As a new GM i have some questions about various aspects of Pendragon which I'd like some help on - this time it's combat.

Critical Damage
When scoring a critical hit with an axe, mace or other weapon which gives bonus damage vs specific armour, is the bonus also doubled?

Double Feint
Thanks to a reminder from another Round Table member, I dug out my copy of KAP4 and re-read this attack option. It seems straightforward enough. Was it left out of KAP5 because of unforeseen balancing issues or merely to keep KAP5 streamlined and lean?

Dodging
With the DEX roll being unopposed, does this cause any game problems? eg, Mr Nimble the Peasant Thief (with his highly honed DEX of 18) is chased by 90year old Mrs Mop, swinging her apple knife, which Mr Nimble skips effortlessly past every time. But wait.. here is Sir Lancelot, greatest knight ever to have walked the earth, surely he will see off this ruffian... he draws his sword, strikes, and once again, Mr Nimble effortlessly skips his every blow. Looking rather silly, Sir Lancelot say's "I'll get my cloak..." and departs.
Of course, I know that 18 DEX means a failure 10% of the time, but if a knight were to increase their stat beyond 18 (by way of a 1000 glory point for eg) that small failure chance would be removed (let's assume that they are unarmoured) Does each weapon skill point over 20 negatively affect the opponents DEX or should I rule that a crit hit requires a crit dodge to avoid? ok answering my own questions, wow this forum is good :)

Jousting
A while ago I recall a discussion regarding this topic on the old WW forum. I see no Jousting rules in KAP5 and a seach of Greg's site reveals no update's either. Are there any updated Jousting rules that I should be aware of?


Many thanks
Andy

ALL GOOD QUESTIONS! Criticals: I had a character recently that used a mace. I don't know what Greg's OFFICIAL word is on it. I do not think you get to double the bonus 1d6 dmg with a mace because it does not make sense with the AXE. The Axe in 5th edition no longer does an extra 1d6 dmg to opponents with shields. It causes the shield bearer to roll 1d6 and that is how much protection the shield affords. So you really can't DOUBLE that, ya know? Also if the shield only protects from 1 point of dmg, it breaks and is ruined. So because of the way axes and two handed axes are dealt with now it would not make sense to double the bonus dmg. I believe anyway, but what do I know! ::)


Not sure About the double feint maneuver. It seems to me, off the top of my head that realistically KNIGHTS would not use it very easily infull armour. It is more of a finese, kinda, rapier , dueling sort of thing? Thats all I can think of there. In the old rules I think part of Lancelots POWER was that he utalized this maneuver often.


Dodging: HMMMMM...... Knights dont chase thieves thank god!!!!! J/k :) Ya know , we have Not in , 50 years of campaign time(485-532AD ) Ever dealt with a combat dodge. Hmmm. I guess because it is more of a knight on knight thing. I was under the impression that if you wanted to dodge someone it was usually an opposed roll? Their dex vs. your weapon skill? If not I would simply change it to that. I might even be generous to the thief if the knight was armored, and give the thief a +5 dex bonus.

Jousting? What specifically were you wondering? About jousting lances or maybe ettiquette( such as how many passes to make and what the knights agree on)? Usually a joust is agreed upon by the competitors. It's default is 3 passes to knock one another off. You roll to hit. The winner does " normal" damage( only 1/2 this dmg is applied to real hit point dmg because weapons are dulled) and figures it against your size. If it's more than your size you have to make a horsemanship roll unopposed or fall off( taking 1d6 real dmg more!).If the dmg equals double your size score or more, you get no horsemanship roll. You automatically topple! If no one wins after 3 passes the knights might agree it is a draw or might challenge each other on foot to knock one another down. Sometimes it gets Quite serious!!! :o

Not much help but there it is!

Critical Hits: yes, you double the bonus damage. While this might not make sense for the axe, the damage is an abstraction. However, there's an rule change in Knights and Ladies that changes the damage axes do, to avoid this problem.

Double Feint: why this was dropped was discussed over on the KAP mailing list, and I can't remember exactly, but I think both of the things you mentioned were involved.
On problem Double Feint causes, is high DEX characters do try to use it. and shoot themselves in the foot. For instance, a DEX 16-16 character might try it out, and end up spending 2-3 rounds failing the DEX roll and so cuasing no damage, and just prolonging the combat to no good effect. All those failed rolls get frustrating.

Dodging: bear in mind that dodging is an all or nothing proposition. If you try to dodge and run away, you are doing two actions, so suffering -5 to DEX and giving +5 to opponent. Furthermore, if you do fail, it's npt just a fail - you fall over. So, again, next round you're at -5/+5.
Dodging is generally only worthwhile if you are have a high DEX and are buying time (trying to stay alive till allies arrive, or avoiding the attack while your friends clobber the knight).

Jousting: aren't the joust rules listed under the Lance skill description? I can't remember. But it's simple enough: when jousting with jousting lances, the winner of the roll unhorses the other, regardless of DEX or SIZ. If the winning roll is an odd number, the jousting lance breaks. If the rolls tie, the lances break. If either rolls a fumble, something bad happens that causes a defeat (even if the other guy failed) - maybe you struck the other guy's horse, a definite no-no in a joust, or fell off your own horse.

Great answers, thanks

My question about Jousting was prompted by an old thread which I only vaguely remember. It hinged on the fact that high Horsemanship knights invariably did better regardless of skill purely because no one could unhorse them. Darren says that Horsemanship rolls are no longer made, I assume this was changed to avoid such a problem.

Im not sure if those are just quick rules for jousting in a tournament, but I know in a battle if someone charges u and wins you get to make a horsemanship to stay horsed. And whats the difference? I have a high Horsemanship, so I dont fall off. Whats wrong with that? It's no better to say, well the guy with the better Lance skill always wins. Why bother jousting? the guy with the better lance shill always wins( or mostly). Its really the same kinda thing either way.

The rules I posted are the jousting rules that you use in a tournament, or when jousting for love (not proper combat), and you need to use jousting lances (which aren't available at the start of the campaign).

For normal lance charges, such as in combat or a battle, you still make Horsemanship rolls to see if you get knocked off the horse.


Actually I have to correct myself. The rules I quoted above are the 1st-4th edition Jousting rules.
In KAP5, there's a change to these rules: see top left on page 122 of KAP5. I'd forgotten about that because I don't like it and use the old rule.

Geez after I posted my last post I read it .I need to learn to write better. I seem so curt. Sorry. :-[

Im not sure if those are just quick rules for jousting in a tournament, but I know in a battle if someone charges u and wins you get to make a horsemanship to stay horsed. And whats the difference? I have a high Horsemanship, so I dont fall off. Whats wrong with that? It's no better to say, well the guy with the better Lance skill always wins. Why bother jousting? the guy with the better lance shill always wins( or mostly). Its really the same kinda thing either way.


I seem to remember the discussion being about whether it was a good or bad thing that Jousting was really just a contest of Horsemanship. However, I agree with you. It does seem a bit odd to allow a Horsemanship check for battle but not for Jousting.



In KAP5, there's a change to these rules: see top left on page 122 of KAP5. I'd forgotten about that because I don't like it and use the old rule.


Thanks. I've just read them and it does suggest that no Horsemanship roll is made.

I'm not sure if you're referring to the KAP5 rules there or the earlier jousting rules I posted. The KAP5 rules suggests that a hoursemanship roll is made.
It says you use the same rules as non-lethal combat, and those rules are decsribed a few pages earlier, and explicitly state that the knockdown rules are used. That means Horsemanhip rolls if on horseback.

Im not sure if those are just quick rules for jousting in a tournament, but I know in a battle if someone charges u and wins you get to make a horsemanship to stay horsed. And whats the difference? I have a high Horsemanship, so I dont fall off. Whats wrong with that? It's no better to say, well the guy with the better Lance skill always wins. Why bother jousting? the guy with the better lance shill always wins( or mostly). Its really the same kinda thing either way.

