Multiple Full Defense Actions in the same Combat Turn?

The “Full Defense” Interrupt Action allows a character to decrease their Initiative Score by 10, and the add their Willpower to their defense rolls for the remainder of their turn. However, the section of the core rulebook describing this action is unclear on whether it may be performed more than once in the same Combat Turn. The relevant section of the rule is

This bonus is also cumulative with other Interrupt Actions.

It is unclear which of these options is the case:

  1. The word “other” refers to Interrupt Actions that are not Full Defense (so any of the others, such as Block, Parry, etc.). Therefore, a character is limited to one Full Defense action per Combat Turn.

  2. The word “other” simply means Interrupt Actions that are not this specific action, which would allow for other Full Defense actions to be performed and stack their bonuses.

Is there another section of rules clarifying this, or is this just an unclear area that has to be adjudicated by the GM?

Seeking a/the Game System with ‘Soft’ Rock-Paper-Scissors-Lizard-Spock Effects in Combat [on hold]

I vaguely recall that in my early RPGing days, I’ve seen attempts in some system or systems to implement a mechanic in combat where one physical manoeuvre or style would be stronger against some manoeuvre/styles and weaker against others. Now I’m trying to find this system (or such systems) because I intend to research the idea for inspiration in a homebrew project I’m contemplating (i.e. I’m considering designing a system from scratch and am currently trying to research various worked examples of system designs which may teach me something I’ll need later).

Does anyone happen to know the system (or systems) that implements such a mechanic?

Features of the mechanic I’m after:

  • Either learned styles (bought during character creation and/or development), or dynamically chosen manoeuvres (once per turn or the like), are grouped into five categories, with each category being stronger against one pair of other categories and weaker against another two.
  • The categorisation is primarily aimed at mêlée combat (though I do hope it can be adapted for ranged combat).
  • The categorisation is sufficiently generic that it is region- and weapon-agnostic (i.e. could be applied to European fencing styles/manoeuvres, North-West-Asian improvised weapons training styles/manoeuvres, East-Asian unarmed styles/manoeuvres, South-Asian wrestling styles/manoeuvres etc. as needed).
  • The justification of the mechanic at least superficially focused on the materialistic properties of various approaches to combat, not elemental or other mysticism.

How long does the Archfey warlock’s Fey Presence feature last when used outside of combat?

A Warlock who chooses the Archfey patron gets the Fey Presence feature at level 1 (PHB, p. 109). The PHB says this ability, when used, lasts “until the end of your next turn”:

Starting at 1st level, your patron bestows upon you the ability to project the beguiling and fearsome presence of the fey. As an action, you can cause each creature in a 10-foot cube originating from you to make a Wisdom saving throw against your warlock spell save DC. The creatures that fail their saving throws are all charmed or frightened by you (your choice) until the end of your next turn.

Once you use this feature, you can’t use it again until you finish a short or long rest.

When a character uses the power out of combat, how should this be handled by a DM? How long does it last? Should “your next turn” be interpreted as the player’s turn?

How can I end combat quickly when the outcome is inevitable?

I’m DMing for a party of 6. In our next session, I’m planning on running four combat encounters. With such a large group, I’ve found that it usually takes an hour or two to get through a single battle. So I’m potentially looking at an 8-hour session!

However, I’ve also noticed that once my players have taken out most of the enemies in an encounter, the outcome of the battle is set in stone. The players will win, it’s just a matter of time. Even so, it can take 10-20 minutes and multiple rounds around the table to finish lopping off those last few hit points. Skipping these rounds and saying the enemies are just dead doesn’t quite work because the players will probably lose a few more hit points and spell slots/ability uses before the end of combat. I want to balance my dungeons on the attrition between consecutive fights.

How can I speed up these last few rounds of an encounter without letting my players keep all of the HP and spell slots they would have used had we played them out in full?

(I’m looking for answers other than making the enemies retreat. I can do that in a lot of situations, but I’d like other options as well. And sometimes, enemies will want to fight to the death no matter what.)

Do defenders who win an Opposed Melee Test in combat do weapon damage to the attacker?

In WFRP 4e, the rules aren’t clear if a defender who wins an opposed Melee (any) test in combat will do damage to the attacker.

A first reading of the combat rules on p. 158:

1: Roll to Hit

Melee: To attack, perform an Opposed Melee Test with your Opponent (both you and your opponent Test your Melee Skill — see page 126). Whoever scores the highest SL wins. If you win the Test, you hit your opponent and gain +1 Advantage. If you lose the Opposed Test, your opponent gains +1 Advantage and your Action is finished.

The last sentence (“If you lose…”) does not include the key phrase from the previous: “you hit your opponent”. This would clearly seem that the defender doesn’t get to make a hit and do damage, and your attacking Action is finished.

However, when you read the Opposing a Melee Attack box on the following page (p. 159):

You can Oppose an incoming melee attack with more than just your Melee Skill. The most obvious choice is Dodge, which allows you to avoid incoming blows, but Chapter 4: Skills and Talents lists many other Skills that just might be useful in combat, including Intimidate, Charm, Leadership, and more. If your GM thinks it’s appropriate for the situation, and you’re happy missing out on the opportunity to score a Critical Hit against your opponent, then why not give it a go.

