Parrying an attack.

[Azurecrusader]

I've been a lurker for years on these forums, but I've got something that I wanted to share and get some feedback on, so I finally joined, yay for me

I'm always looking for ways to give my players more options in combat. I haven't tried this out yet but I've come up with some rules for Parrying, something that I think is really lacking in D&D. First, I'd like to appologize if there are other posts like this out there, without a search function I was not able to find any. I realize this might be a little intimidating to read through, but I think it makes sense (I hope?). Any feedback is more than welcome.

PARRY
You can attempt to parry an opponent’s melee attack with a weapon of your own. Parrying only applies to an attack with a melee weapon, although you may attempt to parry with any weapon or object so long as it is at least the same size category as your opponent’s weapon. If you are attempting to parry with a non-melee weapon or other object you take a penalty. To Parry you must declare a readied standard action against your opponent ("When the Orc attacks I want to try to parry his blow").

Step 1: Attack of Opportunity. You provoke an attack of opportunity from any other opponent who could normally make one against you, but you do not provoke an attack of opportunity from the opponent you are trying to parry. If any attack of opportunity deals damage, you fail your parry attempt and are considered flat-footed.

Step 2: Opposed Rolls. You and the attacker make opposed attack rolls with your weapons. The wielder of a two-handed weapon gains a +4 on this roll. If the combatants are of different sizes, the larger combatant gets a bonus on the roll of +4 per difference in size category. If you are trying to parry with something other than a melee weapon, you take a -4 penalty to this roll. Note that these bonuses do not affect the actual attack roll, only the opposed checks. Also, even if the attackers roll was going to miss you must still parry once you have declared the action.

Step 3: Determine Critical Hits. Critical hits can still happen when parrying. For the attacker, a threat is determined normally, but a critical check is not made until after the outcome of the parry is known. If the attacker scores a threat and the parry fails, the critical is determined normally. If the parry succeeds, the attacker determines the critical hit based upon the defenders attack roll as the AC, if the attack is a critical, the attacker’s weapon deals damage to the defenders weapon as a sunder attack, but in all other respects the parry happens normally. For the defender, a threat is determined normally and a critical hit is determined as though the attackers roll was the AC. If the defender scores a critical hit, he has the option of sundering or disarming the attacker’s weapon, in this case, jump immediately to step 3: consequences for either sundering or disarming. If both combatants score a critical threat, treat the rolls as though they were normal hits instead.

Step 4: Consequences. If the defender parries the blow, the attack misses and the attacker loses all further actions for the round and becomes flat-footed until the end of the round. If the defender fails to parry the blow, the defender is considered flat-footed until the end of the round, potentially making it easier for the attacker to hit or score a critical hit. Remember that some characters are unaffected by being flat-footed.

Feat: Improved Parry [GENERAL]
You are skilled at parrying blows.
Prerequisites: Dex 13, Combat Expertise
Benefit: You do not provoke attacks of opportunity when you attempt to parry an opponent. You may declare a parry action as a move action instead of a standard action.
Normal: Parrying is a standard action which provokes attacks of opportunity.
Special: A fighter may select Improved Parry as one of his fighter bonus feats.

There you have it. What do you think? Is it useful? Is it too complex? Is it too powerful?

 

[Azurecrusader]

I guess everyone is too caught up in their new races and classes to really care about this eh? I really am looking for feedback, good or bad.

 

[Staffan]

Not to rain on your parade, but I don't really like it. The first strike is that parrying is already assumed to be done as a part of general melee. If you do not parry for some reason, the opponent gets an attack of opportunity. If you want to go on the defensive, that's what "Fight Defensively", "Total Defense" and "Combat Expertise" are for. However, ignoring those reservations, I also have some feedback on specific mechanics:

If you are trying to parry with something other than a melee weapon, you take a -4 penalty to this roll.

I would include something about being able to use a shield to parry at a bonus.

If the defender parries the blow, the attack misses and the attacker loses all further actions for the round and becomes flat-footed until the end of the round. If the defender fails to parry the blow, the defender is considered flat-footed until the end of the round, potentially making it easier for the attacker to hit or score a critical hit.