I think the point you're making here is that both systems have a flaw - in one, the winenr is nearly always the one with the best Horsemanship, and in the other, the winner is nearly always the one with the best Lance skill.

I agree with you about Horsemanship. In non-lethal combats, it's too important, which is why I prefer the old jousting rules.
In those old rules, the outcome actually turns out to be very very unpredictable. Remember, it's based on a single opposed roll of Lance - the one who loses gets unhorsed and the joust is over.* That means you do see a lot of upsets. If you are entering a tournament with, say, 12 rounds, the chance of getting through toi the final round is very slim, even if you have a higher skill than every opponent you face.

Skills above 20 are a bit more reliable, and very worthwhile in this situation, but the chance of someone with skill 25 getting through 12 rounds against skill 15 opponents is still only about 25% (1 in 4), and even someone with a 30 skill will get unhorsed befoire the final about 25% of the time.
This is because it's based on a single roll.

If you use the standard non-lethal combat rules, with a horsemanship roll for staying on your feet, it skews the odds much much more in favour of high lance skill, and horsemanship can be even more important.

*It can take more than one exchange, if things like ties or both fail the roll.

I'm not sure if you're referring to the KAP5 rules there or the earlier jousting rules I posted. The KAP5 rules suggests that a hoursemanship roll is made.
It says you use the same rules as non-lethal combat, and those rules are decsribed a few pages earlier, and explicitly state that the knockdown rules are used. That means Horsemanhip rolls if on horseback.


You are correct. I was reading KAP5 but having read the jousting rules I did not then read the non lethal combat rules... :-\ How does this differ from KAP4? (ah I see you've just posted them, thanks)

High horsemanship in a tourney joust also may get u through some portions but after 3 passes u all have to go on foot if no one is unhorsed, So it can only be used 3 times anyway, ya know? then weapon skills are the most important.

Well, technically it's after 3 lances have been broken, which might take more than 3 passes.

But what that means is:

a) the Lance skill - the primary skill for jousting - isn't all that important in a joust. Succeed those horsemanship rolls and it'll be resolved by foot combat.

b) Far more jousts will be resolved by melee combat than actual jousting, which doesn't fit the literature or history

c) scenes which involve multiple jousts - like jousts - will drag on and become a tedious exercise in dice rolling. No matter how creative you are, if you have 4 players fighting 10 opponents each, one after the other, it's going to get boring. (Speaking from experience here!)

Which is why I prefer the older rules I stated above. But that's just my preference- I'm not saying its the One True Way.

Hmmm ... That is something to think about. I am going to run a joust in my next game and I am gonna make it extended, not quick, so I didnt want it tedious either. I tried to put in some old likely enemies and I detailed ( lightly) about 35 knights that the pcs will joust. Just their glory level, skills and a blurb about what a player might know about them. i am hoping this will allow a prolonged joust with enough flavor to make it fun. We will see. If I get yawms I will have to go to a plan B.

In general, I use a variation on rebated weapons for jousting lances: they have a breaking strength of 15+1d6 damage. If that much or more knockdown is applied, it breaks. Knockdown is doubled on a crit, and the victim takes normal lance damage, to a maximum of the breaking value for that lance.
In any joust, damage twice your size knocks you off, no save vs horsesmanship.
Damage greater than your size might knock you off; save on horsemanship.

I've found that it seldom goes to melee; best of three usually is sufficient, since except for tiebreaking, a break is counted as a fall. In a tie, (which is usally 3:3 from dual crits), more falls takes it; if still tied, melee with rebates to first fall.

I've also often let them take a DM-2 to lance to put a DM-1 on the breakpoint.

It makes 4d charging mostly horsemanship, 6d+ mostly lance skill, and 8d+ almost entirely lance.