This clearly indicates that the defender in an opposed melee test in combat can score a critical hit — so the defender winning the opposed roll does make critical hits. This is further confirmed below, under Criticals and Fumbles:

Criticals

Any successful Melee or Ranged Test that also rolls a double causes a Critical. This means you have dealt a significant blow, and it even happens when you are the defender in an opposed Test.

So, obviously, when the defender wins an opposed test, the attacker’s Action doesn’t simply end, despite the wording in the rules for making a melee attack. At the very least, critical damage is resolved first.

Does winning an Opposed Melee Test as a defender also do normal weapon damage, just as if you were the attacker, or is a critical hit the only damage the defender can do?

How can I determine the outcome of off-screen combat between NPCs? [duplicate]

This question already has an answer here:

  • What is the best way to deal with NPC-NPC combat? 4 answers

My players will get a choice as they are assaulting a castle. There will be three magical siege engines they will need to stop so their troops don’t get slaughtered.

Now knowing they have a fight with the big bad coming, they can either sneak in and stop all three towers themselves, or just stop one then move in to the boss fight leaving the other two towers to their retainers.

Should the players decide to leave the other towers to their retainers I want a simple way to decide some off screen combat because the retainers might die if it’s left to them. How would you guys handle it?

Do warhorses know the combat riding tricks? Can they be changed?

I reckon not many DMs or players would ever waste time into arguing about this, I would rule it as “do what’s best for your character”. But let’s assume I’m playing with a very nitpicky DM which wants to play as RAW as possible.

The “combat riding” entry in the handle animal skill says

Combat Riding (DC 20): An animal trained to bear a rider into combat knows the tricks attack, come, defend, down, guard, and heel. Training an animal for combat riding takes six weeks. You may also “upgrade” an animal trained for riding to one trained for combat riding by spending three weeks and making a successful DC 20 Handle Animal check. The new general purpose and tricks completely replace the animal’s previous purpose and any tricks it once knew. Warhorses and riding dogs are already trained to bear riders into combat, and they don’t require any additional training for this purpose.

From this answer What happens when a mount is trained for combat riding using the handle animal skill I know what happens to a normal horse which is trained to bear a rider into combat and what being trained to bear riders into combat means (as per the riding skill).

But when I get a Warhorse must it already know the tricks given by combat riding (since Combat Riding says animals trained to bear a rider into combat know those tricks and then says warhorses are already trained to bear riders into combat) or can i chose?
That is, is bearing riders into combat tightly tied to knowing those tricks or are warhorses able to bear riders into combat without being forced into having exactly those tricks?

What puzzles me is that if whenever you got a warhorse they always had those tricks it’s very likely this would’ve been written on the creature entry in the monster manual.

In the case the answer to my question is that all warhorses come with those tricks, can you change the tricks without making your warhorse less “warhorsey”?

Can the rogue repeatedly hide in combat to sneak attack the same enemy?

One of my players is a rogue and has been, on his turn, using Cunning Action to hide as a bonus action and immediately after attacking. I have been ruling that this does work to grant him advantage as an unseen attacker as I believe that is the RAW, but it seems a little strange. He is really, in the span of 6 seconds, ducking behind a corner and popping back out and this completely disorientates his target? I guess I just wanted to make sure I was ruling correctly

VTM V5 Confusion about Ranged combat

I’m using basic combat.

I have player A and a thug. Both have a dice pool of 7. The are in ranged contest combat. They both roll 7 dice whoever is the highest wins and the margin is the damage. I get that part.

I thought the rules explained this contest roll as a summation of the two combatants fighting it out, attacking and dodging.

So this is where I get confused. Same scenario. Player A and thug. Both have dice pools of 7 and are shooting at each other again.

This time player A has no cover. In the book it says no covers gives a -2 to the players defense pool. Here is where I’m confused. They are both shooting at each other as before and they are treating the combat as a ranged combat contest. Before they just rolled their dice pools of 7 and called it a day. But now since player A has no cover is player A suppose to roll a separate defense roll as well or is their attack pool of 7 suppose to be – 2 dice. Neither option makes sense.

Mounted Combat and Sneak Attack [duplicate]

This question already has an answer here:

  • Is your mount an enemy of your target in terms of triggering sneak attack? 3 answers

Would a halfling rogue mounted on a War Dog get to apply sneak attack damage to a melee attack made while mounted?

The Sneak Attack text states “You don’t need advantage on the attack roll if another enemy of the target is within 5 feet of it, that enemy isn’t incapacitated, and you don’t have disadvantage on the attack roll.”

But, a controlled mount does not attack, it’s only actions are Dash, Disengage, or Dodge. Does this remove the mount as “…another enemy of the target…”?

I’m inclined to allow Sneak Attack for a rogue mounted on a trained mount, but wanted to know if there is any official ruling on this topic.