No announcement yet.

V5 - Multiple attackers, one target?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Quatar
    started a topic V5 - Multiple attackers, one target?

    V5 - Multiple attackers, one target?

    So, ok the V5 combat system is pretty simple. Both sides roll an attack roll and the one with more successes is the one that actually lands the hit.

    That works great for one on one fights, but I see it breaking down really fast in fights where one side outnumbers the other.

    What happens if three attackers attack a single target?

    a) Target gets to roll Strength+Brawl for every attack against him, and has the potential to do damage three times? That seems entirely overpowered and makes no sense.
    b) Target gets to do nothing against attack #2 and #3? That seems to make such situations almost instantly lethal.
    c) Target gets to pick one target to use Str+Brawl against, and can use Dex+Athletics against the others? That at least keeps it somewhat in line, but it still feels weird.

    What's your take on this?

  • thebiglarpnerd
    The book shows how this is broken down, but the example is awful. Karim, one of the devs, also posted on Facebook making some clarifications, which we think will make it into the next round of errata. Per pg 125, if you:
    * Want to attack back against multiple assailants, you split your pool however you want among the enemies.
    * Want to dodge all, you roll dodge against them with the multiple attacker penalty.
    * Want to hit one and dodge the rest, you roll your attack pool against one, then roll dodge against the rest with the multiple attacker penalty. You roll all attacks first, then all dodges. Karim also added you don't have to use Dex+Athletics, but you could use another pool like Dex+Melee (as long as it narratively makes sense), for say, swinging your sword to hold brawlers at bay but not trying to do damage. Karim said that the multi-attack is not an optimal strategic against strong opponents, but it's there to allow for mook clearing and other narrative concerns like that.

    So you have a few of choices for the outcome for Melee/Brawl combat: Here are some examples, using a Target (T) and Attackers A, B and C.
    * Scenario A: T is attacked by A, B and C. T wants to try to damage them all back.
    - T has an attack pool of 8.
    - T chooses to split 2/3/3 against A/B/C.
    - A, B and C all use their full attack pool.
    - The person with the highest margin does damage, or on a tie it's a margin of 1 + any weapon damage.

    * Scenario B: T wants to dodge A, B and C.
    - T has a dodge pool of 6.
    - A rolls attack against T's dodge pool with no penalty.
    - B rolls attack against T's dodge pool -1 (5 dice)
    - C rolls attack against T's dodge pool -2 (4 dice)

    * Scenario C: T is attacked by A, B and C. T wants to damage C (as the weakest link) and dodge A and B. Karim clarified that you DO switch pools when you do this, despite the example not showing that.
    - T has an attack pool of 8 and a dodge pool of 6.
    - T and C roll their attacks against each other per Scenario A.
    - A rolls attack against T's dodge pool -1 (5 dice) per Scenario B
    - B rolls attack against T's dodge pool -2 (4 dice) per Scenario B

    For Ranged combat, it's a little different:
    * If two targets are shooting at each other, they both roll a contested ATTR+Firearms to do damage to each other, as there is cover assumed (think of it like the movies where guy leans out from behind something, lets off some shots and leans back in).
    * If a target is actively dodging, it's ATTR+Firearms vs Dex+Athletics, with modifications for cover as described on pg. 125
    * If a target has no access to cover at all, and isn't trying to dodge, then it's a roll vs. Difficulty 2 (2 successes needed), with the margin damage done as normal.
    * You'd apply any of the above to Ranged combat when it's appropriate (three guys firing at one guy, for example).

    Hope that clears some stuff up.
    Last edited by thebiglarpnerd; 10-20-2018, 01:11 PM.

    Leave a comment:

  • DuncanD
    I have only seen the beta text from v5 and don't remember anything specifically about this situation. Thar being said, c) seems more logical. If you were to evade and counter an attack, it would be logical that you'd only have time to try and evade the attacks from the other opponents that only had to concentrate on attacking a single target.

    Leave a comment: