats was helping in some way to make the final blow more devastating (barring cutting off the head because I would not allow augmentation with this against normal opponents).

Would a single swing that cut through 3 ropes be 3 actions in your opinion? How about a single spear thrust that punched through a shield and impaled someone in the guts?

>
> But you listed the extreme example as how one could smash a
> shield and a word and cut off a head in the same round.

Why not? The level of skill this character has is extreme, as it the amount of magic they are able to use.

>What's
> being debated here is the example of a Humakti who has all
> those feats at the same time. Unless you wish to argue that
> in every round that he's performing the movements you described,
> I fail to see why you should allow the bonuses for shield/weapon/
> head destroyer feats on at all times.
>

I would only allow them if the narrative description was appropriate.

>
> I never claimed it was a multiple attack, I simply counted
> three distinct actions.
>

I can hear the laughter now, "no really you can't possibly know any combat manouvre more complex than 'chop opponent' no matter what your skill". Suffice to say that from a mis-spent youth clobbering people with swords and doing silly martial arts things this does not match my understanding or how armed or unarmed combat skills work (except in the case of very unskilled combatants).

I just hit two key on my keyboard at the same time, do you consider to be two seperate acts or one coordinated act which I can perform through practice? Both were helpful in achieving the end result (an upper case letter i). Actually typing is quite a good example because as any trained typist could tell you they learn to type common sequences of letters rather than having to think about typing each individual letter all the time. A poor typist has to think about each key they will press, which is hence an action per key, a skilled typist does not which is why they are so much faster.

--
Nic

Powered by hypermail