Feint vs. Block and Strike Question

[emukt]

So, Falgrim and I just did a little melee.

The first action was his Feint vs my Block and Strike.

The question is: Should a player specify how he splits his dice before the actions are declared? Otherwise the Block and Strike becomes very powerfull because I just allotted 1 die to my Block and the rest went to Strike.

I might run it so if you ever split die you have to declare it on the sheet along with the action.

[Kublai]

First of all, does Feint even work against Strike and Block? I thought it only worked against Feint and Counterstrike.

[stormsweeper]

According to the section on Block and Strike (under shields, it's not listed in the Fight! section) you can feint away the block. It doesn't specify when the dice are split, though.

[luke]

First of all, does Feint even work against Strike and Block? I thought it only worked against Feint and Counterstrike.

page 188 of the BW: Block and Strike May be Feinted.


The Block and Striker should divide when he declares. If it's an issue of fairness, always divide evenly between the two halves.

-L

[Kublai]

I need a few things straightened out regarding Block and Strike.

-It works just like a Counter-strike in all regards except that it can be used in any stance.

-It gains both the benefits and penalties for stances.

-When Feint is scripted against Block and Strike, the Feinter gets to Strike, but so does the Block and Striker. The Block and Striker loses his Block side of the action, though. Basically, it results in simultaneous strikes with no blocks on either side.

So why does a Block and Striker get to Strike back when Feinted, but a Counter-striker doesn't? The two moves are identical in function so why not identical in this?

[Falgrim]

First of all, does Feint even work against Strike and Block? I thought it only worked against Feint and Counterstrike.

page 188 of the BW: Block and Strike May be Feinted.


The Block and Striker should divide when he declares. If it's an issue of fairness, always divide evenly between the two halves.

-LHuh, that's OK I guess, but it seems a bit unfair. There is no way a Block and Striker is ever going to put more then one die in his block, once his oppoent has declared his feint. I doubt if I'd ever feint against someone who fought two fisted or sword and shield in this case, since one's chance of successfully feinting and not getting ganked for his trouble seems rather slim, but that's just me.

[Enlil]

Well, it looked like Luke was saying the dice should be split potentially before the warrior knows what his opponent is doing. You get the same problem to a certain degree when someone does something unblockable to the block and striker (like a lock). Mayhap people with block and strike should divide their dice at the top of the action.

Christian

[Falgrim]

Well, it looked like Luke was saying the dice should be split potentially before the warrior knows what his opponent is doing. You get the same problem to a certain degree when someone does something unblockable to the block and striker (like a lock). Mayhap people with block and strike should divide their dice at the top of the action.

ChristianThat's probably how I'd house rule it. It seems to me that Feint in itself is a risky gambit, but if you give the block and strikers the chance to respond to the feint after the fact and split accordingly it makes feinting even more risky and ultimately less useful as a viable maneuver IMHO.

[Kublai]

The same can be said for any unblockable move against a Counter-strike, too. :?

[Enlil]

It is like a counterstrike except the block and strike always gets the strike part. This does create some weirdness with the die splitting, so I wouldn't feel too bad making people declare how they split their dice before they know how they are getting hit.

Christian

[Falgrim]

The same can be said for any unblockable move against a Counter-strike, too. :?I agree, but I think both should be decided suring the scripting of the volley and before any actions are declared. It makes more sense, to me at least, for it to work this way. And Counterstrike, seems more useful in the sense that it counters, or at least offers the ability to counter, Strike, Great Strike, Disarm and Push maneuvers. Feint meanwhile ONLY works against Block and Counterstrike, making it more limited in it's capacity to provide a positive result for scripting it.

[Fourth Horseman]

Wait a second, feint works against strike now? In BW classic feint works against only one move--counterstike. You call a feint on a conterstrike and the idiot who scripted the counter strike is left there standing like a dolt. You script it against a strike and your the one left holding your dick in your hand. Against all other moves its a wash.

I can understand it being upgraded to work against blocks but strikes as well? If feints works against blocks, strikes, and counterstikes is there anything it doesn't work against? Is this the WMD of BW?

I'm confused.

Note to self, read new rules . . .

[Thor Olavsrud]

Wait a second, feint works against strike now? In BW classic feint works against only one move--counterstike. You call a feint on a conterstrike and the idiot who scripted the counter strike is left there standing like a dolt. You script it against a strike and your the one left holding your dick in your hand. Against all other moves its a wash.

I can understand it being upgraded to work against blocks but strikes as well? If feints works against blocks, strikes, and counterstikes is there anything it doesn't work against? Is this the WMD of BW?

I'm confused.

Note to self, read new rules . . .

No Feint only works against Block and Counterstrike. But Block and Strike is a special maneuver available through Shield Training or Two-Fisted Training (as you know). Feint can work against the Block portion of the Block and Strike.

[Kublai]

Is there a Block and Strike option on the Script Sheet? There better be!

[eruditus]

Clarification: The difference between Counterstrike and Block & Strike is that you actually get your strike dice if you block & Strike against a feint.

Thus I write down: Feint
My opponent writes down: Block & Strike (3/2)
In that volley I get a strike with my full dice and my opponent gets a stike with 2 dice.

Any questions?

[Angaros]

I keep on resisting. Feint works against the defensive maneuvers Counterstrike and Block. Strike+Block is an aggresive maneuver and you should thus not be able to use Feint against even the block portion of it. If you script a Feint versus a Strike+Block, you ought to Stand and Drool. S+B is not two tandem actions, it is *one* action -- an aggressive one.

[Bill Cook]

In that volley I get a strike with my full dice and my opponent gets a stike with 2 dice.

Feint is only triggered by Counterstrike or Block. So you get nothing.

Angaros is right; conditional maneuvers are triggered by other maneuvers and not the components thereof. Strike and Block, for example, conditions other maneuvers as a Strike.

You may be asking yourself, 'Should I Counterstrike? Should I Strike and Block?' Here's the answer:

If some guy is just wailing on your ass, Counterstrike. (It's even more effective if you have a shield, regardless of training.)
If you (a) have a shield, (b) have Shield Training and (c) want to seriously go on the offensive, Strike and Block.

[Verrain]

Actually Bill, you are incorrect. As the rules stand now (on page 188 as Luke has already pointed out) the Block portion of a Block and Strike will trigger a Feint and eruditus's example is correct.

Angaros is now moving into the realm of gaming philosophy where he is arguing that the whole of Block and Strike is one maneuver and thus should be treated as one. Following this logic, the whole of a Block and Strike action should then be completely negated by Counterstrike. Not sure how that would actually work in game but it is internally consistent.

Now, I would argue that Blocking with the shield and swinging the sword are clearly two actions no matter that your training let's you do both at the same time. The Block and Strike action gives you the advantages of the both the Strike and Block manuever. Thus I see no reason why it should not have the weaknesses of both the Block and Strike manuevers. Thus anything triggered by Strike or Block is triggered. This is also internally consistent.

[Bill Cook]

Ah, yes. It just dawned on me. I'm thinking entirely Classic. I haven't picked up Revised yet, so disregard my input to this board.