> We all know followers can prevent you from suffering from multiple
> attacker penalties. Most typically at the start of combat they loan
> you AP, then block attackers until their AP are used up.
>
> But can they prevent multiple attacker penalties otherwise? If they
> augment you, does that count? I suppose it would depend on the
> narration of how they were augmenting you.
There is nothing *in the rules* that requires a follower to add his AP in order to block Multiple opponent penalties.
> So here is a specific situation. Our heroes are attacked by a group
> of bandits. The merchant Bob grabs his staff and wades into combat,
> assisted by his guard Charlie. Bob tells his young sidekick Dan,
> armed only with a dagger, to stay out of things. However the bandits
> prove more numerous than anyone had at first realized, and soon Bob
> and Charlie are facing four bandits and getting flanked. Inspired by
> his loyalty to Bob, Dan rushes into the fight to help even out the
> numbers.
While narratively this is good, mechanically the decision for Dan to join the fight lies with Bob's player. I'd probably require an unrelated action for Bob to order Dan into the fray, with a "Relationship to Follower" vrs "Follower Reluctance" roll (HQ 86). Note that Dan *doesn't* get to decide on his own! Assuming that my "follower loyalty" beats Dan's reluctance, I would probably allow Dan to add AP to Bob (this is based on the "leave a fight to get help" unrelated action justification: "Withdrawing form a contest" HQ 71).
> Now Dan wants to join the combat. The goal is for Bob to have no
> penalty against the third attacker, and only -3 against the fourth.
> Dan can't add his AP to Bob at this point. He could augment him, or
> loan him AP I suppose. How would you rule what is sufficient
> commitment to count as a third defender?
Any amount of committment is fine with me - narratively, the bandits could have one of their number attack Dan now that he has "exposed" himself (Whether by adding AP or just Augmenting). "Shugash, take care of the pipsqueak throwing writing implements at us - make sure he knows that in certain situations the pen is *not* mightier than the sword!"
Mechanically, this sucks off one of the "Multiple Opponents" and reduces the penalties. We ignore the fight between Shugash and Dan - it's all subsumed into the die roll Bob makes for that particular opponent, even if Dan only has a "Penknife 6" ability. The AP lost by Bob's lousy defense roll can be (narratively) described as Shugash pummeling Dan, rather than Shugash pummeling Bob, but there is no real mechanical need to do that (unless you *really* want to track AP loss of followers).
Followers are meant to be simple - they don't get to decide things for themselves, roll for themselves, or otherwise act as seperate beings.
RR
It is by my order and for the good of the state that the bearer of this has
done what he has done.
- Richelieu
Powered by hypermail