Disarm and Parry

Zeira · Post by **Zeira** » Fri Dec 12, 2008 7:19 am

If someone is struck from behind with a disarm call can they parry?

Ark · Post by **Ark** » Fri Dec 12, 2008 7:41 am

no, you cannot parry back attacks unless a skill says you can

cole45 · Post by **cole45** » Fri Dec 12, 2008 11:27 am

A Warrior may spend a life point to reduce the damage delivered from any single frontal melee
attack that has a number in the call to 0. This includes knockout, crush, vorpal, poison, etc. In
addition, they may also parry disarm attacks

According to the wording you may parry any frontal melee attack, AND the effect of disarm.

so, you can parry disarm from the back.

Atrum Draconus · Post by **Atrum Draconus** » Fri Dec 12, 2008 12:08 pm

I don't think it was meant to be read like that if it was then it needs to be written clearer because then it works completely differently for parry than anything else. Which flies in the face of simplicity, exceptions = not simple.

Ark · Post by **Ark** » Fri Dec 12, 2008 12:09 pm

i dont belive you can parry disarm from the back, it says any frontal melee attack, the only reason disarm is mentioned is becuse its the only attack that can be parried that does not have a number
example:
melee magic sleep, cant be parried
melee disarm, can be parried

Post by **GM-Mike** » Fri Dec 12, 2008 12:18 pm

Correct, you cannot parry any back attacks

cole45 · Post by **cole45** » Sun Dec 14, 2008 1:42 pm

I agree, and it needs to be added to the list in a different way.

Right now it reads as

(Frontal melee attacks) + Disarm. SO we need to change it.

The way the sentences is seperated causes confusion.

I suggest
A Warrior may spend a life point to reduce to zero the damage delivered from any single frontal melee
attack that has a number in the call or negate the effect of disarm. This includes knockout, crush, vorpal, poison, etc. "

General Maximus · Post by **General Maximus** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 8:43 am

parry only work for all frontal melee attacks. Always has and always will. This is the default for the skill. Unless it say's, you can parry disarm from the front and back, you can only use it from the front.

As all rules, if it say's you can do it, than you can. Aka, don't read between the lines and try to get an adavantage out of a skill that it is not meant to be.

And if there is a question, ask before using it.

cole45 · Post by **cole45** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 10:33 am

I'm not trying to push an advanatage, I'm trying to clean up the wording. We all agree here, that it should not be used from the back.

cole45 · Post by **cole45** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 10:45 am

General Maximus wrote:parry only work for all frontal melee attacks. Always has and always will. This is the default for the skill. Unless it say's, you can parry disarm from the front and back, you can only use it from the front.

As all rules, if it say's you can do it, than you can. Aka, don't read between the lines and try to get an advantage out of a skill that it is not meant to be.

And if there is a question, ask before using it.

that's what we are trying to clean up. If the rules say something they are not supposed to say, they must be changed.

General Maximus · Post by **General Maximus** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 11:14 am

It's been played that way for 6+ years now. You will never have the wording perfect and from what mike has said, the core rules will not be changing for some time

Atrum Draconus · Post by **Atrum Draconus** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 11:49 am

I don't see cleaning up wording as changes though. It's tweaking things so they are clearly understood and to me those types of things should be priorities. Confusion about the rules has probably caused more misunderstandings than anything else in LARP.

General Maximus · Post by **General Maximus** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 12:16 pm

I don't disagree, but i think the players are sick and tired of having to reprint the rule book every year. It wouldn't matter if it was new rules or just current rules rewritten. The effect would be the same. People would have to reread the entire rule set to see what changed.

it is not a bad idea to have a person log all the suggest rewording changes so they don't lost. The changes can be added if the rule book gets updated or a couple page supllement could be issued with the rewording updates. CARPS did this and it seemed to work good.

Onimaster · Post by **Onimaster** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 1:00 pm

The wording should be cleaned up, uploaded to the Pdf, and then a notation made in the rules updates. No one is making players print out new books, but the fixes NEED to be put in place not just word of mouth or faith the roof won't leak.

Atrum Draconus · Post by **Atrum Draconus** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 1:08 pm

Eh, I think the supplement thing at CARPS doesn't work well but that's just me. I don't like having to look up every skill in the supplement and remembering every rule in it just isn't going to happen for most people. It would work better if they at least changed the rulebook to reflect that there was a change in the rule but it doesn't.

If it's just wording changes then they all should be collected and changed. There have been quite a few, and in the future it could work like CARPS was supposed to, that the page could be printed out if it was just a wording change. The problem CARPS ran into was that some changes made the pages different.

Heh, yeah what Matt said, and new players shouldn't have to know how to navigate the web page and find all the changes that should be in the book.