First, there's not really any such thing as "end of the round" given 3e's cyclic initiative. That kind of thing is better handled with "until his next action". Second, I think it's a bit harsh that if you parry, you have to give up your own attack, plus run the risk of being flat-footed for a while.

You may declare a parry action as a move action instead of a standard action.

This is kinda problematic too, with the whole readying thing.

 

[Khaalis]

Basically I think Staffan covers it all. The system already assumes a 'parry' action as part of a rounds attack routines and already has defense maneuvers designed to cover placing yourself on the defensive more than attacking. The mechanics are relatively well thought out with the exceptions noted already, but it is a bit of a cumbersome addition to the combat system. If this kind of addition works for you and your group more power to you, but I tend to find most people want combat as streamlined as possible. JMHO. YMMV.

 

[DarkMaster]

Normal Parrying --> included in combat mech :AC and HP

If you want to focus the round on parrying while attacking : Fighting Defensively or Expertise

If you want to simply focus on parrying: Total defense

 

[Azurecrusader]

Hi, first off, thanks everyone for replying, good or bad this is what I was looking for.

Now, I understand that parrying is "included" in the normal combat, but you don't see it. What I'm saying is that sure, I could describe a combat as "You parry his blow" when an opponent misses, but my players wouldn't see it that way. (Perhaps I should state that this is an advanced group, not a group new to D&D or role-playing by any stretch of the imagination). For any of you that have fenced, when your opponent does a true parry, and I'm not just talking a little weapon block, you are thrown off your rhythm.

It is my opinion that combat is often too streamlined, that is to say, boring. Hack, miss, hack, hit, hack miss, hack miss. This is only enlivened through description, not interaction.

My other thought on this matter would be to require defense rolls (as per the optional rule), but I wanted a rule that people could use when they wanted, not when fighting an ooze or something. What do you think of the idea of allowing a defense roll, if you caused the defender to miss, they would be flat-footed until the end of the round, if they hit then you would be flat-footed? By the way, the end of the round means the beginning of your next turn in D&D terms, and is used in some of the books, so thank you Staffan for pointing that out, but not necessary.

I don't think the above (previously posted) system is too harsh, it adds risk to combat, just like there is anytime you would actually attack someone. How is the feat (move action instead of standard action) problematic by the way? And one last comment directly for Staffan: Parrying is an action you do with another object of roughly weapon status, or with another weapon, parrying with a shield would be blocking. You're right that I probably should include it somehow but it doesn't fit with the goal of the rule.

I understand where you are all coming from, but consider this from the point of view of a group well beyond the mechanics of the game. If you were not playing with a noobie group would they want more options in combat? Specifically would they want more options on the defensive? If this rule were included should I drop fighting defensively and total defense?

Thanks again for your replies.

 

[the_bruiser]

I'm with you. To me, the 'parrying' portion of defense that is theoretically included in AC and HP isn't sufficiently visible. In fact, I've become sufficiently disenchanted with the AC/HP system that I'm incorporating a modified Grim & Gritty system into my campaign.

The complaint about core rules: Insofar as HP 'includes' parrying, then why do you have to HEAL the 'parrying' portion of damage taken after combat? If part of HP includes 'parrying', then why does that parrying skill help you survive a fall off a cliff? In my mind, the abstraction of HP being the skill-related portion of defense is not well done in core rules.

I think your rule is okay, but let me tell you what we did under core rules before converting to modified G&G.
1) A character may save attacks from his action. These foregone attacks can be used to attempt to block (opposed roll, using weapon sizes for +/-) after your action against attacks that would otherwise have hit. If you are not attacked, then in retrospect you wasted these attacks. Note that enemies can observe the number of attacks taken (by implication/analysis only, they are not omniscient) and may concentrate attacks on allies if appropriate, and thus in certain circumstances holding these attacks will be a net loss for the party.
2) Characters using shields have a single free block with the shield each round.

Well... not sure I've helped, but at least that's one different opinion.