Aramis... i find that Of all people i really like your opinions. But,,,, I do not understand what ur last comment meant! Is it me?

THe last line of it, or the whole thing?

The last line means that, if you're in a time frame when chargers are rare, and most lance damage is 4d, horsemanship is the key to joust with the way I run it (using the rebate rules, but breaking at 1d6+15 points of knockdown done); lance skills are useful, but being able to retain one's seat is still a viable skill.. When Chargers (at 6d) become normal, it's pretty much "can you hit him," as most of the time, he's going to fall or you'll break the lance even if he doesn't; at the 8d destriers, you don't really need to worry about horsemanship at all, because if you hit, you're going to unseat all but the largest no matter what, and are near guaranteed to shatter that lance.

Ok I get it now. man im a slow one. So someone said that if u break ur lance and the other guy doesnt it counts as a fall? So what... u automatically lose. Or in 3 passes I breal 2 lances and the other guy breaks 1. So I lose? Is that how it is supposed to work or something? Im not sure I would count broken lances as anything.

Jousting lances are designed to break on solid impact. In historical jousts, breaking a lance against an enemy was how you decided a hit had landed.
Hit in different places might be worth more, but the key concept is: breaking a lance indicates a solid hit.

So you could use the following rules:
Unhorsing the opponent: instant victory.
Breaking 3 lances against the opponent: victory.
If both break three lances or both get unhorsed, go to melee.

That is an interesting idea, and with what we have been talking about it gives a completely Random factor to the outcome. Your skill and your horsemanship dont really matter. Its who rolls an odd dmg roll and breaks their lance. That seems a little too random. Hmmmm.... Maybe instead of a random lance greakage you COULD take Aramis' idea and have over a certain amount of dmg break the lance or maube take something dto do with their skill to decide..... Like this.... If you roll your skill and you miss it by more than 10 points then your lance breaks. if both opponents TIE, bothlanves break. So if u are over 30 skill ur lance will not break ever. Unless......... U are matched with someone over 20 skill and u both crit for a tie( thus breaking both spears). I think that this does fit better with the literature. That is just me though.

See, thing is that, depending upon when and where, the value of breaking the lance varied.

In some places, a single fall took that pass. In others, 1st to break a lance or unhorse his opponent took the pass.

In some tourneys, winning a single pass advanced. In others, best after 3 passes. In others still, winning 3 passes advanced. In others still, you took a pass at each opponent; the one who won the most passes wins; that's a round robin.

One need not simulate every pass to run a great tournament for the players... only the passes their characters are involved in. Unless you do a round robin or double elimination. In which case, you've got a lot of rolls ahead for any decent sized tourney.

That is an interesting idea, and with what we have been talking about it gives a completely Random factor to the outcome. Your skill and your horsemanship dont really matter.

It's not entirely random. It's based on Lance - the better lance rolls are the ones getting the hit. Then it's based on a damage and horsemanship roll - if the person gets unhorsed, he's out.
Only if those don't happen, check the lance breakage. The lance breakage rule keeps the jousts short.

But I prefer the original jousting ruyles that I've posted above: single exchange, best lance roll unhorses the loser. This is very random too, but skill is important. And most pertinent - it is lance skill that's important, not horsemanship, SIZ, or melee combat.

But I've beaten that dead horse enough :)

I should have been clearer. In my group whenever it is Lance charge OR joust we all just assume that both targets connect in some way If they are knights because they are professional soldiery. So since the " Loser" Still rolls and HE HITS but not as well, he stillm hits. U see. If both have skill 15 and #1 rolls a 14, and #2 rolls a 13, well then # 1 wins and gets to do dmg, but #2 hit as well.so his lance roll is in order to check for breakage. That is the only way you can have both players break their lance in the same round, which happened often in the literature. I like that better. I see what u were saying though. If only one person hits then lance breakage is NOT random.

Both break their lances on a tie. (At least, they did in the old rules - I haven't checked if that's still true in KAP